Yes, I've been given that advice before, on other videos. The idea from the start has been to use a flipcam, the easiest technology around, which, unfortunately, has no place for a mike. I suppose down the line we might start shooting some videos with higher production value -- but that will be a different kind of line. Glad you like the videos, and thanks for watching
I stumbled upon this video, and I am so happy that I did. We (Americans) need more educators like Dr. Sadler. An educator that connects with his students, inspires critical and creative thought, and makes the most challenging concepts easy to digest.
We end up discussing some of these other issues at other times when I teach this part of the Republic -- each class session ends up going a bit differently. As far as the rights matters go, I've focused on that at other places with different students. Marist students tend to have had a fairly good moral upbringing, and tend to more intuitively go to "what's right, what's wrong" and "wronging people" rather than a lot of "rights-talk" -- not the case in many other places I've taught
Really interesting topic today. I really like the point you made saying "power makes you want to hold onto said power" I also believe that nobody would just do "good" things with this ring. They may do some, but everyone may do "bad" things with the ring. With the ring, I also believe our perception of what good and bad is will become distorted because of circumstances and our newfound abilities. Thanks for the great video!
When I teach about the ring, I focus on the idea that even if you used it for good, would that be good? So, I focus more on issues of rights and privacy. I appreciated the focus on how it is unfair that he not be subject to moral approval/disapproval. I tend to think of fairness here more in terms of the ring is an unfair advantage in general. This was helpful for my teaching. Thanks.
At about 8:14 Another technical implementation of the ring of Gyges is drone warfare and drone surveillance. We will likely live to see to what degree we (and other nations - and other organizations, too) accept restraint on this power of invisibility; and with what candor we are open about it, or what secrecy we justify maintaining for it...
12 30, idk that id be able to get away with anything i want to do with my ring. all my acts generally have my signature right on em as far as personal scores are concerned
Nobody would see each other -- pretty much outside the bounds of the thought experiment. See what you can come up with as the likely consequences. . . .
Gregory B. Sadler Wasn't that Kant saying something like that if evil action is made universal it defeats it's own purpose and that should be the way to distinguish good from bad? But let's say all people have invisibility rings and one person loses his. Does that automatically make him the only righteous person? Does he get killed on day 1 in an evil world? Or does it simply mean if everyone had these rings, shit would be kind of like what we have right now?
Cody Tito are you assuming people know about eachothers rings or still no? Because if no, I'd imagine it wouldn't change too much - people would still be using their ring with caution, the same open boundaries would exist. Although I suppose everyone's individual immorality would lower their view of the world - even those who are the pinnacle of morality who do not use the ring would realize what the ring meant, and the implications of one's morality because of that and therefore see the world as a less moral place because of that, and the person who lost his ring would maintain this view of the world...with reference to later books of the republic, the external city would deteriorate in the same way, and at the same pace, as the internal one (the soul) of each individual.
***** NO NO. The point is that if all people had invisibility rings and had the mere ability to use them simultaneously (and knew about it, which should be a given), the very idea of invisibility being some sort of "power" goes away by definition. Invisible is no longer a power. Private property is no longer private. Private spaces are no longer private. The known moral norms would disappear. Could such a world exist? Maybe. But in this world there are no invisibility rings just like that, and one should act only according to the maxim whereby he can at the same time will it should become a universal law. Per se.
I see what you mean, I misunderstood because other people not knowing about the Ring is the most part of its power, because it is what allows you to do as you please without consequence. Everyone knowing about the rings would lead, I'd imagine very quickly, to complete chaos - society would revert almost entirely back to savagery simply because of human nature - the fundamental values of society (trust, lawfulness) couldn't exist in that kind of society...I think this goes completely beyond the realm of what Plato intends for the story if Gyges and his ring. Would be interested to know what Gregory B. Sadler thinks...
Yes, I've been given that advice before, on other videos. The idea from the start has been to use a flipcam, the easiest technology around, which, unfortunately, has no place for a mike. I suppose down the line we might start shooting some videos with higher production value -- but that will be a different kind of line.
Glad you like the videos, and thanks for watching
I stumbled upon this video, and I am so happy that I did. We (Americans) need more educators like Dr. Sadler. An educator that connects with his students, inspires critical and creative thought, and makes the most challenging concepts easy to digest.
Thanks!
We end up discussing some of these other issues at other times when I teach this part of the Republic -- each class session ends up going a bit differently.
As far as the rights matters go, I've focused on that at other places with different students. Marist students tend to have had a fairly good moral upbringing, and tend to more intuitively go to "what's right, what's wrong" and "wronging people" rather than a lot of "rights-talk" -- not the case in many other places I've taught
Really interesting topic today. I really like the point you made saying "power makes you want to hold onto said power" I also believe that nobody would just do "good" things with this ring. They may do some, but everyone may do "bad" things with the ring. With the ring, I also believe our perception of what good and bad is will become distorted because of circumstances and our newfound abilities. Thanks for the great video!
You're very welcome!
you are awesome Mr. Sadler I would love to have you as a professor.. I enjoyed your lecture thank you
When I teach about the ring, I focus on the idea that even if you used it for good, would that be good? So, I focus more on issues of rights and privacy. I appreciated the focus on how it is unfair that he not be subject to moral approval/disapproval. I tend to think of fairness here more in terms of the ring is an unfair advantage in general. This was helpful for my teaching. Thanks.
Thank you, you helped me understand better the story
...THE ONE RING TO RULE THEM ALL
I'm glad to read they've been helpful for you!
That was a particularly good Ethics class that this video drew upon
Enjoyed the lecture. So much easier to grasp the concepts through this lecture.
ZuZeeQ XO Glad to read it. If you look in my main channel, you'll find 600+ more videos, including 100+ Core Concept videos
new Core Concept video specifically about Plato's great metaphor for power and its corrupting influence -- the Ring of Gyges
At about 8:14
Another technical implementation of the ring of Gyges is drone warfare and drone surveillance. We will likely live to see to what degree we (and other nations - and other organizations, too) accept restraint on this power of invisibility; and with what candor we are open about it, or what secrecy we justify maintaining for it...
Yes, that's a good example
11:00 throw it in the fires of mordor
Good luck finding that place!
Lol
You have enviably smart students.
12 30, idk that id be able to get away with anything i want to do with my ring. all my acts generally have my signature right on em as far as personal scores are concerned
Some folks argue that this this is the first recorded Thought Experiment.
What, exactly, is Glaucon's argument?
That's a great question -- which you can easily answer for yourself by going straight to the text, if you're not finding it here in the video
What happens if every person had an invisibility ring and they all used them simultaneously?
Nobody would see each other -- pretty much outside the bounds of the thought experiment. See what you can come up with as the likely consequences. . . .
Gregory B. Sadler Wasn't that Kant saying something like that if evil action is made universal it defeats it's own purpose and that should be the way to distinguish good from bad? But let's say all people have invisibility rings and one person loses his. Does that automatically make him the only righteous person? Does he get killed on day 1 in an evil world? Or does it simply mean if everyone had these rings, shit would be kind of like what we have right now?
Cody Tito are you assuming people know about eachothers rings or still no? Because if no, I'd imagine it wouldn't change too much - people would still be using their ring with caution, the same open boundaries would exist. Although I suppose everyone's individual immorality would lower their view of the world - even those who are the pinnacle of morality who do not use the ring would realize what the ring meant, and the implications of one's morality because of that and therefore see the world as a less moral place because of that, and the person who lost his ring would maintain this view of the world...with reference to later books of the republic, the external city would deteriorate in the same way, and at the same pace, as the internal one (the soul) of each individual.
***** NO NO. The point is that if all people had invisibility rings and had the mere ability to use them simultaneously (and knew about it, which should be a given), the very idea of invisibility being some sort of "power" goes away by definition. Invisible is no longer a power. Private property is no longer private. Private spaces are no longer private. The known moral norms would disappear. Could such a world exist? Maybe. But in this world there are no invisibility rings just like that, and one should act only according to the maxim whereby he can at the same time will it should become a universal law. Per se.
I see what you mean, I misunderstood because other people not knowing about the Ring is the most part of its power, because it is what allows you to do as you please without consequence. Everyone knowing about the rings would lead, I'd imagine very quickly, to complete chaos - society would revert almost entirely back to savagery simply because of human nature - the fundamental values of society (trust, lawfulness) couldn't exist in that kind of society...I think this goes completely beyond the realm of what Plato intends for the story if Gyges and his ring. Would be interested to know what Gregory B. Sadler thinks...
the darknet is an example of what life would encompass without laws or consequences
+soju69jinro Yes, that's a good example
GALADRIEL. HER NAME IS GALADRIEL! Btw i thoroughly enjoyed the lecture and i love the videos, a great boon to me good sir.
The Ring of Gyges = Anonymity of internet
Yes, that connections comes up frequently in class
I just crapped in a Hobby Lobby parking lot
That's definitely Ring of Gyges level shit there