At the end of the two part season premiere “The Cutie Map”, Starlight Glimmer is exposed as having never given up her own cutie mark despite her claims that possession of a cutie mark leads to fighting and breaking friendships. This, of course, turns the entire town against her as they call out her “hypocrisy.” As she points out, however, it wouldn’t have been possible to remove every-ponies’ cutie marks without her magic, which requires her cutie mark. The town doesn’t buy it, but what if, assuming her morality was correct, she had a point? Is it possible that hypocrisy like this can be moral? In this article we’ll investigate by asking if morality must be public or can there be justified reasons for it to be secret?
Tag Archives: character discussion
In Part I of this two part exploration of Discord’s reformation, I drew upon utilitarian philosopher Henry Sidgwick to argue that Discord’s reformation could be viewed as a story of the conflict between egoism and utilitarian ethics. Sidgwick argued that this conflict was logically irreconcilable as the decision to be one or the other came own to one decision: the willingness to put your own interests aside for the greater good.
In Part II of this exploration I will analyze Discord’s reformation through the lens of Sidgiwck’s view of the role of sympathy and the duty of benevolence in the utilitarian ethic. In doing so, I argue that Discord’s story can serve as an example of how one can transition away from the egoistic philosophy. In doing so, I can also explain why Fluttershy was the best choice of pony to reform Discord despite my arguments that Pinkie Pie is already a utilitarian of sorts. Continue reading
In this first part of a two-part exploration of Discord’s reformation, we’ll explore Discord’s egoism in the context of utilitarian philosopher Henry Sidgwick’s dilemma of the irreconcilability of egoism and utilitarian ethics. This sets the the stage for the exploration of Discord’s reformation in part two.
The article, but in video form!
Everyone knows that Fluttershy loves animals taking care of them is her special talent after all. But does the episode Bats! suggests that she might have a lot in common with preference utilitarian Peter Singer? In this article I will attempt to argue that, like Peter Singer, Fluttershy is acting on the belief that animals deserve equal moral consideration when decisions have to be made.
So, I’m sure by now we’re all quite familiar with the Cutie Mark Crusaders. This group made up of Apple Bloom, Sweetie Belle, and Scootaloo have been together since the season one episode “Call of the Cutie”. United in their status as “blank flanks”, the main goal of the group is to work together in an attempt to find their special talent so they can all gain their cutie marks. This is usually done by shouting “CUTIE MARK CRUSADER INSERT PROFESSION NAME HERE YAY!” and then running off to do whatever it is they just shouted about. So far, however, they’ve pretty much had no success outside of the occasional moments like their showcase for the Equestria Games.
The question is, then, why is it that they have yet to get their cutie marks? As much as we might tease them for following Rainbow Dash’s advice to try “as many things as possible as quickly as possible”, it’s honestly not that inherently bad of an idea. If you’re not sure what it is that you want to do with your life or what you’re good at, taking the time go out and try new things and experiences is probably a good thing, especially for children where play and exploration is a big part of their learning process.
I think one possible way to think about this problem of theirs is to argue that, in a sense, the Cutie Mark Crusaders how found themselves running head first into a variation of what is known as “the Paradox of Happiness.”
Is it possible that Princess Celestia and the other alicorns are living a life in the “transcendence” stage of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs? In this article I’ll be taking a look at how humanistic psychology can be used to explore Celestia’s motivations and the nature of alicornhood.