Hello everyone! What are you doing now? Because I`m about to present what LITE Regal Education can do for you in Business Leadership. So, here it goes:
After breakfast, the first course concentrated on the book review of `What Money Can`t Buy` by Michael Sandal. We had to read the introduction, but I extended my research a little bit through some talks this American professor of Politics at Harvard gave and even other reviews. Have a look at what I wrote:
Michael Sandals`s book, `What money can`t buy` is an invitation to reflection. It`s not that type of mathematical book, with bullet points or any tendency to get bored, although the book is the perfect balance between example, problem and solution that gives this analytic perspective. The Guardian reviewed it and I would like to highlight an opinion which I share and that is, quote: It’s a work of political philosophy more than it is a polemic: he wants to make it unambiguously clear that markets have a moral impact on the goods that are traded in them.
The objective of this books is clearly stated in the introduction in the form of question: `what values should govern the various domains of social and civic life?`. Starting from this quotation, I began to understand that this work does not criticize society; it is, asking, in fact, for a debate. The writer is open to dialogue and that makes the readers more aware of the problem. I quote: We need a public debate about what it means to keep markets in their place. Later on, he explains further – This is a debate we didn’t have during the era of market triumphalism. As a result, without quite realizing it, without ever deciding to do so, we drifted from having a market economy to being a market society.
Through the introduction, a wealth of information is presented, most of it centering on the fall of market triumphalism. The end of the book is very powerful and I quote: Democracy does not require perfect equality, but it does require that citizens share in a common life. In a talk given by Michael Sandel for Oxford Union, he said that `we have to overcome the bad habit of outsourcing our moral judgments and to build moral resonance into democratic public life`. So, at the end of the day, this is more a philosophical debate than a political one.
As for me, money seems to me like a psychological experiment we were given as a test.
Thank you for your attention!
This is it. If you have any feedback, I am prepared to take it! As Sandel recommends, why not having here an open debate about this? I`m all ears!
The next session focused more on population ethics. We discussed about the average principle and the total principle. But, as far as I am concerned, The Mere Addition Paradox totally caught my attention.
I`ll put here the Wikipedia explanation, they tend to be more precise. So: Each bar, within a population, represents a distinct group of people, whose size is represented by the bar’s width and whose happiness is represented by the bar’s height. Unlike A and B, A+ and B− are thus complex populations, each comprising two distinct groups of people. How do these four populations compare in value? We have to start making comparisons between these different pairs of population.
I`ll let you figure out what is the paradox!
We also had a debate about Sartre and existentialism – can existence be better or worse than non-existence? I would like to hear (see) what you think in the comment section!
After the sessions, we went straight to The Regent`s Park and Primrose Hill. And as you can see below, we also met with some giraffes from the zoo. Pretty cool, right?
And here are more details if you plan to see this: The Regent’s Park, designed by John Nash, covers 395 acres and includes Queen Mary’s Gardens which features more than 12,000 roses of 400 varieties, as well as the gloriously restored William Andrews Nesfield’s Avenue Gardens.
After such a perfect day, what can I say other than `See ya tomorrow?`