The aim of the video is to explain the perspectives of a consequentialist and deontology with regards to the train track problem in a creative, humorous way. Both of them try to battle it out to explain their views, but in this video, the deontological perspective wins.
We present to the layman a digestible form of Huemer’s ‘Problem of Authority’ by drawing a parallel between conscription and forced gang recruitment. Through this, we question the moral basis for coercion and show that perhaps these acts of public bodies and private individuals may be morally analogous after all. (*Credits and bloopers not to be included for purposes of grading.)
Through the interactive game on our website, we bring general players through an immersive scenario based on Norcross’s Puppy Argument as well as Lomasky’s replies to the argument. This leaves the players to think about their stance towards the consumption of factory farmed animal products in their daily lives. (Click on graphic to start.)
Two bimbos, who come across a fellow spud in hot soup, discuss whether they are morally obligated to save him based on a bimbotic take of a snippet of Peter Singer’s article, ‘Famine, Affluence and Morality’.
In this video, we explore the nature behind our every day choices. We consider the possibility that our lives are simulations, controlled by someone behind the screen. This video aims to be a creative pitch to fellow GET1029 students on the topic of “Do We Live In A Computer Simulation”.
In our video, we explain the logical problem of evil to a general layman audience. We covered a simple introduction of how the problem of evil came about – if God exists, why does evil exists? Then we provided one of the most convincing counter argument – that the world is better with some evil in it. At the end, we aim to put this thought into our audiences’ brain and enable them to tinker with this idea.
In this episode of the NUS (pronounced “noose”), we interview the general public to hear their opinions of the recent 30% water price hike in Singapore. Their hilarious responses will unveil the various arguments for and against legitimate political authority, bringing it across in a light-hearted manner. (Only 0:04-2:18 counted for grading.)
We explore arguments for and against factory farming which we hope to present in a simple manner. The various arguments ought to get the audience thinking and make an informed decision that is ultimately based on rationality. We also outlined two additional original arguments in favour and against factory farming.
In our video, we briefly explore the contradictions between the existence of Evil and the beliefs of the classical Theist, as presented by Mackie. Targeted at the lay audience (any one), the video simply hopes to raise questions about some commonly held beliefs regarding God and Evil in a fun and understandable manner.
Filmed from first person point-of-view, our main character Joy continues to question why so much Evil exists when her God is supposed to be all good and all powerful. The video depicts what it could be like when one is extremely steadfast in their religious beliefs but also caught up with what is happening around the world – causing them to end up fighting an unending battle within themselves. (A short film based on The Problem of Evil (Week 8).)
In our video, we explore the topic of speciesism and the assumed distinctions between humans and non-human animals in an accessible manner for the public. Set in an alternative universe, the two canine protagonists are confronted with a moral dilemma between saving a puppy and a human baby.
In our video, we explore why NUS undergraduates find it morally acceptable (ethical) to eat factory-farmed animals but morally blameworthy (unethical) to eat dogs. The content of the video includes results from our surveys and interviews with NUS undergraduates, as well as the arguments put forward by philosopher Alastair Norcross.
Our skit addresses the notions behind Huemer’s political authority argument to the lay audience. Our video also attempts to incite debate about the stigma behind whether a coercive government should exist – by highlighting the “unsettling” moral differences between a private agent and that of a government.
Through our video, we aim to highlight how the acts of individuals and governments are morally analogous and result in similar consequences. Michael Huemer argues in his paper that government coercion is morally wrong as a result and we hope to illustrate his premises and argument in this video.
This comic strip reframes the philosophical debate about compatibilism into the context of a wedding ceremony, where there stands two opposing beliefs about the compatibility of the lovebirds: Eve (symbolising Free Will) and Newton (symbolising Determinism). Our target audience is the common NUS student who might be interested in Philosophy.
For this video, our group did a short parody inspired by “Jaden Smith Reads Mind-Blowing Facts about the Universe”. We aim to explain the connection between the Cosmological Argument and the PSR to people without prior knowledge of this argument.
In our video, we explore the notion of Moral Responsibility through Singer’s Drowning Child Argument and Strawson’s Regress Argument. Khairin is caught in a moral dilemma – should he go for a once-in-a-lifetime interview with Prof Loy, or save Wilson (ball)? Angel Singer and Devil Strawson attempt to persuade him – what is his final decision?