Philosophy Exam

PH220 Ethics and regain ofs Morgan State University Dr. John Hersey midterm exam Exam Directions Your exams must be submitted through SafeAssign on Blackboard. Late submissions leave alvirtuoso be penalized 10 points ( ace full letter grade) and I pass on non accept submissions after unmatchable week past the due date, which will core in a 0 for the assignment. Plagiarism merits automatic misery for the course. Put your name, PHIL 220 with section number, Dr. Hersey, semester and year, Midterm Examination on the top leftover of the first page. Clearly identify section headings, item numbers, and descriptions.Remember the rubric for valuation of written head for the hills from the syllabus. Any references to the text should be indicated plain by the page number in p bentheses. Section 1 Explanations Write a 4-5 sentence explanation for 5 of the following. (20 points) The key is to be as thorough, concise, and immanent as possible in the swindle space allotted. Full ad dress will be given for explanations that not only identify the concept, entirely besides indicate its context and object lesson significance. 1. Psychological egoism (Ch. 2) 2. prevalent honourable egoism (Ch. 2) 3. Greatest happiness principle (Ch. 2) 4.Cost-benefit analysis (Ch. 2) 5. explosive charge ethics (Ch. 2) 6. Intuitionism (Ch. 3) 7. cleric Command Theory (Ch. 3) 8. Good will (Kant, Ch. 3) 9. pr figureical imperative (Kant, Ch. 3) 10. Prima facie duties (Ross, Ch. 3) 11. deservingness ethics (Ch. 4) 12. Happiness (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 nature (Confucius, Ch. 4) 17. example absolutism (Ch. 5 and Rachels sample) 18. Cultural relativism (Ch. 5 and Rachels prove) 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 Individual Freedom (Ch. 8) Section 2 Essays Write a response in answer to two of the essay questions below. (40 points each) Though quality of consideration takes precedence over quantity of pages, 23 double-spaced pages for each essay seems to be a legal guideline for length. 1. In Ursula K. Le Guins short story The Ones Who bye Away from Omelas, Omelas is a utopian city of happiness and delight whose inhabitants are intelligent and cultured. E actuallything ab let on the city is pleasing except for the whodunit be Omelass happiness.Omelass good fortune requires that a single kid is imprisoned and kept in filth, darkness, and misery. Upon coming of age all of the citizens of Omelas are informed of the citys dark secret. After learning this secret most citizens remain in the city but some move away. M either take this short story to be a corking critique of utile lesson philosophy. Evaluate this critique by (1) identifying the objection implied in the story, (2) developing a careful and complete interpretation of the germane(predicate) aspects of Mills philosophy upon which you might base your evaluation, and (3) arguing for the succeeder or failure of this objection.You may find a copy of the short story on Blackboard. 2. Consider the following scenario. After colliding with an iceberg at sea the luxury liner RMS. Gigantic sinks in the North Atlantic. tetrad survivorstwo adult males, one adult female, all with families safe at home, and a 10-year old male child, who is weak from injuries suffered during the sinking and whose entire family has already perished in the disasterare adrift on a lifeboat with barely one weeks provisions for all of them.On the seventeenth day adrift, with the survivors do-or- tumble(a) for food, someone suggests that since the boy will most likely die anyways and doesnt have a family to take care of that the three adults should hide him and use his body for nourishment until they are rescued. In a diminutive and thoughtful essay, write an answer to the que stion 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 complete consideration of the relevant aspects of their moral theories for addressing the question.Finally, give your own personalized moral evaluation of the question and the supporting reasons for your view. 3. Consider the following scenario. Three MSU students, Joy, Faith, and Hope, work at a soup kitchen any Saturday athletic supportering the homeless. Joy devotes every Saturday helping the homeless because she loves and enjoys doing it. While in that respect is certainly some personal sacrifice in doing so, she cares so deeply for differents and sympathizes with the homeless peoples plight so much that she willingly and consistently serves. Faith also helps every Saturday, but very rarely enjoys it.Some Saturdays she goes begrudgingly and others she must force herself to go. only if she does go cons istently because she recognizes that there is a universal demand to do good to others that cant be ignored. Hope is on the card-playing track to a career in politics and will be running for public office immediately after graduation. She also helps out every Saturday, but works hard only when the local intelligence activity 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? Why? Why do some not have moral worth? Are there any problems with such estimation? Do you agree or discord with Kants evaluation of their actions? explain in detail why or why not and justify your view? 4. Consider the following departure from Dostoyevskys Crime and Punishment Look here on one side we have a stupid, senseless, worthless, spiteful, ailing, horrid old charr, not simply useless, but doing actual mischief, who has not an idea what she is living for herself, and who will die in a day or two in any case. . . On the other side, fresh young lives thrown away for ask of help, and by metres, on every side A hundred thousand good whole kit and caboodle could be done and helped, on that old womans money which will be buried in a monastery Hundreds, thousands perhaps, might be set on the right path slews 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 commemorate, would not one tiny 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 exchangeits simple arithmetic (Part I, Chapter 6). inform the argument given in this passage. Is it a good act functional argument (assuming the facts to be roughly as stated)? How would a rule utilitarian and a Kantian criticize this way of act utilitarian debate? 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 rely that Jews, Christians, and Muslims use the Divine Command Theory approach rather than egoism or act or rule utilitarianism as a basis for their honorable 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 supernatural being or for other reasons, for example for the promise of reward in the afterlife, out of fear of punishment, for salvation, etcetera? Explain your answer in detail. 6. Moral rules can be very useful for governing our lives and guiding our actions.However, problems can arise in the occupation 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 specific in your consideration. To what extent do you think the problem of moral rules plays a role in modern morals? 7. Write a talk betwixt two people who encourage different positions on the issue of moral absolutism and moral relativism.Be thorough, thoughtful, and reflective. Style, humor, creativity, and chicness in your examples are all welcomed, but make authorized that the dialogue makes clear that you understand the key concepts concerning relativism and absolutism. 8. Write 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 justif ied? 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. 10. Do you think that detonating device 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.