What's Wrong with Exploitation?

abstract  This paper offers a new answer to an old question. Others have argued that exploitation is wrong because it is coercive, or degrading, or fails to protect the vulnerable. But these answers only work for certain cases; counter-examples are easily found. In this paper I identify a different answer to the question by placing exploitation within the larger family of wrongs to which it belongs. Exploitation is one species of wrongful gain, and exploiters always gain at the expense of others by inflicting relative losses on disadvantaged parties. They do harm to their victims, even when their interactions are mutually advantageous, by failing to benefit the disadvantaged party as fairness requires. This failure is the essential wrong in every case of wrongful exploitation. At the end of the paper I assess how wrong this failure is as a way to gain at another's expense.     

THE TRANSFORMATION OF THINGS A REANALYSIS OF CHUANG TZUS BUTTERFLY DREAM

Chuang Chou's Butterfly Dream is perhaps the most well-known and widely studied passage in the Chuang Tzu . It is also one of the most slippery with regard to its meaning. In this paper, I have proposed that the meaning of this passage can be clarified when the passage is recognized as an embodiment of Chuang Tzu's main thane and the double-bind method of instruction which is found throughout the second chapter of the Chuang Tzu. Understood as such, the passage stands as the quintessential example of this theme and teaching style, pressing the reader to transcend the limits of dualistic thinking and awaken in the fullest sense of the word. When viewed from this vantage point, the perplexing nature of the passage dissolves and its beauty and profundity shine through as never before.     

Implications of Concurrent Measures of Viewer Behavior

Carter's “signaled stopping” technique is used here under different instructions to examine two quite different cognitive phenomena during television viewing of marital interactions from feature films: a change to the cognitive state of “thinking” (rather than just watching), and the momentary perception of action “meaningful for the couple's relationship.” A variety of evidence supports the distinction and suggests directions for further applications of the technique.     

Kant's Musical Antiformalism

According to the orthodox view of Kant's philosophy of music, Kant is the founder of musical formalism, the view that music is pure, contentless form, and appreciated as such. On this orthodox view, Kant is an innovator in philosophy of music, though his views are confused and sometimes contradictory. Sometimes, we are told, Kant indicates that music is a fine art and sometimes that it is merely an agreeable art. None of the orthodox position is correct. Kant's views on music are familiar, even a little old fashioned for their time. His views are consistent. He believes that some music is fine art and that the fine arts are imitative arts. Imitative arts have content, and Kant believes that at least some music has content. Our views on Kant's philosophy of music ought to be thoroughly revised.