Home
Đăng nhập
Đăng ký
Loading...
The infamous JoJo thought experiment - Michael Vazquez and Sarah Stroud - Video học tiếng Anh
Luyện nghe
Nghe
/
Video
/
TED-Ed
/
The infamous JoJo thought experiment - Michael Vazquez and Sarah Stroud
The infamous JoJo thought experiment - Michael Vazquez and Sarah Stroud
Chọn chế độ học:
Xem phụ đề
Chọn từ
Viết lại từ
Highlight:
3000 Oxford Words
4000 IELTS Words
5000 Oxford Words
3000 Common Words
1000 TOEIC Words
5000 TOEFL Words
Phụ đề (77)
0:06
Jo the First is a ruthless dictator who rules his country with an iron fist.
0:13
Whenever he wants something, everyone hurries to appease him.
0:17
And since complainers are permanently banished,
0:20
Jo’s terrified servants treat his every whim as a wise and noble decision.
0:26
To most onlookers, his rule appears cruel and unjust.
0:30
But his beloved son JoJo doesn’t see any issues.
0:34
This life is all JoJo's ever known,
0:37
and he never witnesses any fear from Jo’s subjects or violence against them.
0:43
All JoJo sees is his father’s strength, and his subjects’ obedience and praise.
0:51
After spending his entire childhood in the castle,
0:54
JoJo grows up to inherit his father’s role and his style of rule.
0:59
And just as with Jo the First, it’s clear that JoJo’s actions are wrong.
1:05
But his case raises a question about morality
1:08
that can also shed light on less extreme cases:
1:12
given JoJo’s unusual upbringing,
1:14
does he bear full moral responsibility for his actions?
1:19
Philosophers Gary Watson and Harry Frankfurt would say yes.
1:24
According to their Deep Self View,
1:27
people are morally responsible for actions that stem from their true self,
1:33
meaning actions that reflect their deepest values and commitments.
1:37
They believe people are less morally responsible
1:40
for actions performed under the influence of external forces,
1:44
such as committing a crime under duress or while intoxicated.
1:49
But JoJo has no such excuse.
1:53
His actions are the product of his values, and as such,
1:57
Deep Self theorists would argue that he’s responsible for them.
2:02
But what if JoJo’s values have been compromised?
2:06
JoJo might be a monster, but he was raised in a very atypical environment.
2:11
Is he really just as responsible for his crimes
2:14
as someone who had a normal childhood and then became a cruel dictator?
2:19
And if JoJo isn’t to blame for who he is,
2:23
how can we blame him for what he does?
2:27
This is the argument of philosopher Susan Wolf,
2:30
who invented JoJo’s case.
2:33
Wolf believes that even though JoJo’s actions do reflect his deep self,
2:39
when determining moral responsibility,
2:42
we also need to consider how someone’s deep self came to be.
2:47
And in JoJo's situation,
2:49
Wolf believes that even if JoJo is acting on his own values,
2:54
his upbringing makes him less responsible for his cruelty.
2:59
Wolf’s logic seems pretty reasonable in JoJo’s case.
3:03
But if everyone’s deepest values are shaped by their upbringing,
3:07
does that mean nobody is responsible for their actions?
3:12
This is the attitude held by incompatibilists.
3:16
These philosophers believe that if everything is predetermined
3:20
by factors like our environment or biology,
3:23
then no one is truly morally responsible for anything.
3:28
By contrast, compatibilist philosophers
3:31
argue that even if our decisions are the inevitable result of past events,
3:36
we can still be held responsible for them.
3:39
The debate between these factions has been raging for centuries,
3:44
but Wolf created JoJo’s case to focus on a different question.
3:49
Unlike most people,
3:50
JoJo had no meaningful opportunity to learn right from wrong.
3:55
And since he continues to be cruel even as an adult,
3:59
it would seem JoJo also lacks the capacity to self-reflect and change his values.
4:06
To Wolf, this indicates that JoJo lacks basic moral competence.
4:11
If he doesn’t know right from wrong and can no longer learn the difference,
4:16
surely it's misplaced to fully blame him for his actions.
4:21
But this argument raises another important question:
4:25
even with this horrible upbringing,
4:27
was JoJo’s moral incompetence truly inevitable?
4:32
Let’s imagine JoJo had a sister who was raised in the same environment
4:37
but developed different values.
4:40
If JoJa rejected their father’s tyranny,
4:43
this suggests that JoJo could have done the same—
4:47
an outcome that seemingly increases his moral responsibility.
4:53
Similarly, what if a rogue court member tried to teach young JoJo
4:59
about justice and morality,
5:01
but he still chose tyranny?
5:04
Just as Wolf argues,
5:06
it seems like the more chances JoJo has to develop moral competence,
5:11
the less we can excuse his actions.
5:15
Ultimately, it's up to you to decide.
5:19
How should we determine moral responsibility?
5:23
And is JoJo’s tyrannical nature truly inevitable—
5:28
or can our understanding of right and wrong transcend our upbringing?
