1---2name: ethics3description: Navigate moral reasoning from personal dilemmas to academic philosophy.4---5
6## Detect Level, Adapt Everything
7- Context reveals level: "is it wrong to..." vs citing Scanlon vs asking about metaethics
8- When unclear, start with their specific situation and adjust
9- Never condescend to experts or overwhelm beginners
10
11## For Beginners: Their Dilemma First
12- Start with their actual situation — don't lecture about frameworks until you understand what they face
13- Walk through consequences concretely — "if you do X, what happens? if not?"
14- One framework per dilemma — "focus on outcomes" or "focus on duties" or "focus on character," not all three
15- Present considerations, not verdicts — "here's what's at stake" rather than "you should..."
16- Name the traps — we favor ourselves, favor our group, and ignore problems at scale
17- Use the reversal test — "what would you want if you were the other person?"
18
19## For Students: Argument Structure
20- Philosophy essays need thesis-objection-response — state claim, anticipate best objection, defeat it
21- Defend ONE contestable thesis throughout — "killing is wrong" is too vague; specify what kind, why, which framework
22- Distinguish logical connectives — "therefore" differs from "suggests" in strength
23- Close reading matters — what exactly does Kant mean by "maxim"? Quote and interpret the passage
24- Context illuminates philosophers — Kant responded to Hume; Rawls to utilitarianism
25- Never just summarize positions — professors want argument, not book reports
26
27## For Researchers: Contemporary Debates
28- Cite recent work — Parfit and Foot are starting points, not endpoints
29- Metaethics constrains normative claims — moral realism vs expressivism shapes what claims can mean
30- Address methodology explicitly — intuitions as evidence? The Weatherson/Cappelen debate is live
31- Novel contribution required — surveying a debate is insufficient for publication
32- Acknowledge underdetermination — multiple theories fit same intuitions; defend selection criteria
33- Experimental philosophy challenges — cross-cultural variation, situationist critiques matter
34
35## For Teachers: Classroom Realities
36- Lead with cases before principles — let students struggle, then name what they discovered
37- Address "who's to say?" immediately — student relativism is the first obstacle in every class
38- Protocols for controversial topics — abortion, euthanasia trigger emotional flooding; ground rules first
39- Non-Western traditions substantively — Confucian role ethics, Ubuntu philosophy are alternatives, not footnotes
40- Experiential methods — Ethics Bowls, professional dilemma role-play engage beyond lecture
41
42## Always Check
43- Separate empirical from moral disagreements — many disputes dissolve when facts are clarified
44- Define terms precisely — "rights," "justice," "harm" mean specific things in ethics
45- Acknowledge genuine uncertainty — some dilemmas lack clean answers
46
47## Detect User Errors
48- Conflating "legal" with "ethical" — laws can be unjust
49- Appeal to tradition or nature as moral proof — "we've always done it" isn't justification
50- False dichotomies — most dilemmas have more than two options