The Pondering Ducks

Notable Philosophers

Aristotle

Confucius

René Descartes

Immanuel Kant

Lao Tzu

Karl Marx

Friedrich Nietzsche

Plato

Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Socrates

Shows/Movies

The Good Place: #theponderingducks tgp

Controversies/Debates

This attempt to define art is futile, as every definition rebuts another. Art is intention behind creation, it is the ability to convey ideas, it is as defined by the institution, by aesthetic value, and by evidence of formal qualities. It is everything, but also a clear subset of things, based on the definition used.

This message was relayed in my 11th grade Bible class about Paul the Apostle when my teacher would tell us that ‘he lost everything and was still able to continue forward because he believed in God’s goodness and His plan.’ After facing persecution, he continued to preach because he believed that ‘​​‘what has happened to me (him) has actually served to advance the gospel’ (Philippians 1:12), and that ‘To die means to be reunited with the Lord, which he deems ‘better than living’ (Philippians 1:23). His belief in God gave him something to lean on, for lack of a better word. 'We can all learn from Paul, who put his life, his sense of purpose, in the hands of the Lord.'

Are the actions encapsulated by the glass cliff then justified? Is the possibility of a woman excelling in her new position worth the gamble that comes with the glass cliff?

The Glass Cliff is a phenomenon that describes women more likely being promoted into positions of leadership during a time of hardship and crisis for the organization: a time where failure is far more probable.

Just as the name suggests, it is the placing, or in this case the promoting of women that pushes them to the end of a metaphorical cliff. They are expected to do well in the crisis, however, if they fail, then they fall off this “cliff”. Essentially being set up for failure.

While the promotion may seem like a good thing at first, the timing is what sets women up. If she did well, the timing of the promotion can be brushed off as mere coincidence. If she fails, then as intended, she is now to blame for the ineffective response of the organization toward the crisis. In doing so, there is a chain response that sets off.

The woman is blamed for the company not responding well to the crisis → the company is now at liberto to reappoint the man into the position of leadership

However, as they are reviewing the patient's medical history, it is revealed that, (for religious reasons) the patient refuses any form of synthetic organs.

Is the doctor supposed to ignore the patient's wishes and proceed with the surgery that can save their life? Or is he supposed to honor his oath as a doctor to provide healthcare for the critical patient, lying unconscious in his office? There really is no right or wrong answer here, as it is extremely dependent on an individual's personal belief system.

Michael Jackson's “They Dont Care About Us” was written after being falsely accused of raping a young boy, which he claimed innocence. Throughout the case he was able to experience first-hand, how the justice system was not an even field for him.

While there were many controversies regarding word choices in the song, the message remains clear: black men in the US are served the shorter end of the stick, while white men are at a comparative advantage. 

While allies are able to sympathize and offer support to people facing racial discrimination, some are never able to truly understand what it feels like. Knowing what happens when an individual faces racism is one thing. Feeling the effects of it physically, emotionally and psychologically is another. It doesn't take much for someone to know of racism, but not everyone is able to say that they truly understand the depth of its effect.

Theoretically, people who hold positions of authority should be trusted because they are qualified enough to earn that position. Reality isn’t like this. How can we trust authorities to help us during times of need, when corruption in the government, typically the highest form of authority in a nation, costs their citizens so greatly? Perhaps what our world and our history tells us is that we should have expectations, but also act accordingly to what the authorities believe are what will benefit society the most. The development of societies itself means that we have become interdependent and to remain that way, we need to work together. Everyone must contribute.

Cynists and pessimists may default to having little trust in authorities. Those who remain positive may wholly trust authorities. These are two extremes. Like many things, we should find a balance to be the most productive we can be. Maybe we should largely trust authorities but remember the bad things they are capable of. Awareness is an important tool for progress, but it also requires action– this is where activism and protests come in.

If those in authority are expected to contribute to society by establishing a solid institutional framework, then those who aren't should contribute by demonstrating to authorities whether or not the framework works. If the authorities refuse to acknowledge any issues, then those without authority should be allowed to protest against them as an attempt to bring light to an issue.

So why are some people so against protesters or activists? If they trust that there is an issue, shouldn't they be heard so that the authorities can make change?

Gentle parenting, often also called respectful parenting, refers to the “new” system of parenting where rules and boundaries (when appropriate) are set in discussion with the kids. There are a few exceptions of boundaries being non-negotiable, usually the ones regarding the child's safety, or those regarding what is expected of them, which may vary from household to household (e.g. no shoes on the bed, no painting without covering the table first, etc). While there is no real guidebook for it, and variations exist within the community itself, it revolves around one main cohort of ideas: empathy, respect, understanding and, despite what some paint as the opposite, boundaries.

Oftentimes, the seeming/ supposed lack of authority allows for observers to group gentle parenting with permissive parenting. Not to be confused between the two, as gentle parenting is not equivalent to “letting your kid run the show”. Rather, it is gentle enforcement of boundaries and (when necessary) guidance toward self-correction. All this is done while keeping in mind that the main goal of discipline is not to teach kids to shove their emotions aside, rather providing them with the tool they will need to independently regulate their emotions in adulthood.

Discipline is centered on natural and correlated consequences: instead of fussing and yelling at a toddler for spilling juice, directing them to a cloth or paper towels they can use to wipe the spill instead. This instills in them the appropriate response toward a spill, calmly wiping the mess without fearing the response of the parent if they are to make mistakes. Not only that, it teaches them to not associate fear and shame with “bad behavior”, ultimately leading them to hiding mistakes in fear of anger.

So how does gentle parenting differ from regular parenting?

Some of the main differences include the following:

Children must always respect their elders vs parents respecting their child leads to reciprocation

Being punished for bad behavior vs not labelling a behavior as bad, rather just a child trying to communicate an unmet need

Children should learn to self-soothe vs Self-soothing is not a skill to be learned but rather a stage in development and can be aided by supporting emotional regulation in the early years

So long as artists create art to be presented, they need to consider the ethics of what they create. Arts and ethics intersect primarily in intentions and motives, even if they have different approaches and considerations. Part of what can constitute art is the artist’s intentions; it's a work of art if it's intended to be so and be perceived as such in an aesthetic manner by an audience.

In a way, this intersects with Kant's approach to ethics: the moral value of an action is determined by the motive, rather than the result. Bad intentions with good results are bad, and thus are immoral.

Artists need to consider why they create art. They're responsible for their creations and should consider how it might affect other people. The issue arises when you remember that it's almost impossible to control for people's reactions and interpretations. No one should live in constant fear of how people are gonna react to their work. Setting rational limits can be a way to control for how people will react– stating your intent and justifying it automatically limits how the audience can interpret your work.