082416 study questions ethics

1. Define: philosophy (Greek definition)

2. Define: ethics
3. Explain the difference: descriptive ethics v. normative ethics
4. Evaluative words (like good, bad, right, wrong, should, shouldn’t, etc.) appear in
many contexts, including non-moral contexts.
a. Provide 3 examples of statements which involve evaluative words but are
non-moral contexts.
b. Provide an example of a statement which involves an evaluative word, but
which is clearly objectively true. Explain: Why is this objectively true?
c. Provide an example of a statement which involves an evaluative word, but
which is clearly subjective. Explain: Why is this only subjectively true?
[Note: Although I did not spend a lot of time explaining this, a statement
is subjectively true if it is merely a matter of an individual’s opinion, and
the answer given varies significantly among people. No definition is given
about what makes a claim objectively true, but for our purposes we treated
something as objectively true if rational people will all agree that
compelling/ persuasive reasons can be given for saying that it is true. This
definition has some difficulties: but we do not need to address these
difficulties for our purposes].
5. Herodotus
a. If you are given a quote from Herodotus (from the reading) be able to
explain what the quote means.
b. Herodotus used two examples to support the claim that each person thinks
that his or her own cultural norms are right or better than those of other
cultures. What were the examples he raised?
6. Cultural Ethical Relativism (CER)
a. What are the five central claims associated with CER?
b. What is the Cultural Differences Argument?
c. For the examples on slide 38 (or others like these) be able to determine
what the Cultural Ethical Relativist would say about each example (based
on the central claims of the theory that an action is right for a person if
his/her culture says it is right; it is wrong for the person if his/ her culture
says it is wrong).
d. Explain: What does it mean to say that one must always relativize
statements of right and wrong?
e. What does it mean to say that there are no universal truths in ethics?

082916
1. Explain: Ruth Benedict discussed the ideas of PSYCHOLOGICAL
NORMALITY & PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY.
a. According to Benedict, what is the relationship between these ideas and
ideas in ethics?
b. What do her ideas about normality and abnormality have to do with
relativism?
 2. What is Benedict’s version of the Cultural Differences Argument?
3. Homosexuality –
a. In ancient Greece, what sorts of homosexual relationships were considered
morally permissible?
b. Among some American Indian tribes there is a practice called
BERDACHE. What is involved in this cultural practice?
4. Trance & catalepsy –
a. According to Benedict, how was epilepsy historically viewed by
Catholics?

093116
1. Explain the difference between individual ethical relativism and cultural ethical
relativism.
2. Normative v. Descriptive
a. What is normative ethics?
b. What is descriptive ethics?
c. Be able to distinguish statements which are normative from statements
which are descriptive. See examples in notes on: death penalty, abortion,
murder, Afghan women. Be able to apply this distinction to NEW CASES.
3. One of the arguments against Cultural Ethical Relativism which was put forth by
James Rachels, was that the conclusion of the Cultural Differences Argument
does not follow from the premise. Why doesn’t the conclusion follow, according
to Rachels?
4. According to Rachels, Cultural Ethical Relativism suggests a simple test for
determining whether an action is right or wrong (in a culture):
a. What is that test?
b. What is Rachels’ criticism of this test of right & wrong?
5. According to Rachels the idea of moral progress is called into doubt by Cultural
Ethical Relativism
a. What is meant by moral progress?
b. Why is this called into doubt by Cultural Ethical Relativism?
6. According to Rachels, Cultural Ethical Relativism makes us take note of the many
differences in moral beliefs that different cultures have. But it fails to recognize
that there are also similar values that different cultures have. For ONE of the
following, explain why this is a value that all cultures must accept (according to
Rachels):
a. All cultural groups must be protective of (caring for) their young.
b. All cultural groups must place some value on truth telling.
c. All cultural groups must have some prohibition on murder.
090716
1. Define:
a. Ethical egoism
b. Psychological egoism
c. Contractarianism
2. In both the book Coral Island and The Lord of the Flies, groups of boys find
themselves stranded on islands, without any grown-ups to tell them how to
 behave. Explain (briefly) what the boys’ lives will be like, according to these
works of fiction.
3. Define: State of Nature (Hobbes)
4. In the book The Lord of the Flies, one character, Ralph, does try to establish a
government and make rules. Despite this, the boys remain in the state of nature
because Ralph is missing something important for a ruler to have. They not only
need to be able to make laws. They need something else as well. What is that?
What happens to Ralph’s rules in this situation?
5. Explain: What is it about human nature that leads us to fight?
6. Hobbes argues that in a state of nature people are EQUAL. What is his argument?
7. According to Hobbes, in the state of nature, people’s lives are solitary, nasty,
brutish & short. Explain what is lost in the state of nature that makes it so awful.
8. Hobbes claims that in our normal experiences we show through our behavior that
we have the same dark view of humanity that he has. Provide an example of a
type of behavior Hobbes points to that supports his claim.
9. Hobbes provides an explanation of how moral & legal rules arise that is based in
the theory of PSYCHOLOGICAL EGOISM. Based on this theory, why do moral
& legal rules arise?
10. Some critics of PSYCHOLOGICAL EGOISM have tried to raise
counterexamples to demonstrate that this theory is false. These include behaviors
which involve self-harm & altruism.
a. Provide an example of a behavior that involves self-harm.
b. Define: altruism.
c. Provide an example of an altruistic action.
d. How would the psychological egoist respond to the claim that people
sometimes do things to harm themselves (self-harm)?
e. How would the psychological egoist respond to the claim that people
sometimes act in ways which are altruistic?
11. In a state of war is there any thing which is right or wrong, according to Hobbes?
12. Provide the argument: Why is a state of nature a state of perfect freedom
(according to Hobbes)?
13. According to Ethical Egoism, people should always do what is in their own
rational self-interest. Explain the difference between acting selfishly and acting in
one’s own rational self-interest.
14. Explain: Hobbes thinks that there are some universal moral laws. How does this
arise from the theory of Ethical Egoism?
15. What is the RIGHT OF NATURE (Jus natural)?
16. The 1st Natural Law tells us a central goal that all people ought to aim for, because
everyone would benefit by getting out of the state of nature, which is a state of
war.
a. What is that central goal?
b. If you cannot attain that central goal, what rules apply?
17. According to Hobbes’ 2nd Natural Law, all people should have equal rights. That
is, the laws that apply to one person, should apply equally to all others. What is
his argument for this equality?
 18. One of the arguments that was raised against PSYCHOLOGICAL EGOISM is
that it is not a good scientific theory about human motivations.
a. What are three features of good scientific theories?
b. Suppose you hear about someone who acts heroically.
i. How would the Psychological Egoist explain this person’s action?
ii. Explain: How does this show that this theory is not based in
OBSERVATION?
c. Explain: Why isn’t this theory EXPLANATORY?

091916
1. Provide a COUNTEREXAMPLE to Ethical Egoism. Explain why it is a
counterexample.
2. James Rachels argues that Ethical Egoism is a kind of discrimination. What is his
argument?
3. Define: Discrimination
4. According to Rachels, when is it fair to treat groups differently? When is it not
fair?
5. For a particular occupation (ex: fire fighter) or for entering school be able to say:
a. What are some of the differences that are relevant to doing that
occupation?
b. What are some of the differences that are irrelevant to doing that
occupation?
[Note: Think of OCCUPATION. What features does a person need to
have in order to do that occupation WELL?]
6. Seaman Holmes & the Longboat of William Brown
a. What is reported in this brief story? (Basic idea – don’t worry about how
many people on different boats…)
b. What was the BASIC choice that Seaman Holmes had to make & why?
c. If Holmes had to choose between kill some & save other passengers OR
kill none and all die, which choice would Utilitarianism say would be
right? Why?
7. What is the central claim of Utilitarianism (“An action is right…”)?

092116
1. Seaman Holmes & the Longboat of William Brown
a. Consider the two rules below. Which would Utilitarianism argue will lead
to the greater good? Why?
i. The law of the sea: The law of the sea requires that passengers
must always be saved in preference to seamen, except those
indispensable for operating the boat.
ii. Alternative: A law which requires that seamen must always be
saved in preference to passengers.
2. CASE of RELATIVE ON LIFE SUPPORT: If provided this case (or another
similar one) be able to go through the process of explaining how a Utilitarian
would decide what to do. Be sure to include:
a. Who should be taken into account
 b. What are the central costs & benefits that would need to be taken into
consideration
c. Which option is likely to lead to the greatest good (explain why)
3. What does it mean to say that Utilitarianism is context sensitive?
4. Given cases (such as Mom & Pop & grocery store; or killing Uncle Peter) be able
to explain the different answers that the Utilitarian and Ethical Egoist would
arrive at.
5. Bentham produces a list of seven features to use to determine which of 2 pains or
pleasures has more value.
a. What are 4 of Bentham’s features?
b. For each of the 4 you identify, be able to explain what it means
c. For each of the 4 you identify, be able to provide examples to help show
which of two things has more pleasure or pain.
i. For example, one feature is EXTENT
ii. EXTENT has to do with how many people are impacted by your
action. An action impacting more people has a greater extent, and
may have a greater amount of pain or pleasure that is caused.
iii. A terrorist attack which kills one person has less pain & suffering
than a terrorist attack which kills many. OR
Giving a $10 donation to one charity will likely cause less
pleasure/ happiness than giving a $10 donation to each of 10
charities.