I found this fascinating:
If indeed my observation that ethicists hardly write short papers is correct, this might say something problematic about us. For example, that we are less sure of ourselves than other philosophers, and thus feel that we have to go on and on. Or that there is a pro-length bias in the guidance we give to our students; or in accepting ethics papers for publication. Or that the subject makes people feel that they always have to (pretend to) be very serious, because morality is such a grave topic. Or even that ethicists simply tend to have less fun. A while ago Mike Otsuka posted here asking about funny titles for ethics papers, and we all found it hard to find examples.
OK people, the challenge is upon you: what are some funny titles for possible ethics papers? All of my thoughts in this direction are non-funny, such as "A Good Start," or "Here’s Why None of My Papers Have an Abstract."
For the pointer I thank Saul Smilansky.
Ethics: An Exercise in Common Sense
“Plagiarize me”
Rape and plunder with finess!
What’s the best way to skin a cat? — The Ethics of animal treatment.
Thou shalt not codify ethical prescriptions: against the appeal to moral authority
“I seduced your sister for the greater good,” and other problems with moral subjectivism
It is kinda hard.
The good, the bad, and the ugly: does morality make you more attractive?
“Bullshit: Ethical or Unethical? The View From a Superfluous Academic Department”
“Take this Job and shove it: Ethics in the Bible”
–Hostage to Principles: Studies in Law Enforcement
–The Underestimated Perks of an Unexamined Life: Weblogs, Social Networking, and the Stuff People Should Keep to Themselves
–Snitches and Saints: an Examination of the Ethical Aspects of the Prisonners’ Dilemma
–Lies, Damned Lies, and the Ethics of Lying (Mark Twain rip-off)
–What’s Posterity Ever Done for Me?: Global Warming and its Ethical Considerations (Groucho Marx rip-off)
–Moral Probing: Are Alien Abductions Ethical?
–A Critique of Stoicism: Haven’t We Suffered Enough?
The following is a title of an actual essay the I co-authored, we thought our title amusing:
“Corporate Social Responsibility: An Exercise in Misology”
“The N-Agent Problem of Farting in the Elevator: An Equilibrium Analysis”
“I’m Very Important So It’s OK: How Wealth and Power Erode Ethics”
I’ve been receiving regular notices for this upcoming philosophy/ethics conference at the University of York, and it seems to me to capture everything that is wrong with the field: A complete failure to grasp the hilarity of the conference title. Among the topics to be discussed:
# The nature of death.
# Definitions and criteria.
# Human, animal and plant death.
# The irreversibility of death.
# Death, the mind and the brain.
# Posthumous harms.
# Death and non-existence.
# Issues concerning personhood.
# Death’s badness.
Death’s badness?? DO TELL!!
http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/death/
Banana peeling: a slippery slope. Is littering OK if it’s organic, biodegradable littering?
Kvetch me if you can: How much can you ethically complain before you become worse than the original problem?
Death and Texas: Is the death penalty more justifiable in a cowboy culture?
“For what do we live, but to make sport for our neighbours, and laugh at them in our turn?”
Mr. Bennet, in (Jane Austen’s) *Pride and Prejudice*
And them moral philosophers also do cartoons! Enjoy:
http://chaospet.com/2007/10/08/47-crime-and-prepunishment/
And in case you want to broaden your mind (even more):
http://www.amazon.com/10-Moral-Paradoxes-Ten-More/dp/140516087X/sr=1-2/qid=1
Bros Before Hoes?
Parsing A Deontological Dilemma
They write such long papers because they have nothing to say. If they tried to trim their papers down, they would become empty.
Me & Ms Jones : A study of feminine influences on ethical decision making in the Whitehouse
A pain in the neck: Dracula – Ethical dilemmas when dealing with minority demands
Mr. Bernanke builds his dream house: Ethical influences on the subprime crisis
Here is a title of an article that appeared in the Journal of Business Ethics in 1995 that was authored by M. Starik:
“Should Trees have Managerial Standing? Toward Stakeholder Status for Non-human Nature”
Sadly, I’m not joking, this is a real title.
This is silly. Ethics papers are no longer than papers in any other area of philosophy (with maybe an exception for some formal logic, or the papers in Analysis, or whatever). And bioethics papers are notably shorter.
Anyway, there are already tons of funny ethics titles out there:
Kant not Cant (Bernstein)
Killing Babies is not always Wrong (Singer)
In Defense of Cannibalism (Routley/Sylvan)
So Maybe Its Wrong, Should we “do” anything about it (Murray)
What is wrong with sycophancy? (Baxi)
And funny non-ethics titles (just for fun):
“There’s Something About Mary” (Himma, in response to Jackson’s knowledge argument)
“What is it like to by boring and myopic?” (Atkins, in response to Nagel’s “What is it like to be a bat?”)
“Where Tickle Defense Goes Wrong” (Eells)
“Sinning Against Frege” (Burge, it’s a pun)
Tyler:
One has already been written, a monograph titled: “On Bullshit.” Simply brilliant.
If you have to buy dofus kamas, please come to our company.
Comments on this entry are closed.