Study Guide #2 – for the Midterm Exam

Phil 311-01 – Dr. T. Hoffmann – October 2010

Bold numbers to texts listed on the website: http://faculty.cua.edu/hoffmann/courses/311_1108/311.htm Just War • Explain the notions of “prima-facie obligation” and “actual obligation.” (↗ 5.1., p. 430) • Which prima-facie obligations are in conflict, in a case of war? (↗ 5.1., p. 433) • What are the classical criteria for a just war? (Learn them all!) (↗ 5.1., p. 428 for a brief list of the criteria; p. 435–441 for an explanation) • Explain the notions of “ius ad bellum” and “ius in bello.” (↗ 5.1., p. 428) • Concerning ius in bello, how does the Principle of Double Effect help to assess the moral legitimacy of raids that endanger civilians? (↗ 5.2., p. 153; p. 154–56) Principle (or Doctrine) of Double Effect (PDE) • Be ready to apply the PDE to specific scenarios. (I might provide you with a specific case, and your task would be to evaluate its ethical dimensions according to the PDE.) • What are the four conditions of the PDE that must be met simultaneously in order to justify actions with good and bad effects? (↗ 6.2.) • Explain the meaning of the third criterion (that the good effects must not be achieved by means of the evil effects). (↗ 6.2.) • Concerning “intentions”: – Explain the notion of “intention” (↗ 6.3., p. 50, last ¶ – p. 51, first ¶) – What is the difference between “intention” and “foreseeable consequences”? (↗ 6.3., p. 49; p. 51, last ¶ – p. 52, first ¶; p. 55) – What is the difference between “intention” and “motive”? (↗ 6.3., p. 50, last ¶; p. 51, second last ¶; pp. 55–56) – Explain its role in “specifying” the act, that is, in making an act of a certain kind, such as an act of killing rather than a act of life-saving, or an act of lying rather than simply an act of saying something false (↗ 6.3., p. 52, last ¶ – p. 53, 2 nd ¶; ↗ 7.1. + 7.2.) • Explain why in some cases, but not in others, the PDE can morally justify the use of morphine (↗ 6.3., p. 55) • Explain how the PDE justifies self-defense (↗ 6.4.) Lying • What does lying consist in (1) materially, (2) formally, (3) effectively? (↗ 7.1. + 7.2.) Conscience • How does Aquinas explain the notion of conscience? (↗ 8.1., p. 1, lines 4–5) • Why does an erring conscience bind (i.e., why must one not act contrary to an erring conscience)? (↗ 8.1., p. 1, lines 13–30; 8.2., p. 1) • When is a person who acts in accordance with an erring conscience excused and when not? (↗ 8.1., p. 2; 8.2., pp. 1–2; 8.3.) • How do involuntary ignorance, indirectly voluntary ignorance, and directly voluntary ignorance differ? (↗ 8.2., p. 2) • What should you do when you have a doubtful conscience? (↗ 8.1., p. 2, lines 32–33) Euthanasia • What stance does Rachels take on active euthanasia? (↗ 9.1.) • In which case is there no moral difference between “killing” and “letting die,” and in which case is there a difference? (↗ 9.1., p. 78–79, and lecture in class) • Why, according to the moral criteria learned so far (especially in connection with the PDE), is passive euthanasia in some cases justifiable, but not active euthanasia? (Notice that this is not a view shared by Rachels.)

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful