ethics exam 1
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Colorado, Boulder *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
1001
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
Pages
4
Uploaded by DrTreeWallaby30
TOPIC #1
Logical and Ethical Preliminaries
What is the fundamental project of the Normative Ethics of Behavior?
➢
The fundamental project of the normative ethics of behavior is to discover a theory such as a
statement that dictates the necessary and sufficient conditions for an act to be morally right.
Give an example of a theory in the Normative Ethics of Behavior. Give an example of a moral
principle in the Normative Ethics of Behavior that is not a theory (i.e., not a “fully general”
principle).
➢
An example of a theory in the Normative Ethics of Behavior is The Golden Rule because it is a
single principle by which we can judge all actions.
➢
An example of a principle in the Normative Ethics of Behavior is The Principle of Autonomy
which states that a vital part of human nature is the capacity to be self-determining (providing for
your own self interests).
What is an argument?
➢
An argument is a sequence of statements, the last of which (the conclusion) is supposed to follow
from the others (the premises).
What does it mean to say that an argument is valid?
➢
An argument is determined to be valid when it fits the criteria of: if the premises are true then the
conclusion must also be true.
Can there be a valid argument with a false conclusion? If not, explain why not. If there can be,
give an example of one.
➢
A valid argument cannot have all true premises and a false conclusion. If an argument does have a
false conclusion, then not all the premises are true. The truth of the premises guarantee the truth
of the conclusion.
What does it mean to say that an argument is sound?
➢
An argument is sound if it is valid and all its premises are true.
Can there be a sound argument with a false conclusion? If not, explain why not. If there can be,
give an example of one.
➢
A sound argument cannot have a false conclusion because all of its premises are true, and it must
be a valid argument; thus a valid argument with all true premises dictates the conclusion to also
be true.
State 10C, the theory based on the Ten Commandments.
➢
An act is morally right if and only if it does not violate any of the Ten Commandments.
Give your own counterexample against 10C, based on your own specific example (it can be a
imaginary one). Describe your example in detail, and then represent your objection to 10C in the
form of an argument that makes reference to your example. Put your argument in this form:
P1. If 10C is true, then ______________________ .
P2. But it’s not the case that _____________________ .
C. Therefore, 10C is not true.
➢
10C does not mention that it is a violation to hurt others without killing them; ie rape, verbal
abuse, and other physical harm from poor intention.
○
P1.
If 10C is true, then rape is ok because it doesn’t violate commandments in 10C.
○
P2.
But it is not the case that rape is okay.
○
C.
Therefore, 10C is not true.
Then give the
rationale
for each of the above two premises (that's the reason the premise is
supposed to be true).
➢
P1 is true because the theory based on the Ten Commandments takes into account only what is
explicitly stated in 10C. Rape or other harm against another person, without killing them, is not
outlined in 10C; therefore 10C allows rape.
➢
P2 is true because rape is not okay based on the morals & laws of our society.
TOPIC #2
Religious Approaches to Ethics
State DCT (the Divine Command Theory), and define the term in it that needs defining.
➢
An act is morally right if and only if it is not prohibited by God.
➢
A being is God just in the case that the being is the all-good, all-knowing, all-powerful creator of
the universe (if there is one)
Does believing in the Divine Command Theory logically require believing in God? If so, explain
why. If not, explain what follows from the combination of DCT and atheism.
➢
DCT does not logically require belief in God. If one does not believe in God or if God does not
exist, logically, there are no acts that are prohibited by god. With this logic, every act has the
feature of not being prohibited by God; thus all acts are permissible and DCT stands true.
The Euthyphro Problem for DCT can be represented as the following valid argument:
P1. If DCT is true, then either Horn 1 or Horn 2 is true.
P2. Horn 1 is not true.
P3. If Horn 2 is true, then DCT is not true.
C.
Therefore, DCT is not true.
➢
HORN1: wrong actions are wrong because God prohibits them
➢
HORN2: God prohibits wrong actions because they are wrong
In class we discussed two separate rationales for P2. Explain the first one in detail. This is the one
involving a certain conditional claim (i.e., an if-then claim).
➢
If God had failed to prohibit some horrible kind of act, then it would have been ok to do it.
○
If God had decided not to prohibit rape, then there would have been nothing wrong with
what Ted Bundy did.
➢
A common counter argument is “ God would never fail to prohibit these kinds of acts.”
○
This aligns with the point that is being attacked
Explain the other rationale for P2 in detail. The is the one involving the notion of arbitrariness. Be
sure to explain what 'arbitrary' means in this context, why a certain arbitrariness claim follows
from Horn 1, and why this is supposed to be a problem.
➢
Arbitrary in this case means that God has no good reason or good justification for prohibiting
what God prohibits; what moral justification does God seek from?
○
Answer not availiable from horn 1
○
No other sort of answer seems adequate
➢
If the commands and prohibitions that God makes are truly arbitrary, then they would give us no
reason to obey them. We might have reasons of self-interest to obey them, if God threatens to
punish us if we disobey, but no genuine moral obligations would be generated by God’s
commands and prohibitions, if they are arbitrary.
Give the rationale for P3.
➢
The problem with Horn 2 is that it abandons the Divine Command Theory of morality!
○
Right and wrong are no longer based in God, but in some standard that is independent of
God.
○
Morality is no longer ultimately based on God’s commands.
TOPIC #3
Sociological Approaches to Ethics
**State CR (Cultural Relativism). Define the main term that needs defining. Illustrate CR with an
example of an action that intuitively has some moral status and that the theory agrees has that
status (and explain why it does).
➢
An act is morally right if and only if it is permitted by the moral code of the society of the agent
of the act that was in place at the time the act was performed.
➢
Moral Code: The moral code of a society at a certain time is the set of moral rules accepted in the
society at that time.
➢
The Agent of an act is simply the person who performs the act.
○
According to Herodotus, the Greek creamated their dead, whereas the Callatians ate their
dead. Each thought what the other did was wrong.
○
This shows how two societies have different moral codes regarding the same subject; the
moral status of the action of the other is much different from the moral status of their own
actions.
**Does CR imply that everyone should be more tolerant of the practices of other cultures? Explain
your answer.
➢
Short answer: it depends on what your moral code says.
➢
It is important to note the difference between tolerance and embracement. This is the purest form
of the classic example of: “if your friend jumps off a cliff, will you jump with him?” In this
situation, I will not jump off the cliff because I find it wrong to do, but I cannot control or force
the actions of my friend, so I must be tolerant of his actions as long as his actions do not violate
the rights of others.
➢
According to James Rachel
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
○
There is no “universal truth” in ethics—that is, there are no moral truths that hold for all
people at all times.
○
There is no objective standard that can be used to judge one society’s code better than
another’s.
○
The moral code of our own society has no special status; it is merely one among many.
○
It is mere arrogance for us to try to judge the conduct of other peoples. We should adopt
an attitude of tolerance toward the practices of other cultures.
**"Moral Objectivism" is the view that some actions are right or wrong independent of anyone's
moral beliefs or perspectives (including God's or society's). It is the main alternative to Cultural
Relativism and Divine Command Theory. Is Moral Objectivism committed to the view that it is ok
to be intolerant of the practices of other cultures?
➢
Yes because it states that some actions are premtively defined as right or wrong despite anyone’s
moral beliefs. This means that if your beliefs are contradictory to Moral Objectivism, then you are
wrong: in other words Moral Objectivism is intolerant of beliefs that contradict what it defines as
right or wrong.
Different societies have different beliefs about right and wrong. In your opinion, can we infer from
this that CR is true? Why or why not?
➢
Yes because CR states that all societies have different sets of moral codes. It is within the moral
code of a society where it is defined what that society believes to be right or wrong. This in turn
shows that CR essentially states that different societies have different beliefs regarding what is
right and wrong.
Describe the Gallup poll that the Gallup Poll Argument against CR is based upon, and then state
that argument.
The Gallup poll is a poll of what Americans think is morally acceptable regarding controversial issues.
None of the catagories in the poll ended with a unanimous decision.
➢
P1 There is at least one issue in the Gallup Poll that the majority of Americans have the wrong
view on.
➢
P2 If there is at least one issue in the Gallup Poll that the majority of Americans have the wrong
view on, then CR is false.
➢
C
Therefore, CR is false.
Give a rationale for each premise.
➢
P1 For societal standards, abortion should be correct, however the majority of Americans think it
is wrong.
➢
P2 CR means that if the majority thinks something is wrong or right, it is. However, in this case
the majority is wrong.
In your opinion, is this argument sound? Explain.
➢
Yes because all the premises are true & the premises lead to and guarantee the truth of the
conclusion making it a valid argument which is also sound.