Jack Ragan

Peter Singer's shallow pond thought experiment is often used to argue that we have a moral obligation to provide aid to others, regardless of factors such as proximity and number of bystanders. Critics claim that Singer’s thought experiment fails to capture key features of global poverty and should thus not be applied to analyses of global justice. I argue that this use of the shallow pond thought experiment can be maintained only if we reconsider the thought experiment as entailing a virtue ethics principle of moral obligation. I support this conclusion by introducing a modified ‘never-ending’ shallow pond thought experiment.

In Batman: Year One, Bruce Wayne decides that he shall “become a bat.” A question that arises consistently in Batman literature is whether this course of action is permissible. That is, should Bruce Wayne become Batman? In order to answer this question, I will draw upon Jean Paul Sartre’s existential philosophy, to assess whether Bruce Wayne is living in bad faith by becoming Batman. If Bruce Wayne is living in bad faith by becoming Batman, then it suggests that the decision to become Batman is impermissible, and that Bruce should attempt to escape this pattern of bad faith, by considering alternative courses of action. For Sartre, an individual is living in bad faith when they deny either their facticity, which is the limits to their freedom, or their transcendence, which is their ability to be free. In this paper I argue that by becoming Batman, Bruce Wayne is living in a pattern of bad faith which is characterized by: (i) a denial of facticity, when Bruce fails to recognize the limits of his body, mortality, and ability to stop crime; (ii) a denial of transcendence, when Batman fails to leave behind his relationships and become more than a man; (iii) an orientation towards being-in-itself and objectifying himself as Batman. In order to escape this pattern of bad faith, Bruce Wayne should stop acting as Batman and should instead recognize his freedom as Bruce Wayne.