Phil 320 Final Exam
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Virginia Commonwealth University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
320
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by Justiceforzuko
Final Exam
Phil 320, Fall 2020
Your name: Kelvon Glass
Instructions (Please read it carefully before you start answering the questions):
1.
The time for the exam is 4:00-6:40, Nov. 19
th
, 2020. 2.
Please type in and save your answers in this word document, rename the document so to include your first and last name, and email it back to me by 6:40 at yuany3@vcu.edu
. 3.
You can consult the readings, PowerPoint slides, and your own notes. But you cannot copy content from the internet or communicate with other students. 4.
Don't simply copy and paste from the PowerPoint slides
. The exam is about your comprehension and critical engagement with the philosophical questions covered in this class. You must answer the questions with your own words. Copying content from the PowerPoint slides verbatim may undermine your grades.
5.
There are five essay questions (each with sub-questions) on the exam. Please answer four
of them. You have 2 hours and 40 minutes in total. Please pace yourself appropriately. Each question is worth 5 points. The total is 20 points.
6.
Please elaborate on your answers as you see fit. There is no word limit. But be mindful about what is really relevant; superfluous information will not improve your grade.
The Exam:
1. Briefly describe the Lockean and the Kantian approaches to property rights. Make sure to state
clearly how the two approaches differ. Provide one objection to each
of those approaches (if you have multiple objections, choose the strongest one). Can the Lockean and the Kantian approaches adequately address the objections you offer? If they can, how? If they cannot, why? Overall, which approach do you think is more plausible? Please explain your reasoning. Your answer
:
* The Lockean approach
is that every individual owns themselves, his approach serves the saying "First come, First Serve", he brings up that if there is enough for everyone then all is good. Lives by natural law such as they have a right to tell one no, all right to give the property away, and right to use it when please. One Objection for Lockean:
to many people live in a poverty situation which does not look right in his property system, its not fair to those in a different class and political approach
* The Kantian approach:
A single individual can not enforce and establish their own property rights. Only the government can enforce and protect people property right, the state plays a more active role in a person property right. One Objection for Kantian:
The state can be to controlling for a person property and become to interfering.
* Both Approaches address their objections 2. What is a tort? What are use-based and damage-based torts? Please make sure to articulate the difference(s) between the two. Ripstein argues that—as a general principle—strict liability
should apply to use-based torts, while fault-based liability should apply to damage-based torts. Explain strict liability and fault-based liability and then state Ripstein’s argument for this general
principle. Do you agree with Ripstein on this issue? Why or why not? Your answer
:
3. Explain the three basic types of remedies for breaching a contract. According to Fried, expectation damage should be the default remedy for breaching a contract. What is his argument? Do you agree with him on this issue? Why or why not? (In answering the two last questions, you may consider whether reliance damages and restitution are morally adequate compensations for breaching a contract, why or why not.)
Your answer
:
* Three basic Remedies: Reliance Damages, Restitution, and expectation damages. His argument
is that is an individual is bound by his promise but if not by harm the promise as reliance on then
he or she is only responsible for the action. I agree with the arguement because if a contract is breached and broken then some type of payback should be required to the victim, also out of the kind and curtisousy that a respectful contract was broken. It morally better because it helps the victims as the one who broke is wasnt moral savvy
4. What is epistocracy? Reconstruct Estlund’s argument against epistocracy. Are you convinced by Estlund’s argument against epistocracy? Why or why not? In your mind, what is the strongest argument for democracy? Draw on your favorite argument for democracy to analyze gerrymandering: What is gerrymandering? Is gerrymandering morally justified in light of your favorite argument for democracy? Your answer
:
* Epistocracy is Politically competent people should possess political rights, right ti vote and right to run for office. Arguements against is that There is no objection to that political authority is given to provided to the individuals who are being ruled. The argument does have me convinced because I to beileve the a more political educated society would picj a better ruler, but
it also depends on what their political beliefs are.
* Democracy: Strongest argument is that it is free and gives people their voice within the government they live under, gives them more indivdual rights. Gerrymaking: Practice of making other districts boundaries to favor certain groups in hopes to win their election of some sort. The morally in this fails because it cheats an individual into getting them more votes and which ruins democracy and makes it unfair and favors particular citiezens
5. According to retributivism, the criminal justice system should give perpetrators what they deserve. According to deterrence theory, the criminal justice system should deter people from committing crimes. Ripstein's theory of criminal justice aims to integrate retributivism and deterrence theory. Describe Ripstein’s theory of criminal justice: What is a crime? Why should it
be the state’s business to punish crimes? Make sure to explain how retribution and deterrence fit into his theory. Draw on Ripstein’s theory to think about whether/under what conditions the state
should criminalize drug use.
Your answer
:
* Theory: Criminal Justice presuppose the retribution and deterence to itself helps the citizens know the law and not break it and help punish crimes. Crime is what he said are violations that are in the equal system and freedom of law. State Business because they are inconsitent with the rule of law that that state made and enforced. Retribution gives that ability for the people to glace
over the law and not commit the violation within the future creating a rule and law, Helping it fit with his theory to create order. Deterrence helps the government go over the law and reassure that the law is made to make sure citizens can act on the correct order given and reduce the crime
of what they pass. Ripstein Theory: The state should decriminalize drug use and use the state as a
way to not punish them but hel them, kinda like how the state of washington and oregon just did a couple weeks ago
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