{"id":226,"date":"2020-11-18T17:17:23","date_gmt":"2020-11-18T17:17:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/edblogs.pugetsound.edu\/moral-philosophers\/?p=226"},"modified":"2020-12-03T14:57:47","modified_gmt":"2020-12-03T14:57:47","slug":"mundane-morality-sarah-buss-on-respect","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/edblogs.pugetsound.edu\/moral-philosophers\/2020\/11\/18\/mundane-morality-sarah-buss-on-respect\/","title":{"rendered":"Mundane Morality: Sarah Buss on Respect"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The first prompt we are discussing is from the Reddit post \u201cWIBTA for not apologizing to smothering in-laws?\u201d<\/a> This post is written by a bride and discusses how she is fighting with her in-laws. She writes that, because her in-laws have said and done multiple extremely rude things, she sprayed her mother-in-law with water from a hose and is wondering if she should apologize or not. <\/i><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Buss takes a Kantian deontological approach to moral significance. She believes moral significance is derived from manners and their use within; appearance, cultural relativism, and being agreeable. Concerning this specific reddit post Buss would believe, through manners and appearance, that the bride is in the wrong and should apologize to her in-laws even if they were rude first. Buss fundamentally believes that, \u201cTo treat people with respect is to act in a way that acknowledges their dignity, and to act this way because they have dignity (802). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even though the in-laws might have been rude first and were not being polite or respectful, the bride is further increasing the disrespect by escalating the conflict (spraying with a hose). She is also not acknowledging her in laws with their innate \u201cdignity,\u201d choosing to see their actions in the worst light possible instead of giving them the benefit of the doubt. Furthermore, Buss wrote previously that \u201cThe point of good manners is to create a certain appearance, to show others that one does not care overly much for one\u2019s own dear self (799)\u201d. The bride did not apologize by adhering to manners to \u201ccreate a certain appearance\u201d, the bride is then exhibiting the opposite of \u201cnot car[ing] overly much for one’s dear self\u201d which reveals a more self-interested nature rather than one of benevolence, which Buss believes is central to manners and appearance. Since the bride did not apologize to her in-laws the bride is not only not treating her in laws with their innate respect\/dignity but is revealing she cares more for her wants then their wants. The bride’s actions exhibit how her manners do not give her a good appearance and are therefore are morally wrong.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The second prompt is focused on the Reddit post, \u201cAITA for telling my friend that I don\u2019t care about her sexual orientation\u201d?<\/a> This post deals with an individual that has come out as lesbian to their friend group. This individual is lesbian and has conversations with the author of the post in which she tells them to explore their sexuality and has asked, what the author believes are inappropriate questions. The author told her that she does not care about her sexual orientation, which hurts the individual who then accused the poster of being a \u201ccloset homophobe\u201d. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In order to determine if the person is morally right to say that they don\u2019t care about the individual\u2019s sexual orientation, we will use Sarah Buss\u2019 perspective of Kantian deontology with a focus on manners and their moral significance. Buss believes that in order to be polite, one must treat the other as an object of respect. To make her argument that manners are morally significant, Buss states that manners are different from morality as they encourage people to make themselves agreeable which acknowledges one\u2019s dignity. She says that \u201cpeople have a basic moral obligation to make themselves agreeable to others,\u201d and that \u201cmaking oneself agreeable to others is not only an end in itself; it is also, and more importantly, a means to treating them with respect\u201d (798). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In relating these quotes to the example, Buss would say that when the author of the prompt says they don\u2019t care about the individual’s sexual orientation, it is a way of them not making themselves agreeable to others, thus is morally wrong. In addition, Buss says that \u201cto treat someone \u2018\u2018with respect\u2019\u2019 is to treat [them] in a way that acknowledges [their] intrinsic value, or \u2018\u2018dignity.\u2019\u201d (797). By saying that you don\u2019t care about another person\u2019s sexual orientation, you are not showing them respect, as well as not acknowledging their dignity. Instead, it is making it seem as if you do not value the person. That the person\u2019s feelings and thoughts are not valid; that they don\u2019t even matter in the first place. To make one agreeable is to show consideration, which would make people less inclined to harm others, care more about people\u2019s well-beings, and be conditioned to regard people with the dignity they deserve (800). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although the poster is well within their rights to not, for example, attend a political protest in support of gay marriage, they are actively disparaging their friend\u2019s intrinsic choices and preferences unnecessarily by verbally attacking them. The lack of agreeability that the author seems to have would result in the opposite of this and would lead to an immoral life, one that is severely impoverished. The author in this scenario needs think more about how their actions affect those around them \u2013 even if the issue is not significant to the poster, it clearly means a lot to their friend.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Summary<\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Often, the most significant challenge with moral philosophy comes from the fact that there are usually multiple individuals involved in any issue, each with their own moral preferences, predispositions, goals and worries. In both of these cases, it\u2019s possible to see both sides of the argument. For the first, it\u2019s possible that the poster had been experiencing years of mentally exhausting comments from their in-laws, and out of pure, instinctual frustration they pointed their hose in their mother-in-laws direction. This action still isn\u2019t morally admirable, but adding different levels of context can help some justify different moral situations. The beauty (or downfall, for some) of deontological ethics comes from its relative certainty on some issues \u2013 although there are many things that are probably still immoral that are not \u201cbanned\u201d by its standards, it takes clear and definite stances on some issues. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

As Amy Olberding has previously shown us, a significant amount of \u201cmoral\u201d action occurs in the arena of everyday life \u2013 the small moments between people that, while potentially insignificant on their own, build up to define the way people feel about each other and morality in general. Her argument is designed to emphasize the importance of manners \u2013 by mindfully acting in a way that signals to others that you care about their dignity enough to be polite, humans send each other constantly reinforcing messages that they should each continue to care about each other. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Buss reinforces this argument, but takes the opposite approach by relying on Kantian arguments about the importance of treating rational beings as ends themselves and with respect (as they are an equally autonomous being). For her, the respect that manners convey is the exact same as the respect that morality in general creates \u2013 because of this, being ill mannered towards someone is as bad as being more actively immoral. In the cases discussed, there is no one right answer. However, in both cases, they require the poster to put aside their pride and choose to directly express their respect for others. They don\u2019t have to cave in and take their side, but they have an obligation to each other, and themselves, to treat the people around them with as much respect as possible.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The first prompt we are discussing is from the Reddit post \u201cWIBTA for not apologizing to smothering in-laws?\u201d This post is written by a bride and discusses how she is fighting with her in-laws. She writes that, because her in-laws have said and done multiple extremely rude things, she sprayed her mother-in-law with water from … Continue reading Mundane Morality: Sarah Buss on Respect<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1590,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[10,11],"class_list":["post-226","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-amitheasshole","tag-buss","tag-olberding"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/edblogs.pugetsound.edu\/moral-philosophers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/edblogs.pugetsound.edu\/moral-philosophers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/edblogs.pugetsound.edu\/moral-philosophers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/edblogs.pugetsound.edu\/moral-philosophers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1590"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/edblogs.pugetsound.edu\/moral-philosophers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=226"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/edblogs.pugetsound.edu\/moral-philosophers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":243,"href":"https:\/\/edblogs.pugetsound.edu\/moral-philosophers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226\/revisions\/243"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/edblogs.pugetsound.edu\/moral-philosophers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=226"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/edblogs.pugetsound.edu\/moral-philosophers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=226"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/edblogs.pugetsound.edu\/moral-philosophers\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=226"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}