Michael Tooley and the Jolly Nasty Conclusion

Abstract Some recent powerful and persuasive arguments seem to imply that a world of people with lives that are barely worth living is preferable to a world which contains fewer people all of whom have extremely satisfying lives. This ‘repugnant conclusion’ is clearly to be rejected if possible—but is it possible? Many attempts to reject or avoid it have failed. One of the latest, by Michael Tooley, looked promising but the present essay argues that this attempt has also failed.     

Fragmentation in the Field—and the Movement Toward Integration in Communication Science

Two aspects of disciplinary identity are addressed in this essay: (1) Who are we, members of one discipline or a loose confederation of scholars who each have some claim to the word communication; and (2) are we (whoever we are) becoming respectable members of the academic community? The first of these issues is examined in terms of the institutional history of communication. The various forces that contributed to a fragmentation of the discipline are discussed. Evidence that a clear disciplinary identity or “self-concept” is emerging in terms of a social science of communication is presented. This identity differentiates the emerging discipline from its various predecessors, including speech and journalism. While there is less evidence to be brought to bear on the second issue, what evidence there is indicates that respectability (and disciplinary maturity) is increasing, but that there is still much progress to be made.