PHI 192: Final Study Guide
PHI 192: Final Study Guide PHI 192 - M001
Popular in Introduction to Moral Theory
Popular in PHIL-Philosophy
This 5 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 54 views. For similar materials see Introduction to Moral Theory in PHIL-Philosophy at Syracuse University.
Reviews for PHI 192: Final 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 Final Exam Study Guide General instructions when you explain a view make sure you de ne or explain all technical terminology you use When you evaluate an argument you must discuss an interesting objection even if you think the argument is sound 1 State and explain Kant39s Formula of Universal Law FUL Happiness is not valuable without a good will 103 Only acts done from a motive of duty have quotmoral worthquot 105 The moral worth of an action is determined by the reason it was performed 105 An act is morally right iff the agent can consistently will that everyone follow her maxim What is it to will inconsistently Examples Wiing something impossible eg P amp P Wiing a maxim that defeats one s purpose in acting The maxim of an act is the rule by which it is performed which includes the reason for which it is performed Whenever I will in order to eg Whenever I have made a promise I will keep it in order to maintain my good reputation The Formula for Universal Law states quotAct only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that is should become universal lawquot Kant 88 What Kant means when he states this law is that an action can only be ethical if it would make sense for everyone to perform the action on a regular basis For example let s say a person could not decide whether letting someone copy data from his lab report would be moral or immoral The student might feel like this is cheating but also might feel he has to help out those in need According to Kant this student only needs to ask if his proposed action could be made universal if everyone were to let others copy their data what would happen There would probably be very little learning because everyone would merely be copying data from the small number of people who have to do the work More importantly if everyone were to copy data making the action universal who would do the initial work Obviously it is impossible for everyone to copy the work because there would be no starting point to copy from so this action could not be made universal so it would be immoral The student will have to nd some other way to help his friend some way that does not involve cheating 2 Present explain and evaluate the Amusement Park Argument against FUL Kris arrives 30 minutes early to the theme park in hopes of avoiding long lines 1lf FUL is true then Kris39s act is morally wrong 2Kris39s act is not morally wrong 3Therefore FUL is not true Explain lf everybody going to the amusement park arrives 30 minutes early then the lines will be just as crowded if he arrived on time to the park Evaluate I can object to the rst premisis because if the formula of universal law says Kris does this action to create maxim lf everybody followed this action there would be no maxim therefore there will be a contradiction to the law Kris39s maxim is getting to the ride early before the line gets too crowded because he wants to go on the rides to have fun Kris39s act is morally right according to the FUL because arriving to the amusement park early is okay and he will have fun So if everybody went to the amusement park for the reason to have fun just like Kris then there will be no contradiction to choosing to go to the amusement park 2 State and explain Kant39s Formula of Humanity FH quotSo act that you use humanity always at the same time as an end never merely as a meansquot 112 FH An act is morally permissible iff the agent treats humanity as an end not merely as a means What is it to treat someone merely as a means Treating someone as a means quotHe whom I want to use for my purposes by such a lying promise cannot possibly agree to my way of behaving toward himquot 113 X treats Y merely as a means df X acts on a maxim to which Y could not in principle consent For example iwhen I get my groceries and go to checkout I am going to the cashier as an end rather than a means Since I am doing this as a means my act is morally permissible and lam doing it humainly 3 Present explain and evaluate the Surprise Party Argument against FH 1lf FH is true then throwing a surprise party is morally wrong 2Throwing a surprise party is not morally wrong 3Therefore FH is not true The Surgeon Case It is not morally permissible to cut up one healthy patient to save ve sick ones formula of humanity It is not morally permissible to cut up one healthy patient to save ve sick ones State the Doctrine of Double Effect DDE and explain it by showing how it applies to a concrete example DDE there is a moral difference between i bringing about an evil as a side effect of an action that brings about good consequences and ii bringing about an evil as a means to bringing about good consequences 377 1 is morally permissible becasuse the side effect of evil is not the orginal intention The original intention is for good consequences The second case has two intentions one bringing up good consequences and one bringing evil things The problem here is that the intent of bringing evil consequences is n ot moray permissible because this makes you an unethical person The Fat Man Case What is the difference between the original trolley case and the fat man on the bridge case Explain what the quotTrolley Problemquot is Explain how DDE might be used to solve the Trolley Problem Describe the quotLoop Casequot and explain why it is supposed to be a problem for DDE The Trolley Problem Why is it permissible to turn the trolley but not morally permissible to cut up the patient and distribute his organs Trolley Case It is morally permissible to turn the trolley Surgeon Case It is not morally permissible to kill one healthy person to save the other four patients If DDE is true then The Trolley case is morally permissible The guy that pulled the lever did not have evil intentions to speci cally kill the person The death of the one person was a side effect that was not intended to the unstopping trolley This is different than the surgeons intentions because killing the healthy person was an evil intention only to save the other four Loop case the death of the one is required in order to save the ve If it is permissible to turn the trolley then FH and DDE do not solve the trolley problem Foot s conclusion quotthe distinction between direct and oblique intention doctrine of double effect plays only a quite subsidiary role in determining what we say in these cases while the distinction between avoiding injury and bringing aid is very important indeedquot 385 6 Present and explain the quotRight to Lifequot argument against abortion How does Thomson evaluate this argument Do you agree with Thomson39s evaluation Explain your reasoning 1The RTL always outweighs the right to bodily integrity 2f the RTL always outweighs the right to bodily integrity then abortion is morally wrong 3Therefore abortion is morally wrong 0 The right to what one needs to survive The right not to be killed The right not to be killed unjustly 7 State and explain Aristotle39s Criterion of Virtue ACV Virtues are settled dispositions to feel emotions and perform actions Families if V is a proposed moral virtue then the Vfamily is the set of actions and emotions from which V chooses an action or emotion An act is in the mean of the thing if it is halfway between the biggest member of its family and the smallest member of its family An act is in the relative mean if it is neither excessive nor de cient under its circumstances Aristotle39s Criterion of Virtue ACV V is a virtue if and only if V is a settled disposition to choose acts and emotions that are in the relative mean of the V family 6 The Relative Mean An act is in the relative mean of its family if and only if it is an act that would be chosen by the person of practical wisdom quotNow it is thought to be a mark of a man of practical wisdom to be able to deliberate well about what sorts of thing conduce to the good life in generalquot From NE Bk VI Ch 5 S has practical wisdom df S knows what things are good and bad for people and knows the best way to achieve the good things 8 Present explain and evaluate the Angry Andy Argument against ACV 1f Aristotle39s Criterion of Virtue is true then Angry Andy is virtuous 2Angry Andy is not virtuous 3Therefore Aristotle39s Criterion of Virtue is not true 9 State and explain the Virtuous Agent View VAV An act is morally permissible iff it is what a virtuous agent would characteristically do in the circumstances A virtuous agent39s view would be as example I never insult anybody or say bad things to people If you drug me lam angry and insulting somebody This is not a normal characteristic of me and therefore it is not a normal act Since this act is out of character I 10 Present explain and evaluate the Pedophile Argument against VAV 1lf the Virtuous Agent View is true then it is permissible for the pedophile to walk past the playground 2lt is not permissible for the pedophile to walk past the playground 3Therefore the Virtuous Agent View is not true Virtuous Advisor An act is morally right iff it is what a virtuous person would advise the agent to do in the circumstances 11 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'