Possible Exam Questions for the first Ethical Inquiry Exam (on March 1))
Note:
I will choose several questions from this list to be answered quite briefly and
one or two questions to be answered at greater length. You will be able to consult your textbooks
but not any notes or handouts or other papers.
1. Clearly
there can be important differences between the ethical beliefs that prevail in
one culture and those that prevail in some other cultures. What might one say if one wanted to
acknowledge this fact without accepting the doctrine of cultural
relativism?
2. Why does James Rachels think that subjectivism is
unacceptable as a theory of ethics? Is he right?
3. What is the best argument against ethical egoism,
according to James Rachels? Do you
think it’s a good argument?
4.
Explain and assess Peter Singer’s argument for the claim that people in
affluent countries like the US should be doing a lot more to help feed the
world’s hungry people.
5. Why does Garret Hardin
think it would be a bad idea to try to feed the world’s hungry people? What do you think of his case?
6. How does J. S. Mill try to justify his view that
some pleasures are qualitatively better than others? What do you think of this view?
7.
How does Mill answer the objection that utilitarianism is impractical,
because we don’t have time to calculate the effect of our actions on the
general happiness? Does his answer
succeed?
8. What is the difference between act utilitarianism
and rule utilitarianism?
9.
What do you think is
the most important criticism that can be made of utilitarianism? Do you think there is any way to save the
theory, or does this criticism show that it is no good? (Explain.)
10.
According to Rachels (in his article in Applied Ethics), active
euthanasia (killing) is no worse (and in some cases better) than passive
euthanasia (letting people die by withholding lifesaving treatment). How does he try to prove this point and how
good is his argument?
11.
What reasons might a utilitarian have for opposing the legalization of
euthanasia?
12. What is the difference between a ‘hypothetical imperative’ and a ‘categorical imperative’, as Kant uses these terms?
13. According to
Kant there is only one Categorical Imperative (though it can be formulated in
several different ways). In plain
English, explain the meaning of the so-called “universal law formulation” of
the Categorical Imperative.
14.
How can the
Categorical Imperative be used as a test for whether an action is morally
right? (What steps should one go
through to apply this test?) Do you
think this is a good way to determine if an action is right or wrong?
15.
How does a Kantian approach to the question of whether or not we ought to
feed the hungry differ from a utilitarian approach?
16.
Briefly, what is the retributive theory of punishment? What do you think about this theory?
17.
How does a utilitarian approach to the problem of capital punishment
differ from a Kantian approach? Which do you think is better?
18.
Why does Primoratz think that death is the only morally appropriate
penalty for murder?
The
following questions are on new material and will be judged accordingly:
19.
Hugo Adam Bedau says, “the lesson
taught by capital punishment is not what its retributivist defenders infer from
their theory. Far from being a symbol
of justice, it is a symbol of brutality and stupidity.” What reasons does he give for this
view? How good are they?
20.
How does Ernest van den Haag try to rebut the claim that we should
abolish capital punishment because it is not being applied fairly (to use his
terminology, it is “maldistributed”)?
Does his rebuttal succeed?
21.
Anthony Amsterdam presents evidence to show that the death penalty is
applied in a racially discriminatory way.
What conclusion does he think we should draw from this fact? Why does he think the Supreme Court was
wrong to say that this evidence was irrelevant in the McClesky case?