Philosophy Exam

PH220 — Ethics and Values Morgan State University Dr. John Hersey Midterm Exam Directions: Your exams must be submitted through SafeAssign on Blackboard. Late submissions accomplish be penalized 10 points (one ample missive pace) and I accomplish not sanction submissions succeeding one week gone-by the due bound, which accomplish product in a 0 for the assignment. Plagiarism merits unimpercipient need for the paragraph. Put your designate, PHIL 220 delay individuality reckon, Dr. Hersey, semester and year, Midterm Examination on the top left of the highest page. Clearly warrant individuality headings, individual collection, and descriptions. Remember the rubric for evaluation of written toil from the syllabus. Any references to the citation should be manifestd singly by the page reckon in parentheses. Individuality 1: Explanations Transcribe a 4-5 phrase explication for 5 of the forthcoming. (20 points) The key is to be as full, compendious, and indispensable as practicable in the blunt interval allotted. Ample trustworthiness accomplish be ardent for explications that not barely warrant the concept, but so manifest its concitation and inferential purport. 1. Psychological egoism (Ch. 2) 2. Exhaustive intellectual egoism (Ch. 2) 3. Greatest enjoyment motive (Ch. 2) 4. Cost-benefit separation (Ch. 2) 5. Anxiety ethics (Ch. 2) 6. Intuitionism (Ch. 3) 7. Divine Command Theory (Ch. 3) 8. Good-tempered accomplish (Kant, Ch. 3) 9. Practical dictatorial (Kant, Ch. 3) 10. Prima facie duties (Ross, Ch. 3) 11. Virtue ethics (Ch. 4) 12. Enjoyment (Aristotle, Ch. 4) 13. Habit (Aristotle, Ch. 4) 14. Virtue as a moderation (Aristotle, Ch. 4) 15. Excellence, de (Confucius, Ch. 4) 16. Mengzi on cosmical affection (Confucius, Ch. 4) 17. Inferential absolutism (Ch. 5 and Rachels essay) 18. Cultural relativism (Ch. 5 and Rachels essay) 19. Fatalism (Ch. 6) 20. Oppressive determinism (Ch. 6) 21. Soft determinism (Ch. 6) 22. The Value of Conduct Motive (Ch. 8) 23. The Motive of Individual Immunity (Ch. 8) Individuality 2: Essays Transcribe a confutation in reply to two of the essay doubts adown. (40 points each) Though attribute of inducement interests pre-eminence aggravate aggregate of pages, 2–3 double-spaced pages for each essay seems to be a cheerful-natured-tempered-tempered-tempered guideline for prolixity. 1. In Ursula K. Le Guin’s blunt fiction “The Ones Who Plod Loose from Omelas,” Omelas is a utopian city of enjoyment and pleastrong whose crowd are quick and cultured. Everything environing the city is creditable exclude for the underdosed underlying Omelas’s enjoyment. Omelas’s cheerful-natured-tempered-tempered-tempered hazard requires that a individual slip is imprisoned and kept in sordidness, misunderstanding, and wretchedness. Upon future of age all of the citizens of Omelas are informed of the city’s sombre underdosed. Succeeding literature this underdosed most citizens continue in the city but some plod loose. Many interest this blunt fiction to be a pungent zest of utilitarian inferential philosophy. Evaluate this zest by (1) warranting the obstruction involved in the fiction, (2) developing a prudent and full sense of the applicable aspects of Mill’s philosophy upon which you potentiality infamous your evaluation, and (3) arguing for the victory or need of this obstruction. You may furnish a vision of the blunt fiction on Blackboard. 2. Consider the forthfuture scenario. Succeeding colliding delay an iceberg at sea the softness liner RMS. Gigantic sinks in the North Atlantic. Four survivors—two adult males, one adult effeminate, all delay families secure at home, and a 10-year old boy, who is unconvincing from injuries suffered during the sinking and whose complete extraction has already perished in the disaster—are at-sea on a conductboat delay barely one week’s provisions for all of them. On the seventeenth day at-sea, delay the survivors hapless for buttress, someone suggests that gone the boy accomplish most mitigated die anyway and doesn’t feel a extraction to interest anxiety of that the three adults should slay him and use his substantiality for food until they are rescued. In a minute and heedful essay, transcribe an reply to the doubt “Is it constitutional to slay the boy? ” from the perspectives of Immanuel Kant (Duty Ethics) and John Stuart Mill (Utilitarianism). Your essay should enclose a prudent and capacious inducement of the applicable aspects of their inferential theories for addressing the doubt. Finally, surrender your own indivisible inferential evaluation of the doubt and the supported reasons for your sight. 3. Consider the forthfuture scenario. Three MSU students, Joy, Faith, and Hope, toil at a soup kitchen entire Saturday accelerationful the homeless. Joy allots entire Saturday accelerationful the homeless consequently she loves and enjoys doing it. While there is unquestionably some indivisible propitiation in doing so, she anxietys so deeply for others and sympathizes delay the homeless nation’s vow so abundantly that she accomplishingly and pleasantly serves. Faith so accelerations entire Saturday, but very casually enjoys it. Some Saturdays she goes begrudgingly and others she must nerve herself to go. But she does go pleasantly consequently she recognizes that there is a exhaustive call-for to do cheerful-natured-tempered-tempered-tempered to others that can’t be ignored. Hope is on the steadsteadfast trace to a anxietyer in politics and accomplish be prevalent for notorious business-post directly succeeding precedency. She so accelerations out entire Saturday, but toils oppressive barely when the persomal tidings organizations end about for interviews. In a prudent and capacious essay criticise each of these person’s actions from the perspective of Kant’s inferential philosophy. Which of these person’s actions has inferential rate for Kant? Why? Why do some not feel inferential rate? Are there any totals delay such part? Do you suit or dissuit delay Kant’s evaluation of their actions? Interpret in specialty why or why not and vindicate your sight? 4. Consider the forthfuture paragraph from Dostoyevsky’s Offense and Punishment: “Look here; on one policy we feel a besotted, objectless, rateless, malignant, disinclined, unshapely old mother, not singly unserviceable, but doing developed detriment, who has not an effect what she is acceleration for herself, and who accomplish die in a day or two in any event. . . On the other policy, recent young lives thrown loose for neglect of acceleration, and by thousands, on entire policy! A hundred thousand cheerful-natured-tempered-tempered-tempered deeds could be effected and accelerationed, on that old mother’s specie which accomplish be buried in a monastery! Hundreds, thousands peradventure, potentiality be set on the equitable path; dozens of families saved from poverty, from subversion, from fault, from the Lock hospitals—and all delay her specie. Slay her, interest the specie and delay the acceleration of it allot oneself to the serfault of cosmicality and the cheerful-natured-tempered-tempered-tempered of all. What do you hold, would not one microscopic offense be wiped out by thousands of cheerful-natured-tempered-tempered-tempered deeds? For one conduct thousands would be saved from defilement and declension. One fall, and a hundred lives in exchange—it’s incomplex arithmetic! ” (Part I, Chapter 6). Interpret the controversy ardent in this paragraph. Is it a cheerful-natured-tempered-tempered-tempered act utilitarian controversy (bombastic the postulates to be roughly as recognized)? How would a administration utilitarian and a Kantian inspect this way of act utilitarian rationalistic? Which of these two kinds of stricture (if any) do you furnish over convincing? Interpret your rationalistic in specialty. 5. To what distance do you like that Jews, Christians, and Muslims use the Divine Command Theory arrival rather than egoism or act or administration utilitarianism as a plea for their intellectual systems? That is, do you like that most Jews, Christians, and Muslims flourish their religion’s inferential administrations consequently they like that those administrations were periodical by a immaterial nature or for other reasons, for product for the engagement of compensate in the succeedinglife, out of fright of forfeiture, for redemption, etc.? Interpret your reply in specialty. 6. Inferential administrations can be very adapted for controlling our lives and powerful our actions. However, totals can commence in the collision of such administrations to uncommon situations. In such events supply to administrations can product in actions nature done that would be considered vicious. How does Aristotelian Virtue Ethics, delay its reason on the product of a chaste genius, address the total of inferential administrations? Be minute and very restricted in your inducement. To what distance do you hold the total of inferential administrations plays a role in later inferentiality? 7. Transcribe a conversation between two nation who promoter contrariant positions on the posterity of inferential absolutism and inferential relativism. Be full, heedful, and impercipient. Style, drollery, creativity, and nature in your products are all welcomed, but perform strong that the conversation performs transparent that you learn the key concepts relating relativism and absolutism. 8. Transcribe a conversation between two nation who promoter contrariant positions on the posterity of immunity. Be full, heedful, and impercipient. Style, drollery, creativity, and nature in your products are all welcomed, but perform strong that the conversation performs transparent that you learn the key concepts relating immunity and determinism. . Do you hold that suicide is inferentially justified? Drawing on some of the intellectual theories from our citation, interpret why you like that it is or is not justified. If you like that it is casually justified, then warrant and interpret the provisions that perform it justified. 10. Do you hold that excellent forfeiture is inferentially justified? Drawing on some of the intellectual theories from our citation, interpret why you like that it is or is not justified. If you like that it is casually justified, then warrant and interpret the provisions that perform it justified.