Philosophy Exam 3 Study Guide

Question 1

Consequentialism

Answer 1

-a moral theory that evaluates actions solely in terms of their consequences
-that the consequences of an action are all that matter in moral assessment
-do good; avoid bad
ex: consequentialist would say regardless of how the lives are saved they would do what is necessary to save the most people

Question 2

Deontology

Answer 2

-a type of moral theory that denies that morality is solely about consequences
-do your duty (or follow the rules)
ex: trolley problems

Question 3

Virtue Ethics

Answer 3

be a good person
-Cultivate virtuous character traits in yourself.
-Act in accordance with those character traits.

Question 4

Personhood

Answer 4

• the idea of a fetus already being a person from the moment it formed and the potentiality that it has to become someone who changes the world; someone great.
  *Marquis defends this idea

Question 5

Antinatalism

Answer 5

the view that procreation is morally wrong
* Harrison and Tanner defend a version of antinatalism: they clearly hold that nearly all acts of procreation are morally criticizable and that it is morally preferable to remain childless

Question 6

Sexually Explicit Material

Answer 6

depiction of explicit sexual acts on a variety of mediums with the intention of arousing an audience, reader, and/or viewer to sexual stimulation
Eduardo S

Question 7

Pornography

Answer 7

“Historically associated with sexually explicit material deemed “obscene”

●Sometimes defined as sexually explicit material that causes harm (usually to women)”
Edward S

Question 8

Liberal Sexual Ethic

Answer 8

“Consent is the main ingredient in permissible sexual interactions.
●Respecting others’ autonomy is the main moral value.
●Holds that there is nothing “special” about sex – wrongdoing in this context is no different than wrongdoing in other human interactions
●Reduces sexual desire to mere lust”
McPherson

Question 9

Traditional Sexual Ethic

Answer 9

“Views sexual relationships as sacred
●Encourages monogamy
●Better accounts for the grave evil of sexual violence by appealing to the violation of something sacred
●Taboos associated with this position “are meant to protect what’s best in human sexuality: namely, erotic love and its vow.”
McPherson

Question 10

Aristotle’s Three Types of Friendship

Answer 10

Friendship of Pleasure

Friendship of Utility

True Friendship

Question 11

Friendship of Pleasure

Answer 11

-friendship based on the feelings of pleasure

-friendship based on advantages and “good vibes”

-friendship doesn’t last long; temporary

Question 12

Friendship of Utility

Answer 12

friendship dependent on rules

always some sort of payment involved whether it be immediate or within a time limit

“one thing in return for another”

the benefit to the one who receives something must be the measure of return

friendship doesn’t last long ; temporary

Question 13

True Friendship(true friends)

Answer 13

*can only take place between good people

*cannot be apart for too long

• enjoy one another’s company.

*True friends will live in close proximity to one another

*Reciprocal

*Demands of morality are stronger between true friends

*You can only have a small number of true friends

*want the best for each other even if the best for one means the worst for the other

*includes both pleasure and utility

Question 14

Why does Don Marquis think that abortion is almost always wrong? Is his argument sound? Explain your reasoning.

Answer 14

He argues that a fetus is morally equivalent to a person in the right to life. It’s similar to his argument in which he states that murder is morally wrong because it takes away one’s right to a future or in other words potentially valuable future. The only ways in which he views abortion as somewhat permissible is when or if the woman’s life is in danger during the potential birth. In that case, he believes that abortion could be seen as an act of defense. His argument is sound because it is a valid argument with a true premises.
Side note: He pushes the value of life by perceiving “life is a gift”

Question 15

How does Judith Thomson argue that abortion is permissible even if we assume that the fetus is a person from the moment of conception? Is her argument sound? Explain your reasoning.

Answer 15

Thompson’s argues that abortion is permissible by using multiple situations. The violinist example is that you are connected to a violinist and the violinist will die if you unplug yourself from it but it’s also killing your in the process. It is supposed to show that just like the violinist, a woman can also decide to “disconnect” from the fetus. In doing so it emphasizes that the right to life does NOT overpower a woman’s right to bodily autonomy. Then, there is the Seeds example which talks about how seeds are floating through the air and when one lands inside a home, it grows a person. So, someone decides to our screens on their windows so that they can still open the window occasionally but one day it has a defect and a seed gets through and a person is grown. In that case, he also states that it would also be permissible for a woman to abort her baby. (violinist and seeds example). She supports her argument by mentioning that our bodies are like our homes and so we have the right to evict whatever it is that we would want from that home, including a fetus. She argues that a fetus ’ right to life does not supersedes a woman’s right to autonomy. We believe her argument is sound because it is a valid argument with a true premises.

Question 16

What is the “infanticide objection” to pro-choice positions on abortion? What is the best way to respond to this objection? Explain your reasoning.

Answer 16

The “infanticide objection” to pro-choice positions is that you wouldn’t kill a child, would you? The best way to respond to this objection is by saying that a fetus is not actually a whole person on its own yet. The mother is sustaining the fetus’ survival so it is her right to choose whether or not she would like to abort or keep the fetus.

Question 17

Are Gerald Harrison and Julia Tanner right that it is morally better not to have children? Why or why not?

Answer 17

Gerald Harrison and Julia Tanner are not exactly correct but they aren’t exactly incorrect either. Statistically, a lot of people tend to be much happier or “better off” without children. Relationship stability also seems to decrease once the couple starts to have children. Also, it takes over half a million to raise a child in this economy which is really unfortunate. Though, I would argue that those reasons are more logically correct and don’t exactly support the idea of not having more children. I would say that it is morally better to have children because you are bringing a life into this world that could potentially make a positive impact in the world. Then again, the individual could potentially become a menace to society. So, it can be equally right or wrong because we cannot predict the exact life that a fetus could have and the impact in which that fetus may have on society.

Question 18

What does David McPherson think is wrong with the “Liberal Sexual Ethic”? How does he argue for this position? Is it a good argument? Explain your reasoning.

Answer 18

McPherson argues that the “Liberal Sexual Ethic” leads to the commodification and the objectification of people which is morally wrong. It also makes sex seem less special and or meaningful. It promotes casual sex which he believes should not exist and makes people seem as if they are nothing more than their bodies. He argues for “erotic love” which is intercourse between people who are actually in love, in a relation. I believe that his argument is not good. This is because his argument seems mostly opinionated instead of factual. He also blames universities for being at fault due to providing consent training to students. I believe that it is absurd because these “sex-Ed” classes have helped a lot of people who don’t have experience know how to approach it and has been proven to be helpful for long-term relationships. This argument overall is not sound.

Question 19

What are some of the ways that pornography can be considered harmful to women? Do these reasons demonstrate that it is morally wrong to view pornography? Why or why not?

Answer 19

Pornography objectifies women and it has also been proven that women have been harmed within that industry in order to create the right settings or scenarios for the satisfaction of men. In watching pornography , one is not only supporting the physical harm of women but the mental abuse of women as well. These reasons do demonstrate that it is morally wrong to view pornography because the harming of any individual with no proper justification is morally unjust and it harms women in this case.

Question 20

Are friends formed on social media “true” friends according to Aristotle’s criteria? Why or why not?

Answer 20

Aristotle believes that friends have to be geographically near one another to be “true friends”. So, he believes that “ friendships”formed through social media cannot really be true friendships because they don’t actually have a connection built separately from social media. Also, social media friends cannot fulfill a hundred percent of Aristotle’s criteria and therefore they are not really “true friends”. To be more specific, Social media friends tend to live FAR AWAY from one another, are apart 24/7, don’t wish each other good fortune and lack other things.

Question 21

What does Jane English think that grown children owe their parents? How does she support this claim? Is she right? Explain your reasoning.

Answer 21

Jane English believes that grown children owe their parents nothing. This is because once you become older, a healthy friendship with your parents can be seen on more of a friendship basis instead of an “you’ve raised me” basis. She supports this by saying that this is because some people come from horrible upbringings and some come from great ones. You can’t expect all of them to owe their parents something just because they are their biological parents. She even uses scenarios with adopted children to back her claim. I believe that she is correct. It is true that ir depends on whether or not you had a healthy upbringing growing up versus a toxic upbringing. If your parents raised you well, you should treat them well as they get older. In this scenario, you owe them everything and it is only fair. I say this because I believe that parents who don’t love you can’t truly treat you right. If they raised you horribly, you have every right to treat them however you would like because in that case, you owe them nothing. This is how I see it as well because your parents chose to have you but you didn’t choose to exist.

Question 22

Why does William MacAskill think it is ethically preferable to pursue philanthropy through a higher-paying, morally innocuous career rather than working in a philanthropic organization? Is he right about this? Why or why not?

Answer 22

He believes that it is ethically preferable because there is more work flexibility, workers are more valuable, and the pay is significantly higher which leads to an increased ability to fund many different causes. I believe that he is right because in society, more money equals more power. With that power, one can encourage others to donate to charities while being able to donate a ton of money on his or her own. Also, flexible hours leave more time to work at food banks or partake in other acts of community service. To add, when there is more value in your work, there is more effect and importance which can be beneficial in future terms.

Question 23

What is the “maximalist view” of career choice? How does Michael Cholbi argue against this position? Is his view correct? Explain your reasoning.

Answer 23

The “maximalist view” of career choice is that people should choose careers that aim to make the highest positive impact possible. Cholbi argues against this by saying that while this is much appreciated, it should not be a requirement because most people choose careers based off of what works best for themselves as individuals. He believes that career choices have such a big impact on humanity and our lives as a whole that we should have the right to our career paths freely. I believe that his view is certainly correct with the exception of evil jobs that only benefit oneself. Great examples of the jobs that fall under this exception are a hitman or mafia boss. We will work more hours than we will spend eating or probably sleeping. We also need to be making enough money to make a healthy living. So it is crucial that what one is doing is worthwhile and pays well enough for an individual to sustain a good lifestyle.