Part 1
⢠Pick a meal: breakfast, lunch, dinner
⢠Describe what you ate
⢠Talk about why you ate what you did — what factors influenced your eating choices?
⢠Do any current nutritional fads, promotions, or diet claims influence your choice of foods? If yes, talk more about these sources of influence. If no, talk about what does influence your nutritional/food choices.
Part 2
Watch this TED Talk about food and happiness
https://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce
⢠After watching Maccolm Gladwell’s TED Talk and reading from your text and other materials in Module 3, will you to consider changing the way you will make nutritional choices? If yes, why? If no, why not? Provide specific examples from the video, other materials, websites, and text to support/describe your answers.
⢠Finally, what do you think is the biggest problem area in the nutrition/food industry in the United States?
Sample Solution
Nietzschean genealogy is novel because, unlike methods employed by other moral philosophers, it does not try to present an argument in defence of morality. For instance, John Stuart Mill claims that morality is justified on utilitarian grounds, whilst, for Immanuel Kant, moral values are the inevitable product of human rationality. Friedrich Nietzsche, though, rejects such claims and proposes that moral values are often taken for granted without serious scrutiny. In his On the Genealogy of Morality, Nietzsche elucidates this view by way of a historical account of the development of morality. In the three comprising essays, Nietzsche employs various genealogical methods to challenge the status of morality; some of which I will explore in this essay. First, though, I will explore an example of Nietzschean genealogy at work; namely Nietzscheâs account of the slave revolt. I will then demonstrate how Nietzsche applies his âantirealistâ and ânaturalistâ approaches to the historical study of morality (Leiter, 2014); in doing so, I will also call upon Michel Foucaultâs (1977) ideas of âdescentâ and âemergenceâ. Ultimately, I will argue that Nietzschean genealogy is an effective form of critique as, by challenging assumptions about morality, it offers the foundation for a robust interrogation of moral values. The essays of Nietzscheâs On the Genealogy of Morality each give a historical account of how certain moral values have taken shape over time. The opening essay, ââGood and Evilâ, âGood and Badââ, for instance, describes a phenomenon which Nietzsche (2006) refers to as the âslavesâ revolt in moralityâ (p. 20). According to this account, slaves develop a negative feeling â or âressentimentâ â toward their ânobleâ masters and eventually rebel against their oppression (ibid.). This rebellion, Nietzsche argues, causes the inversion of ânoble moralityâ and, in turn, âgives birth to valuesâ (ibid.). In other words, noble masters are considered by slaves to be âevilâ as a result of their immoral behaviour, whilst by contrast, slaves consider themselves âgoodâ for living with their oppression (ibid., p. 22). As Clark (1994) sums up, once the masters âcan be blamed for what they are, they can be thought deserving of punishmentâ and the slaves will âconvince themselves that they really are superiorâ (p. 25). This is an example, then, of how Nietzschean genealogy attempts to explain that certain moral values have their origins in the slavesâ revolt. This is a simplified account of Nietzscheâs âFirst essayâ; however, it still serves to highlight some of the key ideas present within his work. The ideas of âantirealismâ and ânaturalismâ are central to Nietzschean genealogy (Leiter, 2014). Given the focus here is on morality, Nietzscheâs antirealist approach refers specifically to his assertion that there are no universal moral truths. As Leiter observes, Nietzsche holds that âmoral facts donât figure in the âbest explanationâ of experience, and so are not real constituents of the objective worldâ; any ideas about morality, therefore, can be âexplained awayâ (i>
Nietzschean genealogy is novel because, unlike methods employed by other moral philosophers, it does not try to present an argument in defence of morality. For instance, John Stuart Mill claims that morality is justified on utilitarian grounds, whilst, for Immanuel Kant, moral values are the inevitable product of human rationality. Friedrich Nietzsche, though, rejects such claims and proposes that moral values are often taken for granted without serious scrutiny. In his On the Genealogy of Morality, Nietzsche elucidates this view by way of a historical account of the development of morality. In the three comprising essays, Nietzsche employs various genealogical methods to challenge the status of morality; some of which I will explore in this essay. First, though, I will explore an example of Nietzschean genealogy at work; namely Nietzscheâs account of the slave revolt. I will then demonstrate how Nietzsche applies his âantirealistâ and ânaturalistâ approaches to the historical study of morality (Leiter, 2014); in doing so, I will also call upon Michel Foucaultâs (1977) ideas of âdescentâ and âemergenceâ. Ultimately, I will argue that Nietzschean genealogy is an effective form of critique as, by challenging assumptions about morality, it offers the foundation for a robust interrogation of moral values. The essays of Nietzscheâs On the Genealogy of Morality each give a historical account of how certain moral values have taken shape over time. The opening essay, ââGood and Evilâ, âGood and Badââ, for instance, describes a phenomenon which Nietzsche (2006) refers to as the âslavesâ revolt in moralityâ (p. 20). According to this account, slaves develop a negative feeling â or âressentimentâ â toward their ânobleâ masters and eventually rebel against their oppression (ibid.). This rebellion, Nietzsche argues, causes the inversion of ânoble moralityâ and, in turn, âgives birth to valuesâ (ibid.). In other words, noble masters are considered by slaves to be âevilâ as a result of their immoral behaviour, whilst by contrast, slaves consider themselves âgoodâ for living with their oppression (ibid., p. 22). As Clark (1994) sums up, once the masters âcan be blamed for what they are, they can be thought deserving of punishmentâ and the slaves will âconvince themselves that they really are superiorâ (p. 25). This is an example, then, of how Nietzschean genealogy attempts to explain that certain moral values have their origins in the slavesâ revolt. This is a simplified account of Nietzscheâs âFirst essayâ; however, it still serves to highlight some of the key ideas present within his work. The ideas of âantirealismâ and ânaturalismâ are central to Nietzschean genealogy (Leiter, 2014). Given the focus here is on morality, Nietzscheâs antirealist approach refers specifically to his assertion that there are no universal moral truths. As Leiter observes, Nietzsche holds that âmoral facts donât figure in the âbest explanationâ of experience, and so are not real constituents of the objective worldâ; any ideas about morality, therefore, can be âexplained awayâ (i>