PHL 295- Manya Agarwal Midterm
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Toronto *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
PHL295H1
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by BarristerArt10398
PHL295F Business Ethics: First writing assignment
Professor Joseph Heath
Name: Manya Agarwal
Provide a brief summary of the topic of the paper “Why Should We Care About
Competition?” by Waheed Hussain, and what he states at the beginning that he intends to
demonstrate (100 words):
Hussain’s focus is to put forth a social democratic argument that questions the presence of
competitive institutions in a liberal democratic community by examining how much we value
human connectedness. He states that sometimes competitive institutions are acceptable however,
they have a tendency to create conflict between the two individuals where one undermines the
other through the creation and execution of a successful plan. He explored two viewpoints on
social connections, one being instrumental stating that human attachment leads to just behaviour
and the second being non-instrumental exploring political relationships that state how one should
behave and stop excessively competitive institutions.
Describe the two conceptions of social connectedness that Hussain introduces and explain
how they differ from one another (300 words):
The two conceptions of social connectedness that Hussain presents are social union and mutual
affirmation. Introduced by Rawls social union is achieved as individuals engage in certain
activities that have two characteristics. One is that they are collectively planned and second that
they have distinct roles where each person plays their part in the whole for a common outcome.
He explored this through the example of an orchestra where each has been given their role and
each performs their part for the mutually desired outcome of a successful music orchestra.
Mutual affirmation, on the other hand, states that when one person stands with another they
exhibit behaviour that takes into importance other successes and failures as if they were
personally involved or affected. He explored this further using friendship and how one is happy
with their friend's success and disappointed with their friend for their failures as if they were
personal experiences. He focuses on two key characteristics where the connection between
people is internal involving shared experiences and empathy.
The two conceptions differ in the manner that social union is where individuals are externally
connected and social connectedness is related to cooperation between groups of people that have
shared objectives and end goals. The only thing connecting individuals is the group activity. In
contrast, mutual affirmation is where individuals are internally connected and where they feel
empathy towards others where they show others their importance through a sense of shared
experiences as considering others as their own achievements and failures. They are more focused
on solidarity. Individuals are connected to each other and activity and are affected by each other
through multiple transactions.
Explain how the competitive structure of a game creates obstacles to the players' standing
in relation to mutual affirmation (300 words):
Mutual affirmation according to Hussain is seen when a person chooses to conform to a set of
normative rules rather than choosing to not conform. Baseball is a competitive sport that has
certain rules that lead to two outcomes either winning or losing which both teams have adequate
reasons to try for. In attempts to win one team prevents the outcome of another team as one team
scores the other loses a point. These games are structured and are formed in a way where only
one team could win preventing the other team from achieving success. This raises the question of
how individuals are mutually affirmation as in a competitive game one is not able to share
experiences of success and failure of others as they are focused on their own which affects the
result of the others. This created obstacles between players. Therefore they may not form wider
social relationships that create distance and disconnect.
The impact on the prospective of winning - one winning leading to another losing - is a side
effect of competitive institutions. It aims to put people against each other. When a reward is
involved in the matter like a scholarship for those participating in the baseball game it makes it
hard to be mutually affirmation as all are aiming at the same reward. If the stakes are minor the
competitive structure doesn’t hinder mutual affirmation. One is more focused on attaining the
reward for oneself to care about how others are feeling. Hussain also presents the argument that
all members are in social relationships which bind them to the demands of mutual affirmation.
However, this is not possible in a competitive game of baseball where hurdles are placed on
mutual affirmation between players. The winning of one will destroy the dreams of others.
When is a competitive game not antithetical to mutual affirmation? How does Hussain use
this to define the notion of an “excessively competitive institution”? (200 words):
A competitive game is not antithetical to mutual affirmation when competitive structures cause
distancing between individuals and do not affect the behaviours in those relationships. Hussain
states that this occurs when distancing doesn't change the core values or attitudes one holds in the
social relationship or setting and that the reasons are minor for distancing. Hussain uses the
example of receiving a token instead of a scholarship in a competitive game as the reward is
minor therefore the reasons for distancing are competitive institutions and do not affect mutual
affirmation. He called this a friendly competition that is not excessively competitive.
Hussain uses the notion of an excessively competitive institution when there a strong reasons for
distancing and therefore affect the social relationships. It hinders mutual affirmation as they are
antithetical to the forms of connectedness individuals use. It causes changes and obstacles in
actions and thoughts that affect relationships that affect the characteristics of mutual affirmation.
Leading to major reasons and changes in values.
Provide a concise summary of the instrumental objection to excessively competitive
institutions (i.e. the “moral defect” in them). What is Hussain’s evaluation of this
instrumental objection? (200 words):
The instrumental objection to excessively competitive institutions is that they tend to pit people
against each other which affects the formation of strong attachments and networks. They tend to
undermine others' feelings and needs over their own which results in weaker bonds and relations.
The instrumental view of social connectedness states that due to attachment and empathy for
others, we act justly. Justice is seen when individuals are motivated to be fair and caring toward
others however competitive institutions delay this formation of attachments and undermine the
motivation that contributes to the moral defect.
However, Hussain claims that the instrumental approach is not enough to fully explain moral
deficiency for two reasons, one being that our thoughts are more definite about institutions than
what the results of empirical evidence show. This shows that the instrumental view explored how
competition affects social connectedness and motivation to be just is not enough. The second
reason why the instrumental argument is not enough is that the moral objection is how
institutions encourage a lack of consideration of others by putting people against each other in
situations. The disagreement with competitive institutions is not about the impacts of competition
but the lack of civility and regard for others.
Explain the non-instrumental objection and why Hussain considers it to be an
improvement over the instrumental objection (200 words):
Hussain's second argument non-instrumental takes a different approach than the instrumental
argument. He states that in a political community with political relationships mutual affirmation
is a requirement in relationships. Associative obligations are created in relationships where
members are obligated due to their shared activities and history. As mutual affirmation is focused
on the common good, this view states that individuals should also adopt institutions that follow
the same values and prohibit those that oppose them. He uses the example of marriage, where
one has mutual affirmation and therefore to participate in activities that would further allow this.
The non-instrumental view is an improvement from the instrumental view as it doesn't take
regard to the ambiguity of empirical evidence about the relationship between competition and
injustice as it is definitive in its arguments about its moral defectiveness. The second reason it is
an improvement is that it is not only focused on the legislative motives but how these institutions
encourage disregard for others while in a civil sphere. The moral defect is in how these
institutions shape people’s actions and thoughts in various situations along with the development
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
of laws.
Do you believe that Hussain’s analysis in this paper provides a good basis for determining
what level of competitiveness in social life is acceptable? Why or why not? (200 words):
I believe that Husain’s analysis in this paper is a good basis for determining what level of
competitiveness in social life is acceptable. He provides valuable insight into the degree of
competitiveness, where if stakes and reward are minor it is acceptable and permitted however
when they are excessive they cause damage which can be seen through examples. Excessive
competition can lead to changes in relationships due to changes to one's core values and attitudes
which may reduce one's mutual affirmation that could have harmful effects in the future as one
may start purposefully undermining others in a competition.
Hussain’s argument for the importance of mutual affirmation and behaving justly provides a key
understanding of social interactions and the need for justice in actions not only in political
relationships but causal ones as well. He explored these through the views of instrumental and
non-instrumental of social connectedness which provides a more holistic and dynamic
evaluation.
Although Hussain’s arguments make claims about the levels of competitiveness, it is important
to also consider the need for subjective judgment and contextual factors when looking at
behaviours in competitive institutions. Context plays an important role when trying to understand
one’s motivation to be just or unjust.