PHI-205                                   Final Examination-11                 Howarth          

All answers must be written in legible, well-formed sentences, so plan your answers wisely. All answers should be based on the class’ assigned readings and class discussions and in the form of a well-supported argument. Consider how studied material not specifically and explicitly present in questions may relate to your responses. The goal here is to demonstrate your mastery of the course material and methods. Your responses should make cases, not statements. The goal here is to demonstrate your mastery of studied course material. Argue. Pledge.

 
I. Provide answers for any four of the following questions for 15 points each and a total of 60 points:

1.         Contrast natural law and discourse ethics approaches with respect to lex talionis arguments regarding the terrorist acts.

2.         Compare how a care-based then an act-based utilitarian ethicists would consider making the distinction between an ‘animal’, a ‘human’ and a ‘person’ in relation to the right to water, food and being uncaged.

3.         How might Kantian ethicists both oppose and support strong affirmative action?

4.         What are the strengths and weaknesses of pragmatic ethics, with respect to whether or not to commit an act that most would consider an act of terrorism?

5.         How might Marquis’ FLO argument apply and/or not apply to the treatment of those convicted of racial hate-crimes:

6.         How might an Aristotelian distinguish their views with respect to different variant theories of pacifism?

7.         In ethical terms, how are polluting our air by way of burning fossil fuels as we do in for-profit business activities, and burning fossil fuels as we do when our nation fights a war/provides for our national defense around the world, related and different as considered through a divine command ethicist’s lens?

8.         Relate the difference to believing and faithing to a key objection to attempts to mitigate the human contribution to climate change for a rationally reflective cultural relativist:

 

II. Provide answers for any two of the following questions for 20 points each and a total of 40 points:

9.         How many criteria of moral adequacy does Just War Theory, specifically the tandem of jus ad bellum and jus in bello, meet?

10.       What is the difference between how a social contract ethicist and rule-based utilitarian would deal with volunteering to serve in the military and with being a conscientious objector?

11.       How do Virtue-based ethics and emotivist ethics frame and treat the torturing of anyone as punishment?

12.       What moral common ground might existential ethicist share with a common morality ethicist regarding whether right intentions are in place to proceed to fight a war that no reasonable person would estimate to be winnable?