Justice and the Shooting of “Harrison Bergeron”

Prepping for Essays 4 and 5

Plot Discussion…

• Any questions about the story?

Journal (in your notes)• How does Harrison represent the minority that

Thoreau speaks of in “Civil Disobedience” and that King speaks of in “Letter from Birmingham Jail”?

Justice: The quality of being fair and reasonable (oxford English dictionary)The system of laws by which people are judged and punished

• Was the shooting of Harrison Bergeron by the Handicapper General a just act? Why or why not?

Ethics is concerned with questions of how people ought to act.

Ethics denotes the theory of right action and the greater good. It is not limited to specific acts and defined moral codes, but encompasses the whole of moral ideals and behaviors.

Schools of ethics in Western philosophy can be roughly divided into 3 sorts. 1. Aristotelian ethics holds that ethics is the science of achieving happiness, which is derived from being a good person. “How do I become a good person?” By practicing virtues (such as justice, charity, chastity….). The good person performs good actions, and s/he perform good actions in order to achieve happiness.2. Utilitarianism asserts that the guiding principle of conduct should be the greatest happiness or benefit of the greatest number. The consequences of the action is most valuable (the “ends”). 3. Kantian ethics state that certain types of actions (murder, theft, lying…) are absolutely prohibited, even in cases where the action would bring about more happiness than the alternative.  For Kantians, there are two questions that we must ask ourselves whenever we decide to act:  (i) Can I rationally will that everyone act as I propose to act?  If the answer is no, then we must not perform the action.  (ii)  Does my action respect the goals of human beings rather than merely using them for my own purposes?  Again, if the answer is no, then we must not perform the action. The intention or the motive is what matters (the “means”).

Ethics

• Ethics is an important consideration when pondering whether or not something is just.

• When you are trying to decide whether a policy or an action is just, you must determine whether it is ethical• Is it good? Is it virtuous? Will it achieve happiness?

(Aristotelian) • Will it achieve the greatest happiness for the greatest number?

(Utilitarian)• Does it respect the goals of all human beings? (Kantian)

• Return to “Harrison Bergeron.” Let’s apply each school of ethics to the shooting to determine whether or not it was just.

• A brief review of our sources

Justice: The quality of being fair and reasonable (oxford English dictionary)The system of laws by which people are judged and punished

Thoreau’s View of Government and Justice:• Justice is determined by virtues; virtuous, good behavior leads to just

actions and people know this naturally. We don’t need gov’t to tell us what is right.• He asks, “Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree,

resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then?”• He believes it is more important to develop a respect for the right,

rather than a respect for law, because people's obligations are to do what is right.• If government "is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of

injustice to another, then I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine.”

Justice: The quality of being fair and reasonable (oxford English dictionary)The system of laws by which people are judged and punished

King’s View of Government and Justice• King believes that justice is a natural phenomenon that is

determined by God. Good actions are just, and hurtful actions are unjust.• “A just law is a manmade code that squares with the

moral law or the law of God” and “an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.”• Further, he argues “we know that freedom is never

voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.”

Justice: The quality of being fair and reasonable (oxford English dictionary)The system of laws by which people are judged and punished

Cicero’s View of Government and Justice

• Philus presents the complications of justice—the gray areas. He argues “justice [does not] naturally exist, but [is] a quality that is created by those who are occupied in government.”

• Laws and justice “are imposed by the fear of being penalized. In other words, human beings are not just, by nature, at all.”

• “Weakness, not nature or good intention, is the mother of justice” so gov’t must regulate.

• People are good only to avoid “fear,

worry, anxiety, and peril.”

• Laelius represents Cicero’s beliefs, and he argues (without much exemplification):

• “True law is in keeping with the dictates both of reason and of nature.”

• “To explain or interpret [justice] we need no one outside our own selves.”

• Just behavior is dictated by God and it is the same everywhere, for everyone

Justice: The quality of being fair and reasonable (oxford English dictionary)The system of laws by which people are judged and punished

Machiavelli’s views of Justice and Government• If a prince is too compassionate, and does not adequately punish disloyal

subjects, he creates an atmosphere of disorder, since his subjects take the liberty to do what they please

• Men, by nature, are “ungrateful, fickle, dissembling, anxious to flee danger, and covetous of gain.” In times of remote danger, they are willing to take risks for their prince, but if the danger is real, they turn against him. It is easy to break a bond of love when the situation arises, but the fear of punishment is always effective

• Ultimately, a philosophy must be judged by its practical consequences. Because virtue, as an abstract concept, does not concern itself with such consequences, it can never serve as an effective guide for political action. Machiavelli’s definition of virtue is not the same as that of classical philosophers. While Aristotle and others define virtue in relation to a highest good, Machiavelli defines it simply as that which receives the praise of others

Back to the original question:

Was the shooting of Harrison Bergeron by the Handicapper General a justified act? Why or why not?

What do we know about this society and the events that occured?• The law demands and creates equality.• It creates equality by giving its citizens painful, aesthetically displeasing, and

debilitating “handicaps”• All citizens seem to follow the law; George defends the law.• Harrison breaks the law by refusing to be “made” equal.• Harrison engages others in breaking the law (the ballerina and the musicians)• He is shot by the Handicapper General.

What would Philus, in his role of defending the government’s need for injustice, say about this? What would Cicero (represented by Laelius) have to say? How about Machiavelli? Would he defend the Handicapper General? What would Dr. King and Thoreau have to say about this event?

These questions are exactly what you will need to consider as you prep for your midterm.

Define ethics as you understand it and explain your perspective of justice (don’t say “I think justice is…” just say “justice is…”). Then pose your argument: Was the shooting of Harrison Bergeron by the Handicapper General a justified act? Why or why not? Use at least one of our major readings to support your answer. As you make your supporting points, consider the following: Is justice black and white? Is it natural and eternal or does it vary on a case by case basis? Does justice protect all or only the majority? Should justice be determined by the government, as a set of laws, or should justice be determined and carried out by individuals based on their understanding of what is good? Also, portray an opposing viewpoint using at least one of our readings. Who would disagree with you? Why? What is that person’s perspective? Provide at least one paragraph to explain this opposing/alternative perspective.

Creative Option• Create closing statements from a defense lawyer and

a prosecutor. George and Hazel are suing the state, with the Handicapper General named as the primary defendant. You may use our authors as the attorneys, or you may quote them and refer to their ideas in your arguments.• You will still need to include everything stated in the

last slide, but for this option, both arguments will receive equal weight.

The In-class Essay• Please bring an outline for your essay, including only your thesis, your

major claims, and all of the quotes you will need. I will check it before the exam. (Do not bring a prewritten essay—of course, you can draft one as practice all you like. You just can’t refer to it during class)• Bring 5-10 sheets of lined paper and writing utensils• You will have 80 minutes to write the essay. I recommend planning for

a four page, double-spaced essay.• I will provide a prompt with a rubric in class, so you know exactly what

I am grading for when you begin the in-class essay.• After the essay, I hope to have 3 minute conferences to quickly review

your essays, while you put together group “debates” on the issue