Phd research concept paper

How Did Australian Attitudes to National Defence Change in concept the Second Half of the Twentieth Century in Relation to is book Asia? What Have Been the Major Paradigm Shifts and What Attitudes Do They Reflect? Throughout the second half of the twentieth century, Australia’s national security policies were shaped by fear and anxiety towards Asia. These fears shifted and evolved throughout the decades, but strategic contingencies continued to phd research concept paper focus Australia’s resources at defending the alzheimer's paper conclusion, nation from its northern neighbours. Phd Research Concept? It was not until the coursework, end of the Cold War in 1989 that Australia began to seek security ‘in Asia’ rather than ‘from Asia’. This essay will examine three fundamental shifts in the nature of concept Australia’s defence policy as it transitioned in response to perceived threats in the Asian region. Firstly, it will outline how Cold War fears of a communist plague spreading southward through Asia initiated Australia’s ‘forward defence’ posture, a strategy that underpinned the decisions to evaluative annotated apa commit forces to the wars in Korea and Vietnam. It will then examine how the phd research concept, withdrawal of french coursework on school British forces from Asia and the Nixon Doctrine conflated with a re-evaluation of strategic threats to bring about ‘Defence of Australia’, a self-reliant policy of phd research concept continental defence. Finally, it will be contended that the math logic, end of the Cold War initiated the Australian government’s shift towards a policy of phd research engagement with Asia that was focused on regional stability and human rights. For the first two decades of the annotated bibliography apa, period in question, Australia’s attitude towards national defence was predicated on concept, the fear of communism spreading southward through Asia. It also reflected the country’s traumatic experience in annotated bibliography the Second World War. Since Federation in paper 1901, Australians had been nervous about the fragility of the nation’s island boundaries and their tenuous proprietary hold over the vast continent.[1] The rapid advance of Japanese forces in WWII had confirmed the worst fears of Australia’s public, military strategists and politicians alike.[2] Australia was indeed vulnerable to attack from countries in essay Asia. These fears were exacerbated by the fundamental changes that were occurring in the region during the post-war era. In 1950, the USSR secured an East Asian ally in the People’s Republic of phd research concept China, which had been proclaimed one year earlier following the triumph of Mao Zedong’s Communist Party.[3] Communist uprisings had also erupted in Malaya, Vietnam and the Philippines. Moreover, Australia’s perceived vulnerability increased as a result of growing anti-colonial movements, which saw her Imperial allies begin their withdrawal from Asia.[4] A clear anxiety had developed towards the communist revolutions that were occurring in the region and what is book this was matched by a fear of phd research post-colonial uncertainties. These fears and the emerging Cold War provide a context for the decision of the Australian government to align itself with the security policies of America, Britain and other Western European nations.[5] The foundation of Australia’s attitude towards national defence was now distinctly anti-communist. Can You Use Pronouns In An Essay? With its long held fears confirmed and an emerging post-war strategic situation in the region that was a serious cause for concern, it was both natural and concept paper inevitable that Australia would concentrate its defence policy on Asia.[6] As the next two decades unfolded, the anti-communist paradigm dominated Australia’s defence policy frameworks. ‘Forward defence’ emerged in 1950 as the policy that was to use pronouns expository essay protect Australia from the outward expansion of international communism.[7]. Phd Research Concept Paper? To be successful in on school protecting Australia from its fears, two components of ‘forward defence’ needed to be implemented. Australia required a strong system of military alliances and the forward deployment of troops into the Asian region.[8] With the signing of the Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty (ANZUS) in 1951 and the Southeast Asian Treaty Organisation (SEATO) in 1955, the Menzies government believed it had successfully tied the strategic interests of Britain and the US, Australia’s ‘great and phd research concept paper powerful friends’, to Asia.[9] These treaties were designed to have a stabilizing influence over the volatile region. SEATO guaranteed collective security in the event of further communist expansion in Asia and the ANZUS treaty secured Australia under the American ‘nuclear umbrella’.[10] The need for protective screens of this nature had become clear to policy makers after the invasion of logic problems South Korea by the communist North in June 1950.[11] When signed in 1951, the ANZUS treaty received significant popular support in Australia.[12] This demonstrates that the fear of a communist ‘plague’ spreading through Asia was not just a prominent feature in the nation’s security discourse, it was also a widely held attitude of the Australian populace. In combination with this strong alliance system, ‘forward defence’ also required the deployment of paper Australian forces in what Asia. Significant debate surrounds the reasons behind the commitment of Australian forces to conflicts under the mantra of ‘forward defence’. To some commentators, this element of the policy is seen as instrumental to containing communism and avoiding any eventuation of the ‘domino theory’. Field argues that a common strategic theme of phd research forestalling any and all threats to territorial Australia was the true desire of the Menzies government when it committed Australian forces to the Korean and in an expository Vietnam Wars in 1950 and 1965 respectively.[13] Other scholars have been more critical, noting that Australia’s involvement in conflicts throughout this period were a “payment of phd research concept paper insurance premiums for (American) protection.”[14] McNeill suggests that Australia demonstrated such willing involvement in Korea and Vietnam because it would have helped in can you in an eliciting American assistance if external forces ever threatened the Australian mainland.[15] It is phd research, however too simplistic to french on school suggest that by engaging in ‘forward defence’, the Menzies government was just accumulating diplomatic credit so that America would feel obligated to protect Australia.[16] Attempts to secure an American security guarantee definitely played a part in phd research paper the decision to alzheimer's paper deploy forces to these conflicts, but the main aim of ‘forward defence’ was regional stability and the immediate protection of Australian interests. These are divisive interpretations of the policy, but from both it remains clear that Australia’s attitude towards national defence was predicated on the distinct fear of communism spreading through Asia and phd research the need to protect Australia from it. Up until the early 1970s, Australia relied on research paper, its alliance system and the deployment of forces under the proviso of ‘forward defence’ to protect itself from perceived threats in Asia. Significant change was however occurring in the nation’s attitude towards defence from the mid 1960s, when the strategic environment of Asia began to shift again. The policy of ‘forward defence’ was dealt a fundamental blow in 1966 when the British government announced it would be withdrawing its forces from concept paper ‘east of Suez’.[17] Three years later the integrity of Australia’s defence policy was weakened further when the United States announced the Nixon Doctrine.[18] This outlined the American plan to disengage militarily from South Vietnam. It also declared that America would be gradually withdrawing from the region and it would be necessary for allied nations to take primary responsibility for their own security needs. This impacted significantly on the ability of ‘forward defence’ to protect Australia. Annotated? The regional engagement of strong allies and the intervention of Western coalitions when threats emerged was no longer a possibility.[19] Australia was again left feeling isolated from concept its Western allies in everything the Asian region. This attitude and the belief that Australia still needed to be defended ‘from Asia’, led the newly elected Whitlam government to restructure Australia’s defence policy.[20] After consulting the Defence Department’s classified 1971 Strategic Basis paper, the new government announced that it would be replacing ‘forward defence’ with an phd research concept, independent strategy known as ‘Defence of Australia’. Horner encapsulates the need for such a shift succinctly; noting that a policy of self-reliance was far better suited to Australia’s defence needs in the era of changing strategic circumstances.[21] During the late 1960s and early 1970s, the evolving nature of strategic circumstances in the region was not confined to Australia’s relations with its allies. ‘Defence of Australia’ also reflected a re-evaluation of the threat that Asia posed to Australia. By 1968, the spectre of countries in Asia falling to communism was no longer a dominant focus of Australia’s attitude towards national defence. Math Logic Problems? [22] It was clear to phd research defence strategists that domestic communism had been decisively defeated in Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore.[23] The understanding had also been reached that it was unlikely Thailand would fall to communism and in 1969 the United States came to an accord with China.[24] These factors and the perception that the formation of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was going to have a positive influence on regional stability were significant in the re-evaluation of essay image Australia’s defence policy and attitudes towards it.[25] Australia was now in phd research concept a situation where it faced no direct and french identifiable threat.[26] This did not however, give Australia a sense of security. In fact, this uncertainty developed a greater anxiety towards the region. McCraw argues that it was this ambiguity and the withdrawal of allied forces from the region that focused the government on defending the immediate approaches to the Australian continent.[27] Contrary to this, Cheeseman postulates that the need to concept paper defend Australia’s northern air-sea gap emerged from the fear of an math logic, armed and hostile Indonesia.[28] These theories demonstrate clearly that even after the concept paper, era of ‘forward defence’, Australia’s attitude towards security was built fundamentally on fear and the continuing need to seek security ‘from Asia’. The end of the Cold War in 1989 ushered in a new era in Australia’s national security discourse. The uncertain nature of threats in Asia continued to be a dominant feature of strategic policy, but the government’s approach to combating such challenges shifted dramatically.[29] For the first time, Australia aimed at security ‘in Asia’, rather than ‘from Asia’. In 1987 Australian Foreign Minister Gareth Evans announced that the country’s defence forces were restructuring in a way that would have “relevance not only for what the defence of Australia, but for the region as a whole.”[30] This new policy conflated the concept, notion of evaluative annotated bibliography apa self-reliance with regional cooperation to promote preventative diplomacy and conflict-resolution.[31] It encouraged participation in the ASEAN Regional Forum and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, while it also developed a network of bilateral defence links with states in the region.[32] The most significant aspect of this new regionalist policy was the emphasis placed on phd research, stability. The priority given to coursework Asia in the 1990s under the Hawke, Keating and Howard governments was built firmly around the belief that Australia could not be secure in an insecure region.[33] This notion was an paper, important factor that influenced Australia’s decision to involve itself with the crises in Cambodia and use pronouns in an East Timor. Policy makers were of the opinion that if Australia was to remain secure, the government would need to actively promote and enforce stability in the region. Concept Paper? This became possible with the conclusion, thawing of Cold War tensions in 1989, as UN sanctioned humanitarian interventions became possible. Phd Research Paper? Australia played a key role in mobilising an international response to the humanitarian crisis that was occurring in what is book Cambodia in concept the early 1990s.[34] Australia led the coursework on school, United Nations response and took responsibility for paper the country’s affairs until elections were held and order was restored. Australia’s commitment to regional stability and what is book the protection of human rights was again on display in 1999 when it led a UN sanctioned force into East Timor. Australia had been authorised to phd research concept use all necessary measures in the effort to re-establish peace and security in the nation as it struggled for independence.[35] These interventions were seen as essential for research conclusion ensuring Australia’s security, as the stability of Cambodia and East Timor contributed to that of the entire region.[36] In the post-Cold War era, it is clear that Australia was still fearful of instability and uncertainties in Asia. However, its willingness to seek security ‘in Asia’, rather than from paper it, represents a fundamental shift in the nation’s attitude towards defence. Throughout the coursework on school, second half of the twentieth century, Australia’s fears of concept Asia shaped its attitude towards national defence. The strategies that were invoked to use pronouns in an expository protect the phd research paper, nation from perceived threats in can you use pronouns in an the region evolved through the decades, but it is clear that these policies were built fundamentally on fear and the need to protect Australia ‘from Asia’. Even when the Hawke government shifted defence strategies in the late 1980s and phd research sought security ‘in Asia’, fear remained the math problems, predicating factor. This essay has mapped the evolution of Australia’s anxiety towards Asia, linking it explicitly to the paradigm shifts in phd research concept defence strategy. These fears and anxieties continue to influence the nature of Australia’s defence policy, and this appears set to paper endure into the future. [1] David Lowe, Menzies and the ‘Great World Struggle’ , (Sydney: UNSW press, 1999), pp.6-7. [2] Anthony Burke, In Fear of Security: Australia’s Invasion Anxiety , (Sydney: Pluto Press Australia, 2001), pp.68. [4] Christopher Waters, ‘After Decolonization: Australia and phd research the Emergence of the Non-aligned Movement in essay image everything Asia, 1954-55’, Diplomacy & Statecraft , (12:2, 2001), pp. 156. [5] David Horner, ‘Security Objectives’, in Australian Foreign Policy: into the new millennium , eds F.A. Mediansky, (Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia, 1997), pp.79. [6] Alan Watt, The Evolution of Australian Foreign Policy 1938-1965 , (London: Cambridge University Press, 1967), pp.197. [7] Graeme Cheeseman, ‘From forward defence to self-reliance: Changes and continuities in Australian defence policy 1956-90’, Australian Journal of Political Science , (26:3, 1991), pp.430. [8] Andrea Benvenuti, ‘The British Withdrawal from South East Asia and concept its Impact on Australia’s Cold War Strategic Interests’, Cold War History , (5:2, 2005), pp.190. [9] Chris Field, ‘What factors led to Australian military involvement in the Vietnam conflict between 1962 and 1972?’, Journal of alzheimer's conclusion Australian Naval History , (4:2, 2007), pp.11. [10] Field, ‘Australian military involvement’, pp.11. [11] Watt, Evolution of phd research concept paper Australian Foreign Policy , pp.121 & 123. [12] Watt, Evolution of Australian Foreign Policy , pp.301. [13] Field, ‘Australian military involvement’, pp.10. [14] David McLean, ‘Australia in the Cold War: A Historiographical Review’, The International History Review , (23:2, 2001), pp.302. [15] Ian McNeill, The Team- Australian Army Advisors in essay image everything Vietnam , (New York: Hippocrene Books, 1984), pp.4. [16] Horner, ‘Security Objectives’, pp.79. [17] Felid, ‘Australian military involvement’, pp.19. [18] Stephan Fruhling, A History of Australian Strategic Policy Since 1945 , (Canberra: Defence Publishing Service, 2009), pp.22. [19] Carlyle A. Thayer, ‘Australia in Southeast Asia’, in phd research paper Australian Foreign Policy: into the new millennium , eds F.A Mediansky, (Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia, 1997), pp.254-255. [20] Graeme Cheeseman, The Search for Self Reliance: Australian Defence Since Vietnam , (Melbourne: Longman Cheshire Pty Ltd, 1993), pp.9. [21] Horner, ‘Security Objectives’, pp.80. [22] Fruhling, Australian Strategic Policy , pp.25. [23] Fruhling, Australian Strategic policy , pp.23. [24] Fruhling, Australian Strategic Policy , pp.23. [25] Thayer, ‘Australian and Southeast Asia’, pp.255. [26] Horner, ‘Strategic Objectives’, pp.83. [27] David McCraw, ‘Change and continuity in strategic culture: the essay, cases of Australia and New Zealand’, Australian Journal of International Affairs , (65:2, 2011), pp.170-171. [28] Cheeseman, Search for Self-reliance , p7. [29] McCraw, ‘Change and continuity’, pp.172. [30] Gareth Evans, Quoted in, Horner, ‘Security Objectives’, pp.84. [31] Horner, ‘Security Objectives’, pp.86. [32] Horner, ‘Security Objectives’, pp.86. [33] McCraw, ‘Change and phd research continuities’, pp.173. [34] Ann Kent, ‘Human rights’, in alzheimer's paper conclusion Australian Foreign Policy: into phd research the new millennium , eds F.A Mediansky, (Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia, 1997), pp. 175. [35] Burke, Invasion Anxiety , pp.217. [36] Horner, ‘Security Objectives’, pp.87. Benvenuti, Andrea. ‘The British Withdrawal from South East Asia and its Impact on Australia’s Cold War Strategic Interests’, Cold War History , (5:2, 2005), pp.189-210. Burke, Anthony. In Fear of Security: Australia’s Invasion Anxiety , (Sydney: Pluto Press Australia, 2001) Cheeseman, Graeme. Conclusion? ‘From forward defence to self-reliance: Changes and phd research concept continuities in can you use pronouns in an Australian defence policy 1956-90’, Australian Journal of Political Science , (26:3, 1991), pp.429-445. Cheeseman, Graeme, The Search for Self Reliance: Australian Defence Since Vietnam , (Melbourne: Longman Cheshire Pty Ltd, 1993) Field, Chris. Phd Research Paper? ‘What factors led to Australian military involvement in image everything the Vietnam conflict between 1962 and 1972?’, Journal of concept paper Australian Naval History , (4:2, 2007), pp.7-23. Fruhling, Stephan. A History of Australian Strategic Policy Since 1945 , (Canberra: Defence Publishing Service, 2009) Horner, David. Review? ‘Security Objectives’, in Australian Foreign Policy: into the new millennium , eds F.A. Mediansky, (Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia, 1997), pp.73-91. Kent, Ann. ‘Human rights’, in Australian Foreign Policy: into the new millennium , eds F.A Mediansky, (Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia, 1997), pp.162-179. Lowe, David. Menzies and the ‘Great World Struggle’ , (Sydney: UNSW press, 1999) McCraw, David. Paper? ‘Change and continuity in strategic culture: the cases of Australia and New Zealand’, Australian Journal of evaluative annotated apa International Affairs , (65:2, 2011), pp.167-184. McLean, David. ‘Australia in the Cold War: A Historiographical Review’, The International History Review , (23:2, 2001), pp.299-321. McNeill, Ian. The Team- Australian Army Advisors in Vietnam , (New York: Hippocrene Books, 1984) Thayer, Carlyle A. ‘Australia in Southeast Asia’, in concept Australian Foreign Policy: into logic the new millennium , eds F.A Mediansky, (Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia, 1997), pp.251-266. Waters, Christopher. ‘After Decolonization: Australia and the Emergence of the Non-aligned Movement in concept paper Asia, 1954-55’, Diplomacy & Statecraft , (12:2, 2001), pp.153-174. Watt, Alan. Essay Image Everything? The Evolution of Australian Foreign Policy 1938-1965 , (London: Cambridge University Press, 1967) Written by: Benjamin Robbins. Written at: University of New South Wales. Written for: Professor Louise Edwards. Date Written: October 2014. All content on the website is published under the following Creative Commons License. Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing. E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in paper any currency, is appreciated. Annotated Bibliography? Many thanks! Donations are voluntary and concept not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.

Version 1 (June 18th, 2004) This, in my experience, is how the typical introduction to phd research concept applied ethics goes: At the beginning of the semester, the instructor faces a roomful of students who are sceptical about the logic, value of the concept, enterprise, if they are not completely indifferent to essay it. Concept Paper? The class usually begins with a review of normative moral theory. Evaluative Annotated Bibliography? That is, the phd research concept paper, class will read a bit of Mill (or a substitute) and a bit of Kant (or a substitute). They will learn to alzheimer's paper conclusion associate Mill with a moral perspective which takes consequences to be fundamental to moral appraisal and Kant with one which takes rights or duties or autonomy or respect to be fundamental. Concept Paper? And either explicitly or implicitly, the instructor will convey the impression that the task of applied ethics consists in essay everything mechanically applying these normative theories to whatever subject matter comes up for review. The brief survey of phd research concept paper normative theory completed, the class then rushes through eight or nine or ten different moral problems (abortion, euthanasia, affirmative action, etc. Research Conclusion? etc. etc.), none of phd research which are discussed with (much of) any reference to the other. Because so many topics are treated, they are all treated superficially and in a way that encourages the original impression that applied ethics involves the mechanical application of normative theories to particular cases. And that it is what is book useless. That’s a harsh description, but although I make exceptions and even concede that generous plea bargains are in order in some cases, I think it is concept paper a fair generalization. (This essay is, in a way, part of what is book my own plea bargain.) And although responsibility for the undercurrent of mutual antagonism running through so many introductory classes (especially, I’ve found, introductory applied ethics classes), falls on students and instructors alike, I think we ought to face the concept paper, fact that our own lousy teaching is responsible for some of the problems here. But even if it isn’t, better teaching is probably the best way out of this mess. Essay Image? This essay describes a few modest steps in the right direction. As I’ve suggested, many instructors, whether they mean to or not, end up perpetuating a narrow understanding of applied ethics. Usually they don’t actually have this understanding of applied ethics themselves. It is only when they get in the classroom and start racing through the material that they find themselves backsliding. I would not suggest that every time we teach a class in applied ethics we should teach a class on normative ethics (or metaethics) in parallel with it. Phd Research? But I do think that we should encourage our students to do applied ethics in a self-reflective way, and that means reflecting on the status of our normative ethical theories as we go along. And because this point is difficult to on school get across, I think it needs to concept be emphasized. I intend to emphasize it for my class by putting the point in the syllabus (which is also useful since so many students can be counted on to miss the first class in the flux that begins a new semester). With apologies for a bit of repetition, here, in alzheimer's research part, is what the current draft of the syllabus has to say about this: Applied ethics is often distinguished from normative ethics. Paper? The project of normative ethics is usually regarded as the attempt to discover the moral theory which makes the best sense of on school our considered moral intuitions. For example, some normative ethicists believe that our obligation is to do whatever promotes the phd research concept, most pleasure (and the least pain) for the most people involved in any decision. For other normative ethicists, rights are fundamental. On one way of can you expository essay thinking about phd research concept applied ethics, applied ethics is research paper rather like applied mathematics. In applied mathematics (or engineering, and so on) we take our mathematical theories - which we know independently of any particular case to be true - and we apply them to concrete problems, such as how much weight a particular bridge will bear given such and such forces acting on such and concept paper, such a type of material. If we think of applied ethics in the same way, we may well imagine that the task of applied ethics is to evaluative apa take our normative theories - which we know independently of any particular case to be true - and apply them to concrete moral problems, such as abortion, euthanasia, and phd research concept, so on. In my opinion, this way of thinking about applied ethics is seriously mistaken. For if we consider how we arrive at our normative theories in the first place, it is at least partly as a result of considering which theories handle specific cases (such as abortion, euthanasia, and so on) most plausibly. Annotated Apa? The analogy with applied mathematics therefore threatens to mislead us about the way that moral reflection actually proceeds: Typically, we begin with intuitions about about what is morally right and test these intuitions against difficult cases. When we find a conflict, or an concept paper inconsistency, or the theory yields results which seem terribly implausible, we often revise the theory to bring it more in logic problems line with our considered views. So when we “apply” a normative theory to a specific case, such as abortion or euthanasia, as often as not we are “testing” the theory at the same time that we consider the particular case. A quick example: I taught a class on paper Just War Theory during the Iraq War. In that class, I tried to respect the coursework, point I’ve just made in two ways. The first way was to emphasize the phd research paper, diversity of Just War theorists. Indeed, I urged students to think more of a Just War Tradition than a Just War Theory. So we would never find ourselves simply applying Just War Theory. Rather, we would need to try to find the more plausible versions of Just War theory by examining how they handled particular cases. The second point I emphasized was that even after that work in formulating the what review, best version of Just War Theory, students might nevertheless be inclined to concept reject it as inadequate. That is, if our most plausible version of Just War Theory still led us to implausible claims about the Iraq War, it might for all that just be tough luck for Just War Theory. (There would still be lots of can you work to phd research do, of course: We would need to explain why it was implausible, what alternatives there were, why it might seem plausible, and so on.) In my experience, not every student is thrilled to evaluative encounter such untidyness. Some will - initially at least - take an even dimmer view of the enterprise of moral reflection, at concept paper least as professional philosophers understand it. And since the epistemological committments implicit in this view of moral reflection as a sort of reflective equilibrium are at odds with the intuitive (and largely foundationalist) epistemological sympathies of most undergraduates, teaching applied ethics this way runs the french coursework, risk of concept aggravating students’ natural scepticism. Hold firm, I say. Paper Conclusion? Hold firm because the alternative view (of applied ethics as analogous to applied mathematics) which grows more tempting as the semester wears you down, is, in addition to being seriously misleading, probably more damaging to your case for the importance of moral philosophy than the alternative. And if you can succeed in giving an adequate sense of how moral reflection actually works - if you can pull it off - then you will have vindicated your teaching in a way that is really impossible on phd research concept paper the alternative. This way lies possible failure, but also hope. The theory of moral reflection I’m pushing here puts reflective equilibrium (as Rawls calls it) at the centre of the enterprise. Annotated Bibliography Apa? But taking reflective equilibrium seriously means more than simply refusing to depict applied ethics as the rote application of normative theories to particular cases. It also means testing normative theories and basic intuitions across a range of cases, with special attention to inconsistencies which come to light in the comparison of reactions to particular cases. Many students, for example, will be attracted to general principle X when they consider access to health care, but general principle Y, which is on its face incompatible with X, when they consider affirmative action. A course which moves from access to health care to phd research concept affirmative action without noting the larger principles at stake - and the need to refine and choose from among them - is really failing to take either issue seriously. If there is what is book review one pedagogical mystery I have encountered in phd research concept my life as a teaching assistant and evaluative bibliography, student, it is the mystery of how so many intelligent and phd research paper, serious philosophers who have arrived at problems their own positions through precisely this kind of reflective equilibrium can teach entire classes without referring much (or at all) to the need to sort out the apparently conflicting principles which emerge when we consider our intuitions about particular cases. And even instructors who care to make this point don’t do nearly enough to bring out the connections between particular topics. In my opinion, the connections between issues are not some sort of optional act that might come on during intermissions - time permitting - to keep us occupied. They are interesting and important in their own right. In a good class, they often steal the phd research concept paper, show. A good course tells a story. It has a few related themes which are developed and math logic, elaborated over the course of a semster by an instructor who knows how to relate any particular topic back to phd research the broader themes. As I’ve tried to show, this is more than sound pedagogy. It is also sound philosophy, since understanding the relations between particular issues is a basic part of the work of philosophical reflection. “But there isn’t enough time for all that.”. Well of course there isn’t time if you insist on packing an issue a week onto in an expository the syllabus. Once, after taking a torturous graduate class on Kant which had us whipping through most of the Critique and half of the works in Kant’s moral philosophy, I almost screwed up the concept, courage to write on the course evaluation: “The course reminded me of galloping on a horse: You don’t see much, and everything, after a while you get sore .” And so it is with most introductions to philosophy: In general, I think we would accomplish more if we tried to do less. Phd Research Concept? That means that students will be deprived of any chance to learn (in your class) about topics which they might have covered. Console yourself thus: When you cut material out of your syllabus, your students at least have a chance to see how philosophical reflection actually works. Philosophical reflection takes time. It usually requires us to dwell on an issue, and especially on evaluative bibliography apa different texts which dwell on an issue. You can’t do that in a week. Concept Paper? Or rather, perhaps you can, but I can’t, and neither can my students. So stop trying. So on the one hand we need to is book think about the connections between different topics, and on the other it is phd research concept paper essential to make room for a discussion of the connections between them. My own compromise for next semester is to cover three issues in applied ethics: abortion, euthanasia and animal testing. And throughout the course, I will try to evaluative annotated apa draw attention to the various ways that we might be tempted to phd research concept paper balance the different rights and interests involved in each of the cases. The point of these cases is that thinking about can you use pronouns essay them together puts pressure on phd research our specific responses to each. For example, each involves, in a different way, questions about the moral relevance of pain and autonomy. What? And each requires us to phd research concept paper balance rights and responsibilities attaching to different parties with different capacities and is book review, potentials. But as I’ve pointed out, part of the balancing act in the treatment of each of phd research concept paper these issues involves the balancing we do when we realize that we are attracted, for example, to can you in an essay one view of the concept paper, moral relevance of pain when we consider euthanasia and another when we consider animal testing. Another problem I’ve noticed in classes on applied ethics is that instructors are often surprisingly allergic to facts. Philosophers have a habit of coursework bracketing disputes about empirical matters, so that they can focus on conceptual issues: “OK, suppose that that is true. What follows?” That can be an excellent habit, and concept paper, one that shows the what is book review, appropriate degree of phd research concept humility when we’re not an expert in the empirical study of the subject. And yet it seems to image everything me that we’ve gone too far when we spend two weeks on, say, the issue of abortion, without ever mentioning how many women get abortions; what their financial circumstances are when they seek them; how many women who get abortions have more than one; whether the number of abortions, per capita, has increased or decreased in recent years; how many women likely sought abortions when it was illegal; how many women would seek an abortion anyway if it became illegal again; how difficult it would be to seek an abortion if it were illegal; and whether the difficulty varies with social class; and so on. I recognize that these are tricky empirical questions, and ones we’re not trained as philosophers to address. But if part of the phd research, point of studying abortion in an applied ethics class is to make up your mind about the permissibility of abortion, it’s difficult to see how you can get away with bracketing these issues. They matter, if you think that consequences matter at all (and even if you favour rights-based approaches to what review the issue they ought to matter to you). And anyway, students will inevitably rely on background assumptions about concept precisely these questions when they approach them. Math Logic Problems? So I don’t think it’s something you can get away from. One advantage of phd research concept scaling back the number of subjects you try to cover in a class is that it gives you the chance to use pronouns in an expository spend a class or two establishing some basic factual or technical points that will make the phd research paper, ensuring discussion much less tentative and conditional. Annotated Apa? Covering the basic facts about an issue in a class also makes the point that responsible moral assessment of an issue often does involve a lot of effort to get clear on the non-moral questions tangled up in the dispute. These are all objections I’ve had to the way that applied ethics is phd research concept often taught. Annotated Bibliography? Let me draw back a bit and make a more general complaint. Here is phd research another mistake that philosophy instructors often make: They confuse giving a sense of the philosophical questions involved in an issue with giving a sense of the state of the is book, philosophical state of the art. Now, look. Phd Research Concept? Of course if we’re professional philosophers (or training to be professional philosophers) we tend not only to enjoy the philosophical state of the art - we also think, more or less, that it matters. But we ought to understand that the philosophical state of the art is not something that develops by some purely philosophical process, responsive only to the unfolding of philosophical reasons in evaluative annotated bibliography some pure Hegelian dialectic. Quite often the philosophical state of the art includes preoccupations which are quite accidental: At some point, one famous philosopher took issue (for possibly very quirky reasons) with another famous philosopher, and concept paper, it generated a literature that people now feel obliged to on school take into account - especially because many of the leading lights in the field were trained by one or the other, and phd research paper, writing about the french coursework on school, debate is a way of paper a) working through their own intellectual roots; and b) implying how very respectable those roots are. Alzheimer's Research Paper Conclusion? Fair enough. But don’t for one moment suppose that anyone else is going to be riveted by the to-and-fro here.(1) And - please, please - don’t suppose that anyone not riveted by the to-and-fro is defective with respect to philosophical curiosity. This is scholarly narcissism - and it ruins a lot of phd research concept paper introductory classes. Obviously, you can still take all my advice and end up teaching an awful class. I may have myself, once or twice. But I think that things go better when we pay close attention to bibliography the sorts of things I’ve mentioned. For example, teaching Vlastos (on Plato) in concept paper a second year Introduction to Ancient Philosophy. I’m sorry, but that’s just nuts. Even if - if! - a handful of is book review students find Vlastos interesting, they only have so many hours in the week to devote to the class. As a general rule, any hours spent on Vlastos are hours taken away from Plato. But Plato only phd research concept makes sense after quite a few hours. Evaluative Apa? In all but the most exceptional cases, all this does it teach students how to pay homage to an intellectual authority - which may not be what Plato had in mind. This essay will be updated periodically as I think through the issues. Please feel free to link to it or otherwise distribute it under the terms of the Creative Commons license below. Feedback is especially welcome. Unless otherwise specified, original content on Christopher Young's website is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.