[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/edu/ - Education

Learn, learn, and learn!
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Captcha
Tor Only

Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble   Telegram   Discord


File: 1611847791276.jpg ( 63.76 KB , 324x500 , 1611766420757.jpg )

 No.4925

I had the displeasure of listening to the audiobook version of this shit during my commutes the last few months and I must say this is liberalism at it's purest and clearest form.
The book was designer for general audiences so it never goes in deep about what do right or wrong mean, why are things right or wrong or any other analysis about ethics themselves the essays are just a really polite "I'm right and you're wrong" which in the end made the author: Peter Singer, come out like an absolute retarded who only got into philosophy so people will have to listen to his retarded opinions.
What really offends me it's that behind all its stupidity I saw the core of liberalism, absolute ignorance on material conditions and a very strong belief that people are responsible of everything they do. There are essays where Singer struggles to understand why rich people care more about showing their social status than donating to charity and imagines this ideal world where "donating to charity will be the biggest showcase of status" without explaining how would that world come to be and why it doesn't exist already, it's just a really polite rant that rich people are not engaging in noblesse oblige. Like wise Singer; a vegan, protests the mistreatment of animals mean for meat consumption, he cites the testimonial of a farm worker who had a bad experience artificially inseminating a turkey but a no point he ever feels that a human should not work on such conditions in the first place.
After all of that I released that consoomerism is the natural conclusion of liberalism because liberal really believe that other people are not liberal because they have not consoomed the right movies or the right ted talks and that material conditions and life experiences do not matter, Singer just expects that after reading this book you will become a vegan because how right he is about everything.
>>

 No.4926

That sounds exactly like what I'd expect from a liberal professor of ethics. To add to the "consumerism is liberalism", it's not just about the media they consume, but the whole "vote with your wallet" thing. Consume the right products and we will have utopia eventually.
>>

 No.4927

>>4926
Yes, he makes several "vote with your wallet" arguments across the books but they're never too prominent.
>>

 No.4979

Ethics in the real world is Singers worst book, its literally just various columns he wrote for newspapers and magazines collated into one volume. I've read some of his other work where while I don't agree with everything he at least puts it across far better. Most libs tend to hate him too because he takes a lot of viewpoints to a logical endpoint up to and including advocating infanticide and they don't like having to realise what their views result in.

Unique IPs: 3

[Return][Catalog][Top][Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]
ReturnCatalogTopBottomHome