ID:010686232
Topic 1
In Anthony Appiah’s “But Would It Still Be Me?” the idea that race and gender are both
factors of our ethnical identity is explored. Through this short essay, I find that the definition of
one’s ethnical identity is the collection of traits and values that ones’ self, identifies with.
Considering that we are all “biologically” the same, Appiah argues that race is less central to our
ethical identities than gender.
Ultimately, the claim that we see Appiah making through out his argument is that ones’
gender has more of an affect on our ethnical identity than ones’ race. This, meaning that the
result of something as concrete as someone being born a male or female will have a greater
affect upon the decisions you make and various groups you identify with. We then compare this
to race, a very broad category of identity. A category that we as a society have created an array
of labels for, in attempt to define this. However, it is not a simple as one being black or white.
This will have a lesser effect than gender.
Appiah starts his argument by entertaining the idea of himself undergoing a sex change.
If he were to change his sex, would he still be the same person as before? He then continues on
to state that “…A sex-change operation would make of this (metaphysical) person a different
(ethical) person. And so there is a sense in which she would not be me” (page 495). Here,
Appiah is changing his gender. He has now gone from a male to female and feels that if he had
actually undergone this surgery that he would now be a new a different person than he was
before. Thus changing his ethnical identity quite, a lot. We then compare this to race on page
497, Appiah gives the reader something to consider. “Let us suppose that an American of
African descent could be offered the possibility of losing all the morphological markers… Her
ID:010686232
skin is lightened, her hair straightened, her lips thinned: …Surely, in contemplating this
possibility, she could ask herself whether, once these changes had occurred, the resulting
ethical person “would still be me.” … everyone who does contemplate this question in our
society is likely to judge that, whether or not these changes are desirable, the answer here
must be ‘yes’.” Now in this case, the subject is changing their race. Someone has physically gone
from black to white but Appiah and others believe that she truly hasn’t undergone any change.
We compare this to his gender argument where the sex change has created a completely new
person. This showing that gender would have more of an effect than race would on ones’
ethical identity.
I would have to agree with Appiahs’ claim that gender would have more of an effect on
our beliefs and views than race. I know this because being a male or female has a lot to do with
the way we approach life. Males are supposed to act and dress one way while females act and
dress the other. Luckily, in the country we live in, we are very aware of equality. Although, you
fly across the country and there are places where women can’t vote, they can’t leave the
house, they cannot run for office positions, they basically cannot not “live” in the society’s they
call home. Things like this would have a huge impact on someone’s view points in beliefs.
However, when we compare this to something like race it is not near as big. Yes, race still has
an effect but most of them can be rooted back to racism. Unfortunately race has become a
thing purely about the color of your skin. However, there is a greater biological difference
between male and female versus being black or white. As a result of this, I think that changing
ones’ gender would have a greater and more lasting effect on ones’ ethical identity than just
changing the color of their skin.
ID:010686232
Topic 2
We have experiences every day that are pleasurable in some sort of way. The
experiences are either planned or just happen but either way it is how you feel on the inside
that make them special. “The Experience Machine” by Robert Nozick talks about a thought
experiment through which a supposed machine allows you to hook up to it and choose what it
is you wanted to experience. It would then produce feelings from that experience. He states,
“You can pick and choose from their large library or smorgasbord of such experiences, selecting
your life’s experiences for, say, the next two years” (page 42). This machine could give you
experiences from “writing a great novel” to when you met the love of your life for the first time.
Nozick raises the question in his paper, is this what people want or is he trying to say
that a machine with life experiences would not satisfy our needs. He states, “plugging into an
experience machine limits us to a man-made reality, to a world no deeper or more important
than that which people can construct” (page 43). I agree with this statement. I feel that we
create our own experiences. Our outcome of feelings from a specific experience is different
from one another. An example of a personal experience is scuba diving in Belize. From carrying
your equipment to the boat, to the wind blowing on my face during the boat ride to the reef, to
the actual dive and seeing all the life under sea, gives me experience. This experience is
different from the next person. Touching, feeling and smelling cannot be a man-made reality.
Plugging into a machine would not give the same feelings. He states, “floating in a tank” (page
42) and that sounds to me that it is limiting and there is no full experience. You would miss the
entire process of leading up to the actual experience.
ID:010686232
Robert Nozick’s machine and being able to pick your life experiences sounds interesting.
We as humans want to experience life to the fullest. In my opinion, the machine would not be
