Philosophy Exam

PH220 Ethics and prises Morgan State University Dr. prank Hersey midterm Exam Directions Your exams essential be submitted through SafeAssign on Blackboard. Late submissions forget be penalized 10 points (one full letter grade) and I entrust non give birth submissions after(prenominal) one workweek olden the due date, which will result in a 0 for the assignment. Plagiarism merits mechanical failure for the course. Put your name, PHIL 220 with psychea deed, Dr. Hersey, semester and year, Midterm Examination on the top go forth of the first page. Clearly pick up section headings, item numbers, and descriptions.Remember the rubric for evaluation of indite work from the syllabus. Any references to the text should be insinuated obviously by the page number in pargonntheses. Section 1 Explanations spell come out of the closet a 4-5 sentence explanation for 5 of the pastime. (20 points) The key is to be as thorough, concise, and substantial as possible in the sm ea ch(prenominal) space every last(predicate)otted. Full credit will be given for explanations that non notwithstanding identify the concept, still also indicate its context and honourable significance. 1. Psychological self-seeking (Ch. 2) 2. Universal respectable expedience (Ch. 2) 3. greatest gaiety principle (Ch. 2) 4.Cost-benefit analysis (Ch. 2) 5. aid ethics (Ch. 2) 6. Intuitionism (Ch. 3) 7. Divine play possibleness (Ch. 3) 8. Good will (Kant, Ch. 3) 9. Practical instant (Kant, Ch. 3) 10. Prima facie duties (Ross, Ch. 3) 11. moralistic excellence ethics (Ch. 4) 12. comfort (Aristotle, Ch. 4) 13. Habit (Aristotle, Ch. 4) 14. Virtue as a mean (Aristotle, Ch. 4) 15. Excellence, de (Confucius, Ch. 4) 16. Mengzi on human disposition (Confucius, Ch. 4) 17. Moral absolutism (Ch. 5 and Rachels endeavor) 18. cultural relativism (Ch. 5 and Rachels essay) 19. Fatalism (Ch. 6) 20. Hard determinism (Ch. 6) 21. Soft determinism (Ch. 6) 22.The Value of Life Principle (Ch. 8) 23. The Principle of person Freedom (Ch. 8) Section 2 Essays write a response in final result to both of the essay questions below. (40 points individually) Though prize of consideration takes precedence over touchstone of pages, 23 double-spaced pages for each essay seems to be a keen guideline for length. 1. In Ursula K. Le Guins light story The singles Who Walk absent from Omelas, Omelas is a utopian city of happiness and delight whose inhabitants are intelligent and cultured. Everything most the city is pleasing except for the out of sight underlying Omelass happiness.Omelass right fortune requires that a single nipper is imprisoned and kept in filth, darkness, and misery. Upon advance of age all of the citizens of Omelas are intercommunicate of the citys dark secret. later on learning this secret most citizens run in the city but rough walk past. Many take this briefly story to be a sapiently critique of functional moral philosophy. esteem this critiqu e by (1) identifying the objection implied in the story, (2) developing a blow-by-blow and cut interpretation of the relevant aspects of manufacturing plants philosophy upon which you might base your evaluation, and (3) parameter for the success or failure of this objection.You whitethorn find a copy of the short story on Blackboard. 2. care the keeping scenario. After colliding with an iceberg at sea the luxury liner RMS. Gigantic sinks in the North Atlantic. Four survivorsdeuce big(p) males, one adult female, all with families untroubled at home, and a 10-year old son, who is worn down from injuries suffered during the sinking and whose entire family has already perished in the disasterare adrift on a bread and butterboat with barely one weeks provisions for all of them.On the 17th day adrift, with the survivors desperate for food, approximatelyone suggests that since the boy will most likely pass on anyway and doesnt have a family to take care of that the three adult s should knock down him and use his body for nourishment until they are rescued. In a detailed and profound essay, write an outcome to the question Is it permissible to kill the boy? from the perspectives of Immanuel Kant (Duty Ethics) and John Stuart Mill (Utilitarianism). Your essay should include a careful and comprehensive consideration of the relevant aspects of their moral theories for addressing the question.Finally, give your own personal moral evaluation of the question and the supporting reasons for your view. 3. date the following scenario. Three MSU students, Joy, Faith, and Hope, work at a soup kitchen any Saturday dowery the homeless. Joy devotes any Saturday serve uping the homeless because she loves and enjoys doing it. While there is certainly some personal sacrifice in doing so, she cares so deeply for early(a)s and sym bridle-pathizes with the homeless peoples plight so much that she willingly and systematically serves. Faith also helps every Saturday , but very rarely enjoys it.Some Saturdays she goes begrudgingly and others she must force herself to go. But she does go consistently because she recognizes that there is a universal expect to do computable to others that cant be ignored. Hope is on the steadfast track to a career in politics and will be footrace for public office immediately after graduation. She also helps out every Saturday, but works hard only when the local anaesthetic news organizations come around for interviews. In a careful and comprehensive essay analyze each of these persons actions from the perspective of Kants moral philosophy.Which of these persons actions has moral worth for Kant? wherefore? Why do some not have moral worth? be there any problems with such mind? Do you agree or discord with Kants evaluation of their actions? apologise in detail wherefore or why not and justify your view? 4. Consider the following passage from Dostoyevskys aversion and Punishment Look here on one side we have a stupid, senseless, worthless, spiteful, ailing, horrid old woman, not simply useless, but doing actual mischief, who has not an motif what she is living for herself, and who will die in a day or both in any case. . . On the other side, fresh young lives thrown away for want of help, and by meters, on every side A hundred thousand good deeds could be through with(p) and helped, on that old womans money which will be hide in a monastery Hundreds, thousands perhaps, might be set on the right path dozens of families saved from destitution, from ruin, from vice, from the Lock hospitalsand all with her money. Kill her, take the money and with the help of it devote oneself to the service of humanity and the good of all.What do you presuppose, would not one picayune crime be wiped out by thousands of good deeds? For one life thousands would be saved from corruption and decay. One death, and a hundred lives in flipits simple arithmetic (Part I, Chapter 6). explicate the fi nancial statement given in this passage. Is it a good act utilitarian argument (assuming the facts to be roughly as stated)? How would a witness utilitarian and a Kantian criticize this way of act utilitarian reasoning? Which of these two kinds of criticism (if any) do you find more convincing? Explain your reasoning in detail. 5.To what extent do you gestate that Jews, Christians, and Muslims use the Divine Command Theory approach rather than egoism or act or rule utilitarianism as a basis for their respectable systems? That is, do you believe that most Jews, Christians, and Muslims follow their religions moral rules because they believe that those rules were established by a wizard(prenominal) being or for other reasons, for pillow slip for the promise of reward in the afterlife, out of fear of punishment, for salvation, etc.? Explain your answer in detail. 6. Moral rules can be very useful for governing our lives and steer our actions.However, problems can arise in the fin ish of such rules to unusual situations. In such cases adherence to rules can result in actions being performed that would be considered immoral. How does Aristotelian Virtue Ethics, with its emphasis on the development of a virtuous character, address the problem of moral rules? Be detailed and very particularized in your consideration. To what extent do you cypher of the problem of moral rules plays a parting in modern morality? 7. relieve a communication between two people who advocate different positions on the issue of moral absolutism and moral relativism.Be thorough, thoughtful, and reflective. Style, humor, creativity, and cleverness in your examples are all welcomed, but pee-pee sure that the dialogue makes clear that you realize the key concepts concerning relativism and absolutism. 8. put out a dialogue between two people who advocate different positions on the issue of freedom. Be thorough, thoughtful, and reflective. Style, humor, creativity, and cleverness in your examples are all welcomed, but make sure that the dialogue makes clear that you understand the key concepts concerning freedom and determinism. . Do you think that suicide is morally confirm? picture on some of the ethical theories from our text, explain why you believe that it is or is not justified. If you believe that it is sometimes justified, because identify and explain the conditions that make it justified. 10. Do you think that capital punishment is morally justified? Drawing on some of the ethical theories from our text, explain why you believe that it is or is not justified. If you believe that it is sometimes justified, then identify and explain the conditions that make it justified.