PHIL 200 -- ETHICS -- GREAT TRADITIONS -- SPRING 09 -- ASSIGNMENTS

The MAKE UP EXAM takes place on May 7. 4-6pm in LA 205. You must be on my list in order to make up an exam.

The REVIEW SESSIONS for the final exam will take place on:

• Monday, May 11. 4-6pm in LA 244
• Tuesday, May 12. 4-6pm in JOUR 307

The FINAL EXAM will take place on May 13. 3:20 - 5:20 in JOUR 304. The format of the final exam is specified in the syllabus.

FOR 5/6 and 8 -- Death Penalty

• Readings -- RTD 24, 25, SLB 17
• Study questions:
  1. Explain the utilitarian view on punishment?
  2. What is Kant's objection to the utilitarian view on punishment?
  3. What is Kant's view on punishment? What are the two conditions which make punishment right according to Kant?
  4. Bedau suggests that the death penalty is unfairly applied and shouldn't be applied because of this. Provide some reasons for thinking so. Why does van den Haag think that the death penalty should be applied anyway?
  5. Bedau thinks that the death penalty should not be applied because it is irreversible. What is his argument in support of such a claim? What is van den Haag's counter-argument that it should be applied anyway?
  6. Bedau thinks that the death penalty doesn't act as a deterrent. Provide reasons for thinking he's right. Why does van den Haag think that is should be applied anyway?
  7. Bedau thinks that the death penalty is excessive and contrary to human dignity? Why? Why does van den Haag think he's wrong on this?
• Discussion questions:
  1. What do you think is the purpose of us punishing criminals?
  2. To what extent do you think the saying ``an eye for an eye" provides adequate justification and guidance for punishment?
  3. Which arguments in favor of death penalty do you find the most convincing? the least convincing? Why?
  4. Which argument against death penalty do you find the most convincing? the least convincing? Why?
• Course Notes (pdf) Chapter 17

FOR 5/4 -- Movie -- Dead Man Walking

• Questionnaire (to turn in on Monday, May 4th, before 9 pm by email) Chapter 17-1

FOR 5/1 -- Movie -- Dead Man Walking

• Questionnaire (to turn in on Monday, May 4th, before 9 pm by email) Chapter 17-1

FOR 4/27, 29 -- Virtue ethics

• Readings -- EMP 12, RTD 4, SLB 16
• Study questions:
  1. What does happiness consist in according to Aristotle?
  2. What is a virtue according to Aristotle? How is a virtue acquired?
  3. Explain Aristotle's idea that virtuous action always consists in a mean?
  4. According to Aristotle, does the virtuous man take pleasure in being virtuous? Is he morally obligated to take pleasure in being virtuous?
  5. What are the advantages of virtue ethics? What are the disadvantages?
• Discussion question:
  1. What does it take to lead a good life?
  2. What are the relationships between pleasure and virtue?
• Course Notes (pdf) Chapter 16

FOR 4/24 -- Virtue ethics, started -- EXAM 7 on Duty Theory and Social Contract Theories

FOR 4/20 and 4/22 -- Social Contract Theories

• Readings -- EMP 10, RTD 6, SLB 15
• Study questions:
  1. What would be our lives in a ``state of nature" according to Hobbes?
  2. What are the four basic facts about the conditions of human life which make the life in a state of nature dreadful?
  3. Why is it necessary to establish a government in order to escape the state of nature?
  4. What is morality according to the Social Contract Theories? What are the conditions under which the rules of morality can be applied?
  5. How does a Prisoner's Dilemma situation provide justification for social contracts?
  6. What are the four advantages of Social Contract Theories according to Rachels?
  7. Among the ones discussed by Rachels, which is the most important difficulty of the Social Contract Theory according to you?
• Discussion question:
  1. Can we see the rules of morality as the rules on which we all implicitly agree to comply with?
• Course Notes (pdf) Chapter 15

FOR 4/13, 15, 17 -- Duty Theory

• Readings -- EMP 8-9, RTD 9 (Kant), SLB 14
• Study questions:
  1. Why is Kant's argument in favor of the claim that our moral actions should be assessed on the basis of the moral value of our motives?
  2. What is Duty theory? Explain the difference between `acting according to our duty' and `acting for the sake of our duty'. Give an example.
  3. What is the difference between an hypothetical imperative and a categorical imperative? Illustrate your answer with an example.
  4. What are the two formulations of the Categorical Imperative?
  5. How can we use the first formulation of the Categorical Imperative to decide what the right thing to do is?
  6. Is there any circumstances in which it is ok to lie for Kant? Why or why not?
  7. What is the ultimate foundation of morality according to Kant?
  8. Why does Kant think that we should respect human beings? What does it mean that we ought to treat people not as means, but as ends only?
  9. Explain why someone could find Kant's view that it is necessary and sufficient to act from duty in order to act morally. What would be Kant's answer to such an objection?
  10. Is there any circumstances in which one would think that lying is the right thing to do? How would Kant would analyze such a situation?
• Discussion questions:
  1. Do you think there are absolute moral rules which suffer no exceptions?
  2. To what extent do you think that we ought to be deemed responsible for the consequences of our actions?
  3. To what extent do you think that the moral value of one's motives should be taken into account when assessing the moral value of his or her actions?
  4. Do you agree with Kant that morality is ultimately grounded in rationality?
• Course Notes (pdf) Chapter 14

FOR 4/10 -- EXAM 6 on World Hunger and Euthanasia

FOR 4/8 -- Euthanasia, cont'ed -- no new readings

FOR 4/6 -- Euthanasia: The arguments -- no new readings

SPRING BREAK

FOR 3/27 -- Euthanasia: The arguments

• Readings: RTD 17, 18 + SLB 13
• Study questions:
  1. What is the difference between Voluntary Assisted Suicide (VAS) and Euthanasia?
  2. What is the distinction between active and passive euthanasia? Is the distinction relevant concerning the issue of moral responsibility?
  3. (On Doerflinger) What is the argument from autonomy in favor of VAS?
  4. (On Doerflinger) How does Doerflinger reject the argument that VAS can be the ultimate expression of our autonomy?
  5. (On Rachels) What is the argument from mercy in favor of VAS?
  6. (On Rachels) What is the utilitarian argument in favor of VAS?
  7. (On Rachels) Why does Rachels reject the utilitarian argument? What refinement does he propose for it?
  8. (On Doerflinger) What are the abuses does Doerflinger see as possible consequences of having VAS authorized? What kind of argument is this?
• Discussion Question: What are the main conflicting values in the debate concerning VAS and euthanasia? Which is the argument, on each side of the debate, that you find the most convincing?
• Course Notes (pdf) will be available on Wednesday afternoon: Chapter 13

FOR 3/23-25-- Euthanasia: Movie and Discussion

• No readings. Print and bring to class the questionnaire for the movie (pdf) You will have to answer it on Wednesday. I will collect your questionnaires.

FOR 3/20-- World Hunger finished

FOR 3/18 -- World Hunger cont'ed -- EXAM 5 (On The Morality of Nature and Homosexuality and Utilitarianism)

FOR 3/16 -- World Hunger

• Readings: RTD 14, 15 + Hardin, Lifeboat Ethics, SLB 12
• Study questions:
  • On "9/11 and Starvation": what are the reasons why people react very differently in the cases of the 9/11 attack, and in the case of daily starvation? Which of these reasons do you think are morally legitimate?
  • On "The Singer Solution to World Poverty":
    1. Singer claims that there is no fundamental moral difference between Dora selling a kid (who is to be killed for his organs) in order to get a TV, and us buying a new TV set instead of helping starving children. Do you agree? If not, what are the relevant moral differences between the two situations?
    2. Explain in what respect the case of Bob and the Bugatti is a more compelling analogy with our situation (when we don't give money to the UNICEF or Oxfam America).
    3. At what point are you morally legitimated to stop giving according the Singer? What do you think of this?
  • On Hardin's "Lifeboat Ethics"
    1. Explain Hardin's lifeboat metaphor.
    2. Hardin seems to imply that, because we cannot put everybody on the boat, we should not let anybody in. Does this implication sound logically valid to you?
    3. Explain the ``tragedy of the commons". Is it true that ``it takes only one less than everyone to ruin a system of voluntary restraint"?
    4. Hardin explains that increasing the food production would cause further problems for the planet. Do you find this argument convincing?
• Discussion Question: To what extent do you agree with Singer on the idea that we live indecent lives?
• Course Notes (pdf): Chapter 12

FOR 3/9, 11 and 13 -- Utilitarianism

• Readings: EMP 6, 7 ; RTD 8, 16, 27 ; SLB 11
• Study questions:
  1. What is the Principle of Utility?
  2. What is Utilitarianism?
  3. What are the three main tenets of classical utilitarianism?
  4. What do you think of the idea that the ultimate goal of moral life is overall happiness? Is happiness a necessary part of our moral life? Is it sufficient?
  5. What is hedonism? Do you agree with Mill that pleasure is the sole foundation of happiness?
  6. How does John Stuart Mill argue against the idea that ethical theories which take the pursuit of pleasure as the foundation of morals are theories ``worthy only of swine" (RTD p.72)?
  7. Explain how Nozick's experience machine works. Would you plug yourself in? How is the idea of the experience machine relevant to hedonism? What can the utilitarian answer?
  8. How does the idea that we should take a point of view of strict impartiality when deciding upon moral matters conflict with our common-sense morality? What can be the utilitarian's answer to this concern (give at least two)?
  9. What is the sense of integrity according to Williams? How does the principle of utilitarianism conflict with our sense of integrity?
  10. How does the idea that we should assess an action only on the basis of its consequences conflict with our common-sense morality? What can be the utilitarian's answers to this concern (give at least two)?
• Discussion Questions:
  1. In order to make a moral choice between possible alternatives, do you think one should take into account the possible consequences that each alternative will bring about? Do you think some other consideration should also enter into account? Which one(s) and why?
  2. Do you think that we should be strictly impartial when making moral decisions?
  3. Do you think that some moral rules should not suffer any exceptions, whatever the circumstances?
• Course Notes in pdf format :
  • For Monday: Chapter 11 -- sections 1-4
  • For Wednesday and Friday : Chapter 11 -- sections 5-7

FOR 3/6 -- EXAM 4 -- On the Natural Law Theory, The Morality of Abortion, Homosexuality and Morality and Nature

FOR 3/4 -- Nature and Morality

• Readings: RTD 13 (Leiser), SLB10
• Study questions:
  1. What is the argument for the view that homosexuality is wrong?
  2. What are the various possible meanings of ``natural" and ``unnatural"?
  3. Is there any of these meanings in which we can say that homosexuality is unnatural?
  4. Is there any of these meanings in which we can say that what is unnatural is wrong?
• Discussion Question: Do you think one can take as the basis of his or her morality that he or she should follow nature?
• Course Notes in pdf format: Chapter 10

FOR 2/27 and 3/2-- The Morality of Abortion

• Readings:
  • Required: RTD 11 (Thomson), RTD 10 (Marquis), SLB9
  • Recommended: Jane English, Bonnie Steinbock and Mary Anne Warren -- papers that will be available on Blackboard on 2/20
  • Further Readings for yourself: Carol Gilligan In a different voice
• Study questions:
  1. What are the two conflicting values in the abortion debate?
  2. What is the Person Argument against Abortion?
  3. What is the problem with the first premise of the Person Argument against Abortion?
  4. Why is it wrong to kill a fetus according to Marquis? What is the difference between Marquis' argument and the traditional Person Argument?
  5. Explain the analogy that Thomson does with the violin player. Which premise of the Person Argument is it supposed to help us address? How? Can you think of ways in which the analogy is not convincing? Can you think of ways in which the analogy could be changed such that to make it more convincing?
• Course Notes in pdf format: Chapter 9

FOR 2/25 -- Morality and Religion -- The Natural Law Theory

• Readings: no new readings -- reading from last week
• Study questions: no new study questions

FOR 2/23 -- EXAM 3 on Egoism and the Divine Command Theory

FOR 2/18 and 20 -- Morality and Religion

• Readings: EMP 4, RTD 5 (Aquinas), SLB 8
• Study questions:
  1. What is considered right by the Divine Command Theory?
  2. What are the two interpretations of the Divine Command Theory?
  3. What is Socrates' question concerning the relationships between morality and religion? Explain what it means with an example.
  4. What is Natural Law Theory? How does it differ from the Divine Command Theory? According to Natural Law Theory, do our religious principles tell us exactly what particular action must be undertaken under particular circumstances?
  5. In what sense and to what extend do you think religious belief can help people act morally?
• Course Notes in pdf format: Chapter 8

2/16 -- No Class -- Presidents' day

FOR 2/13 -- Egoism

• Readings: EMP 5, SLB 6
• Study questions:
  1. What is the difference between Psychological Egoism and Ethical Egoism?
  2. What is the main claim of Psychological Egoism? Can't you think of something you did in your life, which was not in your own interest? How is this a counter-argument against Psychological Egoism? What would be the Psychological Egoist's answer to that?
  3. Can you argue against Psychological Egoism? Why? Why not?
  4. What is Ethical Egoism? According to Ethical Egoism, is it right or wrong to help other people without any further consideration of one's own interest?
  5. What is Ann Rand's argument for Ethical Egoism? How can we object to it?
  6. What are the best objections against Ethical Egoism?
• Course Notes in pdf format: Chapter 7

FOR 2/11 -- EXAM 2 -- Movie : The Courage to Care -- Course Notes in pdf format: Chapter 6

FOR 2/9 -- Moral Subjectivism, cont'ed -- Exam 1 back

FOR 2/6 -- Moral Subjectivism

• Readings: EMP 3, RTD7, RTD 3, SLB 5
• Study questions:
  1. What is Moral Subjectivism?
  2. What is the simple version of moral subjectivism? How does it fail?
  3. What is Emotivism? Why does not fall under the criticisms leveled against the simple version of moral subjectivism?
  4. Explain the distinction between our use of language for stating matters of facts and our use of language for expressing attitudes
  5. Explain Hume's argument in favor of the claim that "The rules of morality, therefore, are not conclusions of our reason". If not from reason, where do the rules of morality come from according to Hume?
  6. Hume asserts that there is nothing in the world that corresponds to what we call good and bad (these are ideas). Explain.
  7. What is an hypothetical imperative? What is a categorical imperative? How is the distinction relevant to Mackie's defense of moral scepticism?
  8. How does Mackie answer our rejection of the Cultural Differences Argument?
  9. What is the argument from queerness? How is it relevant to Mackie's defense of moral scepticism?
• Course Notes in pdf format: Chapter 5

FOR 2/4 -- Cultural Relativism

• Readings: EMP 2, SLB 4
• Study questions:
  1. What is Cultural Relativism?
  2. What is the Cultural Difference argument?
  3. Why is the Cultural Difference argument not valid?
  4. Which assumptions in the Cultural Difference argument are flawed?
  5. What evidence speaks against Cultural Relativism?
  6. What conclusion should we draw about moral tolerance?
• Course Notes in pdf format: Chapter 4

FOR 2/2 -- Philosophy and Argument, EXAM 1 (on What is Morality and Philosophy and Argument)

FOR 1/30 -- Philosophy and Argument

• Readings: SLB 3
• Study questions:
  1. What is a premise?
  2. What is a valid argument? What is a sound argument? Give simple examples of: 1.a non-valid argument, 2.an argument which is valid but unsound.
  3. Do the exercises in the course notes
• Course Notes in pdf format: Chapter 3

FOR 01/28 -- Introduction: Ethics and Philosophy

• Readings: EMP 1, RTD 1, SLB 1
• Study questions:
  1. What are moral issues? Give some examples and try to characterize the main components which are constitutive of a moral issue.
  2. Give an example of an ethical dilemma, that is, a situation in which your moral values conflict with one another and no option lets your conscience free. How do you usually solve such situation?
  3. Who should be consulted concerning moral issues? Imagine that you are an hospital administrator. You want to put together an Ethics Committee. Who would you like to on the committee?
  4. What do you think the right answer is in the case of Baby Theresa?
• Course Notes in pdf format: Chapter 2

FOR 01/26 -- Presentation of the course -- Syllabus (Chapter 1)

---