Would You Eat Your Cat?

Key Ethical Conundrums and What They Tell You About Yourself

De: Jeremy Stangroom

Narrado por: Gregory St. John

Are you authoritarian or libertarian? Are we morally obligated to end the world? And just what’s wrong with eating your cat?

Would You Eat Your Cat? challenges you to examine these and many other philosophical questions. This unique collection of classic and modern problems and paradoxes is guaranteed to test your preconceptions. Jeremy Stangroom creates contemporary versions of famous dilemmas that explore the morality of suicide and the ethics of retribution. He then delves into the background of each conundrum in detail and helps you discover what your responses reveal about yourself with a unique morality barometer. Are you ready to have your best ideas confronted and your ethical foundations shaken? If so, then Would You Eat Your Cat? is the book for you.

©2010 Elwin Street Productions (P)2013 Audible, Inc.

Organization of Information for Audible

The book was interesting and enlightening. A good introduction into philosophy, morality and how we define it. It was hard to discern which question were important in the audio version. This book was much easier to read and I ended up buying the kindle version. Now, the issue with the audio version is that the organization of the information was organized the way the book is. Which was 4 chapters of question in different categories, then the 5th chapter is the moral barometer based on how you answered the questions. For audio purposes it really should have been: Chapter 1 then the moral barometer on that chapter. Then chapter 2 followed by the moral barometer on that chapter. . . And so on. I really just recommend getting the Kindle version.

Would You? Could You? Should You? - Probably

This short book offers up 25 dilemmas in five differing categories. The author seeks to help you see both sides of the argument by pointing out those arguments that float and those that sink in the philosophical cesspool. By offering a moral barometer and characterizations like 'if you agree with x then you are mostly likely are a kind of y' he attempts to herd the listener into their ethical position. As with most philosophers, the author offers simple mind experiments luring you into a snap answers, then he makes it a tinsy more complex, twists it just so, does a bait and switch and before you know it you are agreeing that a villain should end the world or suicide is okay.

The organization of the book is problematic for listeners. He first poses each question, one after another, without fluff which loads you with all of these questions, then in part two he deconstructs each one of the 25. For someone listening who does not have a pen and paper while driving down the highway considering whether a 'train conductor should kill one person, five or 500 if the one person is your mother' I found it a touch too overwhelming. You should listen to this book in a place where you can write and jot some notes.

What's is good: it is brief and to the point. Not so good: as usual philosophers don't seem to see grey, its just this evil, that evil and more evil disguised as evil. Give it a listen, at least you will conclude whether you'll think Buffy is tasty.

Good not great

The book presents scenarios, asks the reader to make a decision, and makes brief philosophical arguments for each side citing relevant philosophical theories. I found the arguments shallow and often had other reasons to come to my decision based on sociology and psychology that were not touched on.

Good listen

The book was good, but the author outlines all of the scenarios at the beginning and then goes back in the second part to explain them without refreshing the actual scenario. It forces you to really remember what was said. Probably best to listen if you have a full 3 hours to do the whole thing at once. Otherwise very interesting thought experiments

Not very interesting

What could have made this a 4 or 5-star listening experience for you?

I like information and I especially like compelling and interesting information. This book is neither and reminds me of someone that simply has a weird mindset to begin with which is why THEY find these thoughts interesting. But I also hear there are those that like rope burn, so what can you do?

Would you ever listen to anything by Jeremy Stangroom again?

No.

How could the performance have been better?

It is okay.

What character would you cut from Would You Eat Your Cat??

The writer.

THIS is how I like my ethics (with a side of cat)

I never imagined ethics could be so much fun. (OK, full disclosure, I'm an ethics dweeb, but ---). This appeals to the (better nature of the) 19-year-old boy inside me, but make no mistake: it's wild but serious and SMART. The cartoonish thought-experiments are uneven here and there, but I haven't ever had so much fun and thought-provocation in 3 hours of my time. This is just how I like to teach the endless stream of 19-year-olds passing through my classes. And the price is right. Oh, and yes, of COURSE I would eat my cat. What, you wouldn't?