Entry into Valhalla : contextualising the learning of legal ethics through the use of Second Life machinima

An ability to recognise and resolve ethical dilemmas was identified by the Australian Law Reform Commission as one of the ten fundamental lawyering skills. While the ‘Priestley 11’ list of areas of law required to qualify for legal practice includes ethics and professional responsibility, the commitment to ethics learning in Australian law schools has been far from uniform. The obligation imposed by the Priestley 11 is frequently discharged by a traditional teaching and learning approach involving lectures and/or tutorials and focusing on the content of the formal rules of professional responsibility. However, the effectiveness of such an approach is open to question. Instead, a practical rather than a theoretical approach to the teaching of legal ethics is required. Effective final-year student learning of ethics may be achieved by an approach which engages students, enabling them to appreciate the relevance of what they are learning to the real world and facilitating their transition from study to their working lives. Entry into Valhalla comprises a suite of modules featuring ‘machinima’ (computer-generated imagery) created using the Second Life virtual environment to contextualise otherwise abstract concepts. It provides an engaging learning environment which enables students to obtain an appreciation of ethical responsibility in a real-world context and facilitates understanding and problem-solving ability.

Ethics and public health

• recognise that “ethics” is often defined and approached in different ways • describe the foundations and development of public health ethics • summarise some key ethical systems and their relevance to public health practice • outline and critique some codes of ethics, and discuss their application to public health practice • recognise, evaluate and communicate ethical concerns regarding public health, and apply ethical principles in your practice.

Sustainable housing: family experiences with supply chain ethics

Climate change, resource depletion and increasing urbanization are converging global issues that are challenging the way we design, construct and operate buildings. The housing sector is a significant contributor to these global issues through consumption of limited resources, waste generation and disposal (solid, liquid and atmospheric waste) and negative human health impacts (Senick 2006). Although the design and construction of ‘sustainable housing’ would appear to be an obvious and technically feasible solution, there remains multi-faceted issues affecting the delivery of sustainable housing (Holloway and Bunker 2006). Two fundamental issues - what makes a house sustainable, and to what extent regulation should be used to deliver sustainability - have been, and continue to be, debated at multiple levels in society. Despite personal, professional and political views on these issues, three key characteristics of the whole housing supply chain require fundamental change if we are to successfully address sustainability challenges (Birkeland 2008). These include: fragmentation; established methods, practices and processes, and the relationships between players. A more in-depth understanding of the role of ethics (values, beliefs and standards) and potential ethical conflicts within the supply chain will assist in better defining the nature of the fundamental changes required...

Living with strangers: Urban space and the ethics of civility

Urban regeneration is occuring in cities across the world, as cities increase in scale and complexity. This chapter argues that in planning public spaces, greater consideration should be paid to sociability through consideration of the affective dimension of urban life.

Design and Ethics: Reflections on Practice

This book is an multi disciplinary approach to design thinking across the fields of Architecture, Communication Design, Fashion, Graphic Design, Urban Design and Philosophy.

Framing perspectives on design and ethics

This chapter discusses design thinking and design as a process which spans all spheres of everyday life.

Engaging Noemi Lakmeier's living installations : the ethics of embarrassment

In Exercise in Losing Control (2007) and We Are for You Because We are Against Them (2010), Austrian-born artist Noemi Lakmaier represents Otherness – and, in particular, the experience of Otherness as one of being vulnerable, dependent or visibly different from everyone else in a social situation – by placing first herself then a group of participants in big circular balls she calls ‘Weebles’. In doing so, Lakmaier depicts Otherness as an absurd, ambiguous or illegible element in otherwise everyday ‘living installations’ in which people meet, converse, dine and connect with spectators and passersby on the street. In this paper I analyse the way spectators and passersby respond to the weeble-wearers. Not surprisingly, responses vary – from people who hurry away, to people who try to talk to the weeble-wearer, to people who try to kick or tip the weeble to test its reality. The not-quite-normal situation, and the visibility of the spectators in the situation, asks spectators to rehearse their response to corporeal differences that might be encountered in day-to-day life. As the range of comments, confrontations and struggles show, the situation transfers the ill-at-ease, embarrassed and awkward aspects of dealing with corporeal difference from the disabled performer to the able spectator-become-performer. In this paper, I theorise some of the self-conscious spectatorial responses this sort of work can provoke in terms of an ethics of embarrassment. As the Latin roots of the word attest, embarrassment is born of a block, barrier or obstacle to move smoothly through a social or communicative encounter. In Lakmaier’s work, a range of potential blocks present themselves. The spectators’ responses – from ignoring the weeble, to querying the weeble, to asking visual, verbal or physical questions about how the weeble works, and so on – are ways of managing the interruption and moving forward. They are, I argue, strategies for moving from confusion to comprehension, or from what Emmanuel Levinas would call an encounter with the unknown to back into the horizon of the known, classified and classifiable. They flag the potential for what Levinas would call an ethical face-to-face encounter with the Other in which spectators and passersby may unexpectedly find themselves in a vulnerable position.

"Are there any right or wrong answers in teaching philosophy": ethics, epistemology, and philosophy in the classroom

This article assesses undergraduate teaching students’ assertion that there are no right and wrong answers in teaching philosophy. When asked questions about their experiences of philosophy in the classroom for primary children, their unanimous declaration that teaching philosophy has ‘no right and wrong answers’ is critically examined across the three sub-disciplinary areas to which they were generally referring, namely, pedagogy, ethics, and epistemology. From a pedagogical point of view, it is argued that some teaching approaches may indeed be more effective than others, and some pupils’ opinions less defensible, but pedagogically, in terms of managing the power relations in the classroom, it is counter-productive to continually insist on notions of truth and falsity at every point. From an ethical point of view, it is contended that anti-realist approaches to meta-ethics may represent a viable intellectual position, but from the point of view of normative ethics, notions of right and wrong still retain significant currency. From an epistemological point of view, it is argued using Karl Poppers’ work that while it may be difficult to determine what constitutes a right answer, determining a wrong one is far more straightforward. In conclusion, it is clear that prospective teachers engaging in philosophy in the classroom, and also future teachers in general, require a far more nuanced philosophical understanding of the notions of right and wrong and truth and falsity. In view of this situation, it we wish to promote the effective teaching of philosophical thinking to children, or produce educators who can understand the conceptual limits of the claims they make and their very real and often serious practical and social consequences, it is recommended that philosophy be reinstated to a fundamental, foundational place within the pre-service teaching curriculum.