Tuesday, September 14, 2021

Arnett blog post (2)

     Other than this chapter is very dense with information, there was a lot to unpack, and something that I thought was really interesting was the multiplicity of goods. First, what was defined as good, was something that had a lot of layers in it, not just depending on context and our own experiences, but also how it depends on a lot of different things for different people. 
     
     Something I thought was really really interesting was the multiplicity of goods. Arnett describes this multiplicity as something that has more than just one set of rules and each situation has a different set of rules and laters that determine what is the correct 'good' and what is appropriate for each situation. If I see my friend is at the mall, and she has something stuck in her teeth, you can go about it in a few different ways. The question to ask is what is right? You could simply not say anything, but eventually, when your friend sees it in the mirror, she can get upset with you or feel embarrassed. You can also choose to tell her right away, yell it out, and let everybody hear. Or you can pull her aside and let her know and give her time to fix it. 

     Now, there is a point for this naming all of the situations possible for this. We do this every day. We choose the best option based off of how much we value this relationship. You wouldn't purposely try to embarrass your friend like that, and you don't want her to be mad for not helping her out. It's really interesting to think that we do this so fast and so often. 

4 comments:

  1. Hi Katie!

    I also thought that reading about the multiplicity of goods was an interesting topic. The idea that given a certain scenario, we have the option to tell someone the full truth and risk hurting their feelings or to tell a lie to protect their feelings is a dilemma that we have all faced at some point in our lives. I think that one of the main contributors towards making the decision on how to respond lies in your relationship with that person. If you are close enough to them and often tell each other the full truth, even if there is a risk of insulting them, then we probably would think that the right thing to do is to not lie. If your relationship with someone is not as close or as strong and you do not want to risk an argument or insult by telling the truth, we might say that the right thing to do in that case is to tell a little lie. It is interesting that depending on the situation and the context of the situation, the right and wrong thing to do can differ. Looking at the idea of multiplicity of goods and our discussion in class, do you think that individual responses are heavily influenced by their moral values and personal ethics or more by the desire to not want to hurt anyones feelings by telling the truth?

    ReplyDelete
  2. That’s a great example of the multiplicity of goods, which I also thought was interesting. While reading your post and thinking of your example, it made me think of something that just came across my Facebook page recently and kind of relates back to the multiplicity of good. Basically, there should be this ‘ten second’ rule that people should follow when it comes to situations like—telling your friend she has food stuck in her teeth. If she can fix the issue in ten seconds, then the moral thing to do is tell her. However, if it’s something she can’t fix in ten seconds—like crooked teeth, then the moral thing to do is not mention anything to her. Before seeing the Facebook post, I would originally rely on my guts when voicing something like that. Do you think that social media plays an important role in influencing the way we handle multiplicity of goods?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I never thought about how we do multiplicities of good like your example on a daily basis, and that we evaluate each situation dependent on our relationship with that person and how to communicate with them. Just like we would have a conversation on a difficult topic or two opposing topics, that in good communication ethics we need to evaluate how others will understand and learn from differences and from each other. Like your example it's important to have a good understanding of what the other person might think based on our relationship with them and dependent on what and when we would say something to them. Really great example that helped me work through this topic thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I totally agree! The concept of the multiplicities of good is totally fascinating to me, and I love the example that you put forth. As well as the point you brought up of us making these kinds of decisions and having these thoughts every single day. regarding how we go about things in our day to day lives. Super cool.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Blog Post 10

      I chose to read the article by McKinnon and the article was starting to catch my eye when the conversation about Jewish people were ...