Links: Assignments and Study Guides
Review Lists and Sample Quizzes
Sample Mid-Term Exam
SAMPLE FINAL EXAM
Phil. 160 Introduction to Ethics Summer II 2006
Instructor: Dr.
Office Hours: 12.30-1 p.m. daily and by appointment.
Text: Course Packets at UC Bookstore.
And, an English to English Dictionary (or English to L,
if L is your first Language).
Course Requirements:
!
Attend class and
participate, do the readings, do all written assignments, pass the exams. Two exams. (multiple choice, T/F, see
sample exams on web page). First exam worth 120 pts, Final exam is
comprehensive, worth 180 pts.
!
Quizzes: there
will be frequent (twice a week or more) unannounced quizzes. Missed quizzes cannot be made up. Each
quiz will be worth 6 – 12 points, and will consist of multiple choice and T/F
questions. Total, 20-30 pts. Quiz points
are extra credit.
!
Study guides are due at least once a
week. They must be turned in when
due. They are worth about 125 pts total, which is more than %25 of the
grade, therefore it is essential that they be completed and turned in on time.
!
One purpose of the
study guides is to prepare you for classes. Therefore late guides do not serve
one of the main purposes. Consequently,
guides turned in one class late can receive partial credit only provided you
have a legitimate excuse. No guide will be accepted at all, for any reason,
more than one class late.
!
Attendance. Regular attendance and informed participation
in class are essential since (a) not everything covered in class is included in
the text (b) you will need help with this material, and that is what class
sessions, and the instructor, are for. 50 points.
Extra Credit: There are only two ways to earn any extra credit: 1. Quiz points are extra credit. 2. Carefully prepared study questions can earn extra points.
Total points ca. 475.
Normally %90 of total points gets you an 'A', %80 a 'B' and so forth,
but significant adjustments for curve are made when necessary.
The purpose of the
study guides is threefold:
1.To ensure that you actually
read the assigned texts, and read them carefully;
2. To assist you in
developing capacities for close reading of difficult texts (development of
reading comprehension);
3. To help you determine what
parts of the texts give you the most difficulty.
#3 will be achieved if you come to class prepared to ask about study guide questions which you could not figure out or are very unsure of, AFTER you have made a reasonable effort. Reading the text once does not generally constitute a reasonable effort if you find yourself "stopped" by a question. You may need to go over a text several times, make notes on it, and THINK about it. If, having done that, you still do not "get it" then you should bring up that question in class.
Rules for Preparation
of the guide;
1. Guides must be prepared on 8.5 x 11 sheets, preferably white and lined, unless printed from a PC (which is a good idea).
2. You can use the front and back of a sheet.
3. You must not continue an answer from one sheet to another (there will be no questions that will require more than one sheet).
4. Questions will be assigned for each class period. Once a week or more one of the assigned questions will be collected, graded and returned to you.
How the Study Guides are Graded The guides are
graded generously. If your answers indicate that you have indeed read the
material and made a genuine attempt to understand, you will generally get some
credit even if your answers are wrong!
Exceptions would be very simple questions, including many of the
fill-in-the-blank questions, which may be graded more strictly.
ON-LINE HELP
. Access the link for the
Phil. 160 web page through the UTM page (click on faculty staff, then on
faculty web pages) or by using this address directly: www.utm.edu/~nlillega/lillegard.htm. There you will find a glossary, some sample
quiz and exam material, and links to other helpful sites. I do not use blackboard. Everything
you need will be on the 160 web page.
Class Conduct,
Instructor's Role, etc. What I Expect of
Students.
1.Treat each other with
respect. 2.Treat the instructor with respect. 3.Do not talk unless called on.
4. Do not leave the room
without permission except in extreme emergency. 5. Be on time.
6. Be eager to learn. The best indication of progress is engagement
with the issues and ideas we deal with.
7. Do not be afraid to say
"I don't understand." 8. Expect the same of me as I expect of you.
(Except for #3, and #4, of course. You will see that I follow #7 a
lot.)
NB. Any kind of cheating is a
serious offense and will be dealt with accordingly. It also ought to be beneath
the dignity of each and every student.
Classes will consist of a mix of lecture,
discussion, possible occasional reports, and watching of a few
videos (designated as >
reviews. Students are
expected to treat other students in a polite fashion, even though they should
feel free
to express disagreement on ANY topic or ANY
claim that is advanced by anyone, including the
instructor. At the same time, each student must attempt
to exercise responsibility by keeping discussion
focused on the subject at hand and by
listening carefully to the responses of the instructor and other
participants.
Particular value is placed on argument, as
opposed to mere expression of opinion.
Say what you believe, but be prepared to say why. Students should feel
free to interrupt with questions or comments, even though on occasion answers
may be postponed for the sake of coherence. The instructor is pledged to careful
consideration of any view, including those that he finds unsupportable, and to
critical thinking with any student who values thoughtful discussion. Students
who feel a need for individual help
should feel free to ask.
The following course outline is very general. You will be
expected to make applications, aided by the text. For example, you should be
able to apply the principle of double effect to a case of abortion.
Course Outline: (subject to adjustments)
July 11. Introduction, The size of morality, relativism The inevitability of Moral Judgment
12. Relativism and its relatives. Goodness, reason and tragedy, moral truth.
13. Goodness, reason, communal norms etc.
14. The good life, reason and virtue.
July 17. Virtue and happiness
18. “ “
19. Religion and Ethics. Natural law.
20 . Wisdom and Folly. The principle of double effect;
21. Divine commands.
July 24. Religious morality
25. review
26. Midterm Exam
27. Egoism, Reason and Ethics
28. Egoism etc.
July 31. Feeling, Reason, and Morality
Aug. 1. Feeling etc. “ “ “
2.
3.
4. Rightness, Reason and Consequences
Aug. 7. “ “ “ (
8. Reviving Virtue Ethics
August 9 Virtue ethics ICA
10 Review.
11. Final Exam
July 12. read p. 3-23. ANSWER QUESTIONS 1- 20
13. read p. 23 – 36. Answer questions 21-35
14.read p. 36-69 Answer questions 1-14
Read p. 77-87 Answer questions 1- 16.
July 17. Read 87- 108 Answer 17-59
18. “ 109 - 121 60-82
19. 121-27 83- 95
138-143 109-114
20 . 141-160 1-20
21. 161- 173 21- 30
July 24. 173-185 31- 43
25. REVIEW
26. Midterm Exam
27 210 – 231 1-18
28 231-246 19-38
July 31 246-260 1-13
Aug. 1 260-69 14 - 17 July
2. 1-17 1-25
3. 17 – 28 26-47
4. Begin Mill q. 1
August 7 7-27 2- 25
8
EQ 2. Compare and
contrast the moral thinking of the people of Le Chambon
with Mill’s ideas about moral thinking. With Kant’s.
EQ 3. Does the
Cruzan family reason in utilitarian fashion? Explain. Aristotelian
fashion? Explain
9 Engineering human life.
10 Review.
11. Final Exam
I. Moral relativism –
two kinds.
a. Protagoras – man is
the measure. The individual?
b. Montaigne – “Custom”
is king.
c. the pattern of
argument implied in Montaigne and common among relativists:
i. people have varying moral customs (beliefs, standards).
THEREFORE
ii. there
are no objectively right moral customs
(beliefs, standards).
Ques. Does ii follow from i?
d. ii does not follow
deductively from i. But i
might give inductive support to ii.
1. Moral
disagreements are not like disagreements in the sciences, for example. In what way?
II. Against
Relativism (Rachels)
a.
relativist ideas are expressed in a variety of ways: (add your own)
b. the “cultural
differences argument” is unsound. An
argument from analogy: state it!
c. Some
(bad)consequences of taking cultural relativism (CR) seriously.
1. If CR
is true, we could never condemn the practices of a different society. So, is that so bad?
Examples:
2. If CR is true, we
can determine what is right or wrong just by consulting our social rules.
Examples:
So what?
3. If CR is true,
there can be no such thing as moral progress. Why not?
So what?
d. Cultural relativists overestimate the moral differences between cultures.
Examples;
e. All cultures (societies) have some moral beliefs in common.
Examples:
How come?
MIDGLEY
But surely it is always wrong to
make moral judgments? (how come?)
1. What do the stories show?
a. false universality
b. immoralist moral
reformers
2. The concern for freedom and
privacy
3. Problems with knowledge, in
general, and in ethics particularly.
i.
can’t know
therefore can’t judge
a. relation of 2 to 3. Entangled.
Since no knowledge,
no grounds for infringing on freedom.
p. 28 It is not possible
to be so detached.
DISCUSSION
1. do q. 27.
2. Accepting differences –
Postive:
Negative:
Tolerance-
What does the word mean?
Multiculturalism –
Positive:
Negative:
Thick Ethical
Concepts.
The possibility of
real moral disagreement.
Chinese cat-skinners
GLENDON: THE UN
DECLARATION
Cf. the
1. similarities
2. differences
One (or more) way(s) of
grounding ethical claims.
SOPHOCLES, SOCRATES,
PLATO
What is THE question?
Focus on discrete actions
Focus on character
Antigone –
1. When duties conflict, then what?
a. Duty to family, brother
b. to larger community
c. Duty to “God” or some higher source of obligation?
Antigone associates duty to family with a higher duty, the requirements of the Gods.
Such duties override all others. But, there is also the emotional attachment.
Notes
Socrates/Plato
Trying to come to grips with
a. tragic dilemmas
b. sophistic relativism
1. The Euthyphro
a. what sorts of disagreements provoke fighting? How come?
b. could morality be rooted in the will of God?
2. The Protagoras
a. getting rid of tragic dilemmas by denying that there are moral incommensurabilities.
i. how do that? Find a single metric
ii. “pleasure” will work. All pleasures are “commensurable” Explain.
a. to act rightly is to act so as to maximize pleasure. E.g.
b. to act wrongly is to miscalculate pleasures. E.g.
c. miscalculating is a kind of stupidity or ignorance. So acting wrongly is simply a kind of ignorance.
Virtue=knowledge. Vice=ignorance.
3. The Republic
1. Moral truth exceeds everything this worldly, including pleasure.
Problem: what motivates anyone to do what is good, if goodness is beyond this world? Why be just, for example, if it gives no advantage in THIS world?
2. Why be moral? The ring of Gyges.
Body Heat.
ARISTOTLE
Asking THE question:
Whatever the answer, it must take account of “what people aim at.” For surely people aim at the good (as they, rightly or wrongly, conceive it).
1. The aim is something desired for its own sake. Otherwise?
Examples of things desired as means and of things desired for their own sake.
2. Common views on the “aim” or goal.
A. Happiness (eudaimonia)
i. Desired for its own sake. Not a means to anything.
ii. Problem: what IS it?
Common views
3. Happiness and
proper and excellent functioning.
a. A “good” x is one that performs
its proper function well. Examples.
b. Do human beings (‘mankind’) have
a proper function? If so we could figure out what a ‘good’ human being (life)
is.
i. how to answer this
Fill in the summary
of ch. I, on p. 96
4. The concept of a virtue:
a. a
disposition
i. to feel, act, choose
a. feeling and pleasure
ii. the
mean
b. what the
“mean” means (and doesn’t mean)
c.
perceptiveness, salience etc.
5. How you get virtue
Cf. questions (also 79,1)
6. Choice
a. the
voluntary – actions that originate in the agent. Cf. modern determinism. See
109
i. involuntary acts involve regret
a. in between cases – dumping cargo.
ii. what
about actions done
in ignorance-e.g. when drunk
through ignorance-particular circumstances
b. choice
and deliberation
choice=df
cf. q. 68
a.
choice and character -
7. examples
(joking etc.)
a.
the sheer size of morality
8. Practical wisdom
a.
a master virtue
b.
opposed to technicians. Cf. modern technicians. 74
c.
the wise persons pursuit of happiness 75
i. no method
d.
facts and values
i. reason as instrument
e.
reason and teleology
9. Incontinence - ???
83
10. Friendship –
kinds
a.
the best kind 126)
b.
its importance for the good life, its ties to community (politics)
c.
friendship and virtue - 93
11. Aristotle on
ethical “science” (Nussbaum)
a.
vulnerability
12. Moral education
and autonomy
13. Friendship
a.
self knowledge
b.
vulnerability
RELIGIOUS ETHICS
Orienting Questions
1. Aquinas – natural
law.
a. The idea of “law” not prominent
in Plato/Aristotle. Law presupposes a law-maker.
b. Theistic views have a “lawmaker”
in God.
2. Reason/Law –
connection between Aquinas and Aristotle
a. it
belongs to reason to command
i. reason is superior in a human, by nature (think of
Aristotle), therefore fit to command.
ii.
only the commands of reason make real
law, as opposed to conventions (which may be bad, wrong etc).(150)
1. consider all the bad laws. Are they all unreasonable?
iii.
that is because reason, as in Aristotle, orders activity towards a proper
end. The commands of reason “direct to
the (proper, real) end” (teleology) (149) so they CAN’T be bad.
3. Law is directed to
the COMMON good. This also fits with Aristotle.
a. the
proper end is life-in-community.
4. Promulgation – law
requires it. This fits to the theistic conception.
Def. of law =
The obvious question: where (when,
by whom) was it promulgated? See reply to Obj. 1
5. Kinds of law
Eternal law
Natural law
Human law
Divine law
a. eternal
law-God is “ruler of the entire universe”
i. the “community” of the universe?
b. natural
law – notice
i. notice the “strict notion” of law as requiring requiring reason for “participating in”
c. human
law – why do we need it?
Because
natural law provides only general principles. For the actual conduct of daily communal life, we need lots of detail.
i. human law consists of inferences from, and
specifications of, natural law.
e.g. Do
good avoid evil
Be sociable
ii. again,
relation of human law to “custom”
d. Divine law – why to we need IT?
Four reasons
q. 11
e. The natural law is the same for
all (anti relativist; note reply to obj. 3 in art. 4)
i. both with respect to rectitude and knowledge =
ii. particular
inferences vary e.g.
iii. the
various origins of differences in custom or belief
a. permissible differences in details
b. circumstances
c. corruption
f. How it can change.
Note esp. Art 5, Obj. 2 and the reply!!!
Slavery?
6. The principle of
double effect.
a. is it
ever permissible to kill a person?
i. the three conditions (do q. 22)
7. Wisdom and folly:
a. wisdom
is a “gift” (therefore not available to
unbelievers?)
b. you can better see what wisdom is by considering folly
i. dullness, unresponsiveness to justified criticism (Turner, the death camp doctors)
DIVINE COMMAND MORALITY
Commands and obligations
1. cf. the Euthyphro dilemma
2. Duns Scotus
a. God can will anything except contradictions
b. compare the Abraham story to ps. 1.
c. will vs. intellect (Scotus vs. Aquinas)
3. Voluntarism –
a. Scotus and Luther
b. how do you get rid of the arbitrariness problem?
i. maybe by stipulating that only the commands of a GOOD God obligate.
a. the social nature of obligation
b. the relationship and social bonds to God.
4. Rachel’s objections
a. a good person never does something simply because he was commanded. A true moral agent is always AUTONOMOUS
b. religious worshippers are never autonomous, therefore they cannot be moral.
c.
EGOISM, REASON AND
ETHICS
1. Is Lord of the Flies a parable of “how it really is with people?” If
so, how is it, really?
a. The dominant motives
are . . .
b.
the only way to prevent chaos is thru the imposition of law by force . . .Cf. Glaucon/Thrasymachus in Plato’s Republic.
i. think about Ralph and Jack
ii. think
about Piggy
iii. what
about the conch?
iv. what
about the naval officer?
2. Hobbes: the “Laws
of Nature”
a. The state of nature – a state of
war
in such a state
life is ____, _____, ___.
No one can “win” because?
Facts that prove we could be in such
a state.
b. three
factors that cause “quarrel”
i.
ii.
iii.
b. What does “justice” amount to in
such a state? Cf. Piggy
c. There is thus a motive for
replacing it with law. “Reason” suggests
convenient articles of peace. Such as
They are “laws of
nature” Such as
i. seek peace
ii.
be willing to lay down the state-of – nature “rights” when others do also
i.e. enter a “SOCIAL CONTRACT”
iii. KEEP the contract
But . . .how can I trust others to do the same? I can ONLY WHEN
there is a
COERCIVE
POWER. Prior to that, there
is no right, wrong, just, unjust.
“Injustice” = violating the contract
Justice= a rule of reason. Reason
tells me what is necessary for peace, survival.
Reason is concerned only with MEANS.
e. The WHOLE OF MORALITY consists in
these laws.
Compare to Plato, Aristotle,
Aquinas, Scotus.
Summing up: Egoism
and altruism
a. Hobbes – egoism
1. Pity –
rooted in?
2. Charity –
rooted in?
3.
Tautological egoism
4.
Psychological egoism
Ques. How should one respond
to a.3? a.4?
3.
a. self love is a “general affection” – a desire for ?
b. love of others (altruism) is a particular affection
a. examples of particular affections.
c. the “hedonistic paradox”
d. confusions about the relations between self love and
happiness, egoism, selfishness.
i. “benevolence” (love of others) may actually increase
happiness in benevolent person.
4.
5. Baier –
reason ala Hobbes
a.
notice that morals is based in reason or fact. So it is not all subjective.
b.
what is the response to someone with the ring of Gyges
who protests that they have good reason to violate moral rules?
i. the rational person allows
moral reasons to trump reasons of self interest BECAUSE. . .
6. Self interest,
cooperation, and the Prisoner’s dilemma.
See the chart, p.239.
a.
one cannot maximize self interest without cooperation.
b.
looking out for #1 gets in the way of looking out for #1!!
c.
in fact people do cooperate. Are they “irrational.”?
i. the problem of free riders
and
suckers.
ii.
Once again, rationality is pitted against the common good. Compare to
Aristotle, Aquinas.
d.
saving cooperation thru repeated PDs.
7. A biological version of the PD.
Does nature select cooperators, or
egoists?
a.
natural selection operates on genes, and only individuals have genes.
i. individual fitness
i. inclusive fitness
b.
how free riders get dumped: inclusive fitness and tit for tat. Repeated PD.
7. Broadie
on an Aristotelian view of egoism , reason and
justice.
a.
consider what it takes to raise a child.
Ch. VII Reason,
Feeling, and Morality
1. Huck Finn
a. What Huck KNOWS
What Huck FEELS p. 251
b. It appears that some
of his feelings are natural, i.e. not the result of training.
i. what might BE the basis for his
feelings towards Jim?
ii. Conscience, thought, feeling
2. Hume: there has been a
controversy
a.
what exactly IS it? Compare aesthetic
and moral responses.
b. Evidences of a role
for reason
c.
evidences of feeling as necc and suff.
i. reason is “cool”254
ii. what is not unreasonable 254!
d.
utility and reason -
i. knowing what to do to get a
useful result
ii. feeling that is IS useful
e.
reason cannot motivate to action.
f. projectivism – 257
g. Is – Ought q.11
3. Emotivism
and prescriptivism
a.
hurrah x
do x
b.
non statemental uses of language
c.
objections to emotivism – 261
4. Morality and Sentimentality
Bennet on Himmler, Edwards, Huck.
Types - 263
a.
who is worse, Himmler or Edwards, the Walrus or the carpenter?
5. Projectivism
–
6. Is-ought and institutional facts.
a.
examples of IFs.
b.
how to deriver ought from is.
DUTY, REASON, DIGNITY
1. Duty and the”must”
(deontology)
2. Immanuel Kant
a.
opposition to Aristotle
b.
to Aquinas etc.
c.
to Hobbes
d.
to Hume
The main issue –
duty vs. “inclination.”
3. The categorical imperative
version 1.
a. The golden rule
b. “law” and impartiality
c.
law and consistency
i. consistency and contradiction
d.
what about conflicting duties
4. Categorical imperative version 2
a.
using people (cf. q.17)
b.
making objects of people
5. The notions of
freedom=dignity=law=consistency=
autonomy
Further Discussion
1. Prima Facie duties and conflicts of duties (Ross)
2. Sex, using people, objectifying
people. The
freedom-dignity-autonomy issue.
i. marriage as the solution (?)
3. natural goodness
– what ARE our intuitions? What DO we admire MORALLY?
i.
cf. Aristotle’s great souled man
ii. Hume’s kindly
peasant
4. Moral education and principles
(Kohlberg).
i. if education follows natural development, there will
be not violation of “autonomy.”
ii. what
is the natural development?
5. Gilligan-male bias in Kohlberg.
Cf. Aristotle.
UTILITARIANISM
Reason, Consequences, Social
Engineering
1. Raskolnikov
as social engineer
a. “arithmetic”
b.
problem; what are we adding up?
c.
problem; contingency
i. foreseeable consequences
2. Mill –
a.
actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote ----?
i.
“consequentialism”
ii. kinds
of pleasures (pains)
b. “higher pleasures” How decide which
are higher?
i. the Hyacinth problem
c.
rejection of virtue theory – what ultimately matters is actions
i. nobleness of character and
individual vs. overall happiness (q. 12)
ii. good character producing bad actions - examples
d.
rule utilitarianism
3. Criticism-q.17
Williams
a. Jim case – how should
I regard it (not just, what should I DO). Q. 18
b. George case- q.19
4. Defense – Hare
a.
contrived and unrealistic examples
b.
relying on situations where training, rather than calculating, comes into play.
i. how would a good utilitarian
train up a child?
Virtues
and traditions (MacIntyre).
a. Virtues and the good for a whole
life (the nature of a virtue).
b. human
action embedded in story or narrative q.
85
1. learning
to live virtuously through learning stories.
c. “quests” as searches for the good
of a “whole life.”
d. virtues,
communal stories, and community.
e. virtues,
“practices” and traditions.
f.
illustration: the people of Le Chambon. Notice the adjectives used to describe these
people. Notice how they describe themselves.
Relevant concepts:
1. virtue
2. a
“whole life”
3. a
whole life and narrative
4. learning
to live (well or badly, virtuously or viciously) from examples, including those
given in communally shared stories, traditions.