PHI 192: Exam 3 Study guide
PHI 192: Exam 3 Study guide PHI 192 - M001
Popular in Introduction to Moral Theory
Popular in PHIL-Philosophy
This 4 page Study Guide was uploaded by Emily.nicole on Sunday October 11, 2015. The Study Guide belongs to PHI 192 - M001 at Syracuse University taught by T. Towner in Summer 2015. Since its upload, it has received 65 views. For similar materials see Introduction to Moral Theory in PHIL-Philosophy at Syracuse University.
Reviews for PHI 192: Exam 3 Study guide
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 10/11/15
PHI 192 Study Guide Exam 3 Final version 1 Explain what a criterion of morally permissible behavior is De ne or otherwise explain any technical terms you use A creiterion of moral permissibility tells us what makes an act token morally permissible Act A is morally permissible if and only ififf to say that X is Giff X is Fis to say thatanything that is F is G and anything that is G is F X has a face iff X has 2 eyes a nose and a mouthwhat about Sesame StreetBernie has no nose 2 De ne or otherwise explain the following terms morally permissible morally wrong morally obligatory Three Interrelated Concepts 1 Morallv permissible to say that an act is morally permissible is to say that morality allows one to do it 2 Morallv Wrond to say that an act is morally wrong is to say that it is not morally permissible 3 Morallv Obligatorv to say that an act is morally obligatory is to say that it would be morally wrong not to do it 3 State and explain the Divine Command Theory DCT Why might someone believe DCT Present explain and evaluate the Euthyphro Argument against DCT The Devine Command Theorv DCT an act is morally permissible iff it does not violate any of God39s Commandments Someone might believe the DCT because many people claim that morality is impossible without the belief in a supernatural entity god from which our sense of right and wrong ultimately derives And yet Plato put a huge hole in this argument back in the 4th century BCE Think about this excerpt from Plato39s Euthyphro Socrates is speakingSocrates Robologue The EuthVDhro Argument Against DCT 1 If DCT is true then acts are permissible only because God permits them 2 It is not the case that acts are permissible only because God permits them 3 Therefore DCT is not true Explanation 1 There is no way to objectively know what God wants 2 What God wants seems contradictory at times eg how to square quotlove your enemiesquot with the slaughter of the Amelikites 3 There is no agreement among quotexpertsquot on God eg Christians keep Sunday butJews keep Saturday A few Christians like Seventh Day Baptists and 7th day adventists keep Saturday like the Jews Are not the 10 Commandments a bedrock belief 4 Socrates develops the following in order to do good because it is holy you rst have to do the holy because it is good It is a vicious circle Evaluation 1 response Only God can guarantee objevie morality 2 response Only God can violate his own rules 3 response God does not havre to take sides on arguments of one human system vs another 4 response The holy hosion is the very possibility of the good agathon Argument against the Divine Command theory 1 If the Divine Command theory is true then we should always obey God39s commands no matter what they are 2 If we should always obey God39s commands no matter what they are then we should do so even if God were to command us to commit atrocities such as to create as much pain among innocent children as possible 3 It is absurd to think that we should create as much pain among innocent children as possible even if God were to command us to do so 4 Therefore the Divine Command theory is not true 4 State and explain Utilitarianism Why might someone believe Utilitarianism Present explain and evalute the following arguments against Utilitarianism The Lack of Time Argument The PromiseKeeping Argument The Watering the Lawn Argument The Colosseum Argument producesthe tota Utilitarianism an act is morally permissible and only maximizes Hedonism utiity Smart says quotUtilitarianism is the doctrine that the rightness of actions is to be judged by their consequencesquot The hedonic Utility of an actthe total amount of pleasure it amount of pain it produces An act maximizes hedonic utility iff no alternative has a greater hedonic utiity Two acts are alternatives only if it is impossible to do both Someone may believe Utilitarianism is true because this story Again defenders of utility often nd themselves challenged to reply to such objections as this Before acting one doesn39t have time to calculate and weigh the effects on the general happiness of any line of conductMill Example Utility Chart Phineas and Pherb build tree housebuild portal to Marsnothing 1 The Lack of Time Argument 1 If Utilitarianism is true then we are always srequired to calcylate the values fo alternatives before acting 2 We are not always required to do that 3 Therefore utilitarianism isn39t true what is best for wellbeing goes against themselves rues aren39t important just maximizing utility is Explanation To calculate utilities is a to gure out what all of ones alternatives are b to calculate the hedonic utility of each of these alternatives c to identify which of these alternatives maximizes hedonic utility Rationale for Part 1 All says that an act is right just in case it mazimizes hedonic tility So the only way to nd out which of your alternatives is right on AU is to gure out which one maximizes hedonic utility And the only way to do that is to calculate the utilities before acting Thus all requires that we calculate utilities before action Rationale for Part 2 Suppose my son Henry runs out onto Broadway distracted by a dragon y The cars are racing towards him If I calculate the utilities before doing anything Henry will be hit by the bus Clearly I should just grab him without calculating Thus it is not always right to calculate utilities before ac ng EvaluateThe quotLack of Timequot Argument P1 lf AU is true then it is always right to calculate utilities before acting P2 Sometimes it is not right to calculate utilities before acting CTherefore AU is not true This argument is UNSOUND P1 is FALSE P1 If AU is true then it is always right to calculate utilities before acting This can be shown to be false using exactly the case that proponents of the argument used to support P2 Alternatives hedonic utilitypull Henry from road 550 0 shout at bus driver 300 right 0 cover eyes 295 wrong 0 call 911 300 wrong 0 calculate utilities 305 wrong B The PromiseKeeping Argument Ross 1 If Utilitarianism is true then jack is morally obligated to break his promise 2 jack is not morally obligated to break his promise 3 Therefore Utilitariamisn is not true 0 Explanation Objection against premises 1 jack can39t necessarily break his promise for something better no moral importance just consequences of actions Objection to premises 2 What are the effects on me if I broke my promise can39t object to Smart s story Dentologyis the view that it can be permissible and perhaps even obligatory not to do what would have the best outcome Deontology is thus the denial of quotconsequentialismquot ls Deontology Irrational P1 If we all successfully follow Ross39 theory we39ll be less happy as a whole than if we all successfully follow utilitarianism P2 It would be irrational for us to follow a theory under which we would be less happy as a whole C1 Therefore it would be irrational for us to follow Ross39 theory P3 If it would be irrational for us to follow some moral theory then that theory cannot be the correct moral theory C2 Therefore Ross39 theory cannot be the correct moral theory C The Watering the Lawn Argument 1 2 3 If Utilitarianism is true then it is morally permissinle forJack to water his lawn It is not morally permissible forJack to water his lawn Therefore Utilitarianism is not true 0 Explanation Objection to the 1st premisisSuppose everybody did this If you use water nonessentially it will cause others to do the same If others do this it would have disastrous consequences Therefore your using water nonessentially is wrong because it will have disastrous consequences D The Colosseum Argument 1 2 3 If Utilitarianism is true then the emperor is morally obligated to throw the Christians to the lions The emperor is not morally obligated to throw the Christians to the lions Therefore Utilitarianism is not true 4 Present explain and evaluate the Bugatti Argument A The Bugatti Argument 6 7 1 Bob is morally obligated to divert the train to Bugatti 2 lfl Evaluation According to Singer the case of Bob and the Bugatti shows that 1 people are sometimes required to make large sacri ces for their loved ones 2 people are sometimes required to make large sacri ces for strangers 3 no one is required to make large sacri ces for the good of others 4 it is silly to become to attached to one39s possessions Present explain and evaluate the Survival Lottery Argument The Survival Lottery Argument 1 X ampY Present explain and evaluate Norcross s argument against eating factory farmed meat Be prepared for an EXTRACTO question
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'