 Okay, so today we're going to talk about two different readings, and I'm going to try to stitch them together for you in a way that makes sense And they're a little bit disparate from each other. One is this guy, Alistair McIntyre, who started talking in the last class He's a virtue ethicist Still alive, teaches at Notre Dame, teaches undergraduate classes by choice The other guy we're going to read is a famous 20th century French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, and we're going to look at his existentialism as a humanism And there's some common themes that tie them together. McIntyre actually talks a little bit about Sartre in that reading I'm not presuming that you understand at this point how they fit together, but hopefully by the end of this you know And I want to start out with this This is kind of a good distinction to think about Today we're going to talk a lot about two different moral theories One of which we call relativism, the other one we call the motivism They're both very prevalent in our culture and in our educational culture We want to get away from them They're sort of the end of ethics. If we buy into them We may as well just end the class here and say everybody, you know, gets whatever grade they get And when we're finished there's no point in studying anything. If relativism is true, our motivism is true then There's not much point in ethics The reason why we're going to look at Sartre is he has spouses of kind of a motivism You can see a motivism and relativism at work in our culture by looking at this distinction When we get into discussions about moral issues Things that people consider to be right or wrong, good or bad, how we should order our lives or our goods or our societies or relationships There's a huge difference between asserting that something is the case And then asserting that something is the case because and then giving some sort of reason or explanation or justification A lot of times this this slips out of people's minds. So think about all these controversial issues that, you know, we like to find hundreds of them Think about daytime talk shows I'm sure some of you have been indulged every once in a while in watching some people get into an argument It's probably a moral argument. You should do this. You shouldn't do this Those shows, they get heated, sometimes they throw chairs at each other, guards have to hold them back Right? That's probably not your experience in everyday life, I hope, not if you are getting into brawls But you've probably gotten some heated exchanges about moral issues When you go home at Thanksgiving or Christmas or Easter or whatever There's certain issues that in polite conversation you're supposed to avoid at the dinner table You know, what are they? Sex is one of them. Politics, religion. But yeah, well it's interesting because usually people always say politics and religion And then the other two that vary because we like things in threes, right? Are either sex or money Now if you think about these, why are these such hot books? Well is always tied in with all sorts of things How you earn your money, whether you've got enough money, whether other people should have that money or not What you spend it on, what you shouldn't spend it on, these are the things that people get worked up about Consumption and purchasing are not value-neutral things, as we say Sex? Well, you know, there's There's all sorts of ways in which you might be able to screw up your life or enhance it, depending on what you do You know, in the realm of attraction dating and sexuality And people have some pretty strongly held beliefs about that, right? And we also have some pretty strong drives That often bring us into competition with each other or run us into societal norms Make us want to, you know, choose this rather than that Politics, what is politics about? It's about who has power, who gets to decide important things Who should rule? And then religion, you know, why do people get so worked up about religion? Well, you know, if there is a God Sartre, for example, says there isn't And we're not going to go very deep into any of these sort of theological issues But if there is a God and God's what, you know, people who believe in God Make him or it or whatever out to be is a source of all value and goodness Well, that would really reorient things, wouldn't it? And if there isn't a God, well, that would really reorient things as well People often have very deep emotional investments in these These issues and so what happens when they get into discussions? If they're being reasonable, if they're being rational They're acting like What human beings could do they would say I think this is the case They make a claim and then they'd say because and then they would give some sort of Justification or some sort of reason I think that you shouldn't spend your money on candy because it'll rot your teeth. It's kind of a trivial example I think you shouldn't spend your money on candy because I think you should put it towards a Marist education A little less trivial example. Those are moral claims I'm giving you a reason That's different than just saying I don't think you should spend your money on candy or I think capital punishment is okay Or I think capital punishment is wrong or people who believe in capital punishment are Barbarians with a medieval mentality or people who don't believe in capital punishment are weaklings Coddle criminals and Victimized the victims once again, you notice those are all just assertions that they're not saying anything because they're not getting a reason and What happens when we get into discussions about these? These issues It turns into you guys are familiar with this from experience This side says this this side says this and they just shouted at each other Pretty common experience right in our society common experience in every society, but successful societies Teach their members how to get to the because how to reason with each other Doesn't mean we'll actually convince each other But if you can give reasons why you think something is the case you're going further than just yelling and shouting unfortunately our culture Often tells us that the key thing is just to express ourselves express your point of view Make your opinion count Your opinion is really only going to count if somebody else could find it reasonable And that's where the because comes in so What happens often times in our society this is where relativism and animotivism is the focus on this rather than moving beyond to try to find some sort of reason some sort of Common ground by which we could work these things out Relativism says that there are no actual objective moral values or norms or Things like theories that would hold for everybody they hold only for Particular individuals or for cultures or societies or groups that are relatively so when you hear somebody say something like well That's true for me, but it's not true for you That's an example of relativism if they really mean yeah Um Why is it an example of relativism and not just an example of being relative? There's a difference between being relative you can say that something appears to be true from my perspective That's being relative right, but if you're saying well something is true for me, but not true for you The word true The way we actually use that word means that it applies to more than just One thing one perspective you can say something appears true from a perspective. That's not really a big deal for instance Let's say we take a sort of silly moral claim. I used this example in the last class I Would guess that you would think that drunk Now I'm not actually saying To me it seems that drowning puppies could be a perfectly justifiable thing if you have too many puppies You know, I mean it's been done for a long time In a lot of areas you put them in a bag and throw them in the river And then you don't have any puppy problem, you know, and they're out of their misery They would otherwise make a star or something like that. And you know, some people just like to drown puppies too Now do we want to say that you know, that's true for me It's not true for you For you, it's true that drowning puppies is bad for me Drowning puppies is good. They're both equally true. They're both equally valid That's not the same thing as saying I have that. I mean, you know Let's say I do it's one thing to say I have this Or it appears this way to me from my perspective And appears that way to you from your perspective, it's a whole nother thing to say they're both equally true One is it's a good point one is saying think things are relative to points of view and other is Stating that they're both equally true is relative to this. Yes Maybe there's nothing that's that's true because nothing is true for many Universal The trouble is is it puts everything on the same level so it becomes very difficult to say then How anybody could in fact be wrong so if you want to be able to say condemn the Nazis If you want to say that what they did was wrong say Holocaust You can't be a relative Because if you're a relativist you have to say well, it was it was right for them wouldn't be right for me Or for our society, but it was right for their society because that was their Their set of norms if you want to be able to make judgments about whether things You can't afford to be a Much more basic way somebody wants to be a better use this example If you want to be a relativist, let me know because then I can give you the F right away And then when you come to me and you say I don't think that's fair dr. Sadler I can say well, of course, you don't think it's fair and it's not fair to you It's fair to me. That's the way I understand fair Then suddenly you're not a relativist any more right because when it comes down to it most of us are not This guy Allen blue wrote this book the closing of the American mind years and years ago All college undergraduates are infected with relativism. I don't think that's actually the case I think that our society pushes it a lot and our educational institutions will often push it because we're afraid of making judgments Because if we make judgments, then then we're being judgmental, right? It's not nice to be judgmental One of you want to be labeled as judgmental, right? Well, correct Also providing enough for being a relativist a year being judgmental That's an internal problem with Right. I'm here to actually say it's okay for you to be judgmental just Have some reasons why you're making the judgment Try you know giving some some justification for why you're saying this is right or this is wrong as a matter of fact I would say you have to be judgmental if not You're you're you know, you're going to let a lot of things slide that shouldn't slide Very often people talk in a relativistic way when they want to manipulate Or they want to avoid criticism oftentimes it can be good to undergo criticism So that's relativism a motivism which is what Macintay talks a bit more about and he actually this is one of his major books after virtue He begins this and I'll put some references to this and I look for you. I'm not going to require you to read it He talks about a motivism as being sort of the the general moral theory governing our Culture today more than a little bit different than relativism Motivism will also put a stop to ethics, but it'll do for they'll do so in a different way for a different reason The emotivist can say people will give reasons and It might not just be those reasons might just not be well But ultimately those reasons are just sort of window What the emotivist is committed to is saying something like this What moral judgments moral values ways in which we order goods our lives Relationships what those boil down to is just our subjective preferences so If I say drawing puppies is bad It's not because drawing puppies really is bad And that's part of the way the world is or anything like that. It's just I feel bad about And I feel good in saying let's not drown puppies That makes me feel like a good person And there are people out there who make their moral claims and make their moral decisions basically on the basis of Wanting to feel good about themselves or not feel bad about themselves Maybe to feel morally superior to other people or to avoid shame or something like that There are people out there who take their sides and take their stances and it's basically the equivalent of as one of the Proponents of the emotivist theory said basically like saying yay, you know not drowning puppies. Yay drowning puppies boo It's just a preference If a motivism is correct Then all this justification stuff and the moral theories that we use these are just a mask For our wish to get things to go the way We want them to make us feel good Now there's a further use though We also use this stuff to try to make other people feel the way that we do too If you're an emotivist, it's a okay to try to make everyone else feel like you Because you know the ultimate basis is your feelings so If I don't want you to drown puppies or kittens for that matter or whatever I Should bring pressure to bear on and try to make you feel bad if you do that on the other hand if I want you know you to let me Drown puppies because I'm sadist or something like that then I would you know come up with some sort of argument that makes you feel bad for Interfering of my rights to do as I wish with my property or something like that, but it's really about my wish to drown puppies You can see this is going to be a big problem, right If all that morality is is just our subjective preferences What's the point in studying all this? I guess just to get good at tricking each other So you learn a little con so you can bring that out to make people feel a certain way learn a little play-doh do the same thing If that's the case then then we may as well end this semester here right so relativism and emotivism Not saying there aren't any people out there to hold these theories They would prevent you from doing any real study in ethics. They would prevent you from actual growth So MacIntyre is going to take off from this MacIntyre let's do a little recap from MacIntyre said He said that plain persons, so that's you That's also me and so far as I live a life outside of the confines of this classroom and my Academic life All of us live out some sort of moral theory Some people actually are right some people are just using value to judgments and moral language to manipulate people Right to coerce them into doing things Does that mean that everybody is no, but but that's one possible And our society often Steers us towards that our culture whether we like it or not does in fact steer us towards a motivism In part by discouraging us from actually giving good reasons You know when somebody if you've been told since you were a kid Your opinion is good because it's your opinion and you should act on your feelings You are probably gonna end up at least that early on becoming an emotivist, right? If you don't have anything else telling you no, you should make a decision on other and When MacIntyre talks about this he talks about this in terms of this guy John Paul Sartre who we're gonna talk a little bit more about towards the end of class One of the readings for today, not everybody's an emotivist though, right? When you guys make moral decisions, and he's made a lot of moral decisions in your life What other bases might you have made them on? Now you probably didn't think of it in terms of utilitarianism Did anyone when they were deciding you know what they needed to do in their last crisis? Say what would Jeremy Bentham say? Well, none of you did that Probably not gonna do that later on But now you know it's utilitarianism What utilitarianism is If we want to put it in a nutshell The approach that it takes Is to say well, you know when we make moral decisions Decisions that really count things about right and wrong good and bad The best thing to do Or the right thing to do is that which will benefit the majority of the people or the greatest number and harm the least amount So you can do like a cost-benefit analysis You're gonna do some sort of action and it will affect your community or your family You look at how it's gonna affect all the different members and you try to pick the thing that will do the most good at least harm Now that means that You can't just do whatever pleases you, right? Because oftentimes doing what will produce the most benefit of the least harm for most people Is that always the thing that pleases you the most? And you think that they're adjourned and you'd like to tell them that But they're friends with a lot of people that you care about If you were to indulge yourself in what you'd like to do you'd like to really call that person a lot of names Maybe kind of emphatically phrased, you know, and you try to put them in the box that they deserve to be That's what you feel but you realize if I do that That would feel good to me And and yeah, of course that would hurt that other person, but they're adjourned They got a comment, but it would hurt all these other people. And so what do you do? By your lip and you don't say what do you think? Take a deep breath No, you don't When I was your age, I said too actually But I had to learn from experience utilitarian say well, you know, let's see how it works out for the Majority so you can't just indulge Whatever it is if you want to do that. That's a different moral theory. That's a different way of orienting your life Person who has a utilitarian Moral theory is going to act differently than somebody who's just following their desires, aren't they? Now the utilitarian Is not committed to saying that anything is truly right or wrong one of the things about this is You know, if it worked if it would work out good over all for the majority of the people you can do some bad things Like let's say We could enslave just five percent of the population And they'll have no rights whatsoever And we can make them work like dogs and we can do anything that we want to them And that's going to make after the rest of our lives so much better If you really had a trade-off like that the utilitarian would say yeah, that sounds okay Now another way you might go is Some people would say no you can't do slavery is wrong Just is wrong Maybe we could come up with some argument for it, but we're not going to go there Right, you don't enslave That would be a sort of duty You have a duty not to treat people in a certain way. You have a duty to treat people in certain ways Now you might be able to provide some sort of you know reason for this or you might just say Well, we just have our duties and I know what they are and I'm going to do them even if it kills me Or even if it goes against my desires and inclinations or even if it doesn't benefit the the majority Like here's one example We've used this sort of thing Over and over again in philosophy What if you could go back in time and kill Hitler? Should you do so? Would that be a good thing to do or a bad thing to do because you'd be killing a human being right? Yeah, how does it the reason forget by the way any sort of worries about Went back in time and altered history than what I exist. Don't don't worry about that, right? Because because that gets complicated, but we're gonna say that I can't answer your question because it was gonna go So let's let's think about this one person it's wrong to kill me, right? What if this guy hit their dad? Yeah, he just killed one person He was responsible for millions Now did he you know individually kill all these people? No, but he was he was the guy at the top and and given the you know the Nazi Ideology if you would have taken out the top guy things could have fallen apart actually So maybe you could have prevented say the Holocaust let's just say just the Holocaust itself and we don't worry about you know the Jehovah's Witnesses and gypsies or any other people Just just the Jews that were killed six million people So one guy one life as opposed to six million If you're a utilitarian, that's enough, right? I think most people here would do it I would actually myself. I'm not a I'm not a band colleges. I'm actually not a utilitarian Well, then you would have to weigh duties against each other right yeah, so maybe you could come up with a good consciential logical reason But one of the problems is you can say well you have a duty to protect life, you know, that's the life Mass murderer I'm bringing this up not to try to solve this here, but just so you can see So we got three main moral theories in play right now that are kind of common stances In our society and you don't see people coming out and saying well Conses X Y Z so therefore I'm going to do this, but you do see a lot of people that are very duty-free right, and you do see a lot of people that are sort of cost-benefit analysis and then you do see a lot of people who really They may talk about morality, but it's just sort of a mask for their own Desires preferences feelings that sort of thing Matt in there talks about these as Options that you may recognize yourself already in or to recognize other people He also talks about another one As being what we're going to call virtue ethics uses Aristotle as Example here. It says the plain person. That's you again Is a proto-aristatelian meaning you don't realize it yet But unless you're fitting into one of these More likely in line with at least on the start with virtue ethics Virtue ethics understood in an Aristotelian way. It's part of the reason why we're going to study this guy Aristotle Now Matt entire raise up another thing that's very important Moral theories are really cute What else is really cute? What's a narrative? It's kind of like the story of your life. Well, that's one particular kind of use the word story. That's That's a good synonym for narrative movies are narratives When you do a report like let's say somebody here was international business You do a report on say what took place November 2011 to Stock market you produce a lot of data, but you put it together in some sort of coherent story You're making a narrative We have narratives of all sorts of things cartoons are Bugs Bunny tricks you somebody Sam. That's a classic narrative somebody tells a story on Jerry Springer about how they were cheated on by Whoever, you know, that's a narrative When we reconstruct where all the money went to in 2008 that's a narrative now all these are stories And we live through this right because what is your life like? Well, it has a beginning Can have an end sooner or later here hopefully much later in sooner because all of you are very young I wish you very long productive lives And a whole bunch of stuff is going to happen in the middle, right? Is it all just a bunch of random incidents Sounded fury signifying nothing No, there's there's connections, right Matheter is interested in two kinds of narratives. He's interested In this piece he's interested in narratives of Progress He's also interested in What we can call It's kind of interesting There are a lot of cultural narratives out there that See the world in these terms like At one time human beings We're all very good and then something came along and screwed us up We've just been getting worse and worse and that's why we're a bunch of heartless bastards That's a narrative of war Or you know, we started out as just you know, basically one step up from from apes and We've actually developed society and agriculture and laws and our laws were pretty inhumane for a long time They've been getting more and more humane and our society's been getting better and better and we're all becoming Really good people Story more progress both these are probably false Narratives can be true false Things jive with the way things actually are You can do this for individual people too. Can't you some people their lives Start off pretty good and then they screw it up and they keep screwing it up when they screw it up more and more and more Stories of addiction Heroine gets it's pretty much over until you get Doesn't have to be addiction though it could be all sorts of other things People make faithful choices one second people make faithful choices that put them on a path Which then it becomes harder to get yourself away from once you have a trajectory set Takes choice right to make yourself go a different way Or you know on the other hand people sometimes come to themselves and say That's a lot better than where I am I want to be there What do I have to do to get there and that's that's a narrative of a moral progress and For the Aristotelian view we don't start out All the way at the bottom. We don't start out all the way the top Start out somewhere in the middle and We have to you know, slowly build step by step by step. There's no single decision That solves everything or fixes everything It's a bunch of different things along the way and we're going to come back to this theme of progress When it comes to moral progress or decline isn't it kind of like the idea that if you keep doing it bad behavior The more you do it the more it becomes your norm and you don't realize that it's bad. Yes. Yes, exactly the what we call the vicious person person who's developing bad Habits not only develops habits of doing things badly. They develop a different mentality different mindset I want to make a sort of change of gears now and go and talk about this guy John Paul Sartre The reading that I had you guys look at is this existentialism Like I said Sartre important 20th century philosopher French guy if you want to see how his philosophy actually plays out in lives there there is a Narrative that you could read he wrote a book he wrote a set of books called paths to freedom I think he's translated as the first one was called the age of reason and his characters in there sort of exemplify his philosophy We're not very sympathetic characters So we were really attracted to start reading them I turned you off I know it certainly did for me because I went through a Sartre face If you also look at his life, he was not a particularly good guy. He I'll tell you just one tip He had a another philosopher Simone de Beauvoir who was also pretty, you know pretty important philosopher in her own right beautiful one really Sartre himself was quite ugly He actually had eyes going off in different directions And he cheated on Multiple times as a matter of fact he even if I remember right Trying to get her to cheat on him. So he wouldn't feel bad as bad about him cheating on her So it gives you an idea This guy has lived out Now he would have said well, you know philosophers life and his his philosophy are two different things But maybe they are connected now Sartre's Starts out talking about God not existing and the reason why he's interested in that He thinks if there is a God then we have a human nature Because you know God would have created us God would have made us all a certain way So what would make us, you know all a certain way we're going to talk more about that over the course of the semester What would be our essence we would say maybe it's something like Rationality or some sort of potentials that we would all develop together Sartre doesn't think that we have anything like that. He says Existence where you are right now what you come into the world with precedes essence so you have your Feelings preferences your situation that you're thrown into Your background, and it doesn't it's not the same as everybody else's It makes you you and then you decide what you're going to make of it Great theme in the Sartre is decision That's where he's a motorist I'm going to read you a little bit from from this. This is on page three of them one that I put together for you When we say now he's in use of gender specific language when we say that man chooses himself We do mean that every one of us must choose himself By that we also mean that in choosing for himself. He chooses for all men We're in effect of all the actions a man may take in order to create himself as he wills to be There is not one which is not creative at the same time of an image of man such as he believes he Wanted me to choose between this or that is at the same time to affirm the value of that which is chosen We make a choice you you're unless you're totally crazy You're choosing what you think is better, right? Sartre is saying the very act of choosing makes it better. So Why be Virtue ethicist or a day ontologist or a utilitarian Ultimately for somebody like Sartre because you chose it. There's no other deeper reason ultimately just comes down You choose it so, you know, if you're a complete bastard who you know drowns puppies for fun and Cheats, you know old widows out of their their livelihood throws them out on the street and then Sneaks up behind People on crutches kicks their crutches up from them. That's what you choose to be I think that's you know probably a bad way to be I think all of us would say That's what you chose For you That's good You're gonna have a hard time making a case to other people, but that's okay because you're choosing if you cheat on your spouse And then suddenly revise your views about cheating so that cheating really isn't a bad thing You can choose that. I had so many friends when I was in graduate school that were Revised their views about sexual morality It became inconvenient for them. I remember being quite kind of struck by that On the other hand if you choose to devote your life to serving the poor The only reason why that has any value is because you chose it Doesn't have any value in and of itself Sartre says this is Sartre's Emotionalism you see what that does to moral judgments, right? Sartre thinks that he's liberating people by sayings, but he's really just sort of pulling the rug out If the only reason why you up to this point I guess most of you have chosen to be good people more or less Up to this point if the only reason why you have chosen to be good people up to this point It's because you've chosen it and you can't give any other grounds It doesn't really have much value doesn't it or maybe it's just your emotions Emotions maybe you just like being a good person And if you didn't you'd be a bad person Perfectly fine with that That's where this goes to Now Sartre goes a little bit farther than this very often philosophers can't be reduced just to an ism And one of the things that Sartre is saying here that's kind of interesting Let's say you adopt his point of view. So you're an existentialist you're a to some degree When you decide How it is that you're going to arrange your moral universe what you're going to value what you're going to say is good What you're going to say is bad? You don't really have a choice you have to do that for other people They may not accept what you say You know so for instance when when Charles Manson says killing people's a great thing we don't say yeah Okay, Charles Manson said so so I think you know along along with that now right we say he's nuts But he's actually not just deciding for himself. He's deciding for humanity in general if you decide to be Totally ruthless you're saying everybody should be like that if you decide that we should in fact serve those who are more vulnerable than ourselves Take care of them. You're saying everybody should be like that. That's a good thing That goes along with the structure of human action So whether you like it or not the story that is your life Is not just a story for you It's a story of how you're trying to make sense out of how a person wants to be This goes back to Macintay's point about none of you. I think none of you have actually like sat down and said What is the basic human good? How shall I achieve it? Let me never do that on the weekend No, maybe you will this week probably Do you have thought to yourself? What am I? What do I need to do in order to get that what do I have to do to put myself on that track? Am I making progress towards that or am I actually going away from that? And sometimes you actually Pass through a plateau you say wow, I thought this was really good, but there's something even better Beyond that that I need to change my my priorities That would be moral progress Sarp's it's kind of stuck Virtue ethics would take us further than that So this is the last thing I'm going to talk about with these points of view Once you've got it you got it Utilitarianism is pretty straightforward as a theory You know you end up doing something like a cost-benefit analysis you can get better at doing it You can get worse at doing it, but once you've got the basic principles down, that's it, right? You can recognize the basic principles same thing with with Cons stuff even though it is difficult once you've got it down that you know you're done Now it's just a matter of application With virtue ethics, this is one of the points McIntyre is trying to make to you in this piece There's a there's a back and forth between the moral theory and the narrative You never fully understand the moral theory until you've lived it out When it comes to virtue You often don't fully understand your narrative that you're living until you can get a vantage point later on like you know Think about what you thought was important to you in high school You guys are now three years into college at least one of these four years. Have your priorities changed? Have your evaluations of what was important to be thinking about and spending your time on is that probably radically changed, right? Your narrative is changed You've gotten a better grasp when you went back home for like Maybe not the first time he went back home, but a couple times after that You got you mentioned some of the people who didn't go to college at high school. You said I don't have as much in common with these people They were still in the same narrative The way it works is in the narrative of your life If you're making more progress things get clearer and clearer and clearer to you as you go on on the other hand If you make the wrong choices There are some choices that you can make That place you had a cat where you can see less and less quickly where you develop something So the example that I'm going to leave you with think about wealth, why do we want money if we're going? There's there's reasons, you know, there's some crazy reasons like some people like to roll around That's a weird thing right why do normal people want money you need it Okay, that's a great piece to provide for your family. It's a means and In this part of it at least your family is the ends right and Which is the higher value money or your family and the life that you can have the family is the higher value And so if you have your priorities, right you know think about a sort of Common problem that comes up in the course of people's lives. Do you take the job that's going to require You to spend very little time with your family, but it's going to generate a lot more wealth Or do you make the sacrifice and do without something that's going to spend the time with your family? That's a fateful decision that places you have there's one path here. There's another path here, right and If you decide that wealth is the most important thing Which is what you know sir would say if you make that decision you are in fact deciding to wealth and family And you're not just saying wealth and family for me. You're saying wealth and family for everybody That's a spousing moral theory If you make the decision that something that's just a purely Instrumental wealth is the good and you center your life around that You will develop a kind of moral blindness to other values And so after a while it'd be difficult for you to see what it's doing to your family And you've all seen narratives in which this takes place, right? Maybe you've lived out part of those narratives Or your friends You've all seen all sorts of Hollywood cultural productions, right because that's a real life moral decision That has to be made and notice when people are making this they don't always frame it in terms of How should I how should I arrange this they they're on the spot may have to decide do I take this job? Which is gonna have these consequences, or do I stick with this job? Think to themselves in terms of concrete. They don't say often times my family they say my kids so-and-so my kids so-and-so my Husband your wife, you know, they think in terms of real concrete actual Goods and values And they think in terms of real dollars. Do I take the $100,000 job or stick with the That's the way narratives work I'm gonna give you in I learn an assignment that has you do some reflection on your own Life and whether it's been a narrative largely more progress so far or a narrative of oral decline So let's look for that in I learn under assignments, and I'll see all of you on Tuesday And the next class will be a bit more Interactive discussion. It's good good participation. Well, this is my next student. Yes And all the assignments not only will be posted in the island, but you'll post your work in the island as well