Final Part 2

Final Part 2 - Below are sample questions from Part II of the final Again we shall choose two questions from this list Part II General issues 1

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Below are sample questions from Part II of the final. Again, we shall choose two questions from this list. Part II. General issues 1. Sartre notes that it’s “very distressing that God does not exist, because all possibility of finding [absolute] values in a heaven of ideas disappears along with Him; there can no longer be an a priori Good, since there is not an infinite and perfect consciousness to think it….If God does not exist, we find no values or commands to turn to which legitimize our conduct.” If we cannot call on the authority of a Supreme Being to defend our moral judgments, does it mean there are no objective moral grounds on which to make them and that everyone’s “opinion” is equally valid? For example, the following theorists give quite different and opposed accounts of moral responsibilities and obligations in the situations they address. Choose any two of the following pairs. Compare and contrast how each would morally assess the case at hand. Are there any non-theological moral grounds which make one of the opinions superior to the other? Why or why not? --Almeder and Friedman, in evaluating Ford’s decision to market the 1971 Pinto --Sidney Callahan and Judith Thomson, in determining whether or not it is morally permissible for a teenager whose contraceptive failed to seek a first trimester abortion; --Elizabeth Anscombe and Henry Stimson, in evaluating the moral justifiability of dropping atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II; --Mark Bowden and Professor Comisso in discussing whether or not “coercion” is permissible in interrogating individuals who might know of a crime to be committed. 2. In Dostoyevsky’s novel, Crime and Punishment , the hero murders a wealthy pawnshop broker with the intention of stealing her money and distributing it to poor people who desperately need it. Pointing out the result would be “dozens of families saved from destitution, from ruin, from vice,” he adds, “would not one tiny crime be wiped out by thousands of good deeds?” Discuss three of the following cases and explain whether they illustrate how “one tiny crime” can be justified by “thousands of good deeds.” Defend your judgment against potential critics. Utility and Mill is what this basically is. Kant and deontology are the main criticizers/opponents.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
--A couple that agrees to let the female undergo an abortion because they are in high school and unready to care for a child; they go on to have successful careers, marry (each other), and have several children, which would not have happened had they had to care for a child when they were teens; --The decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the hope of ending the war with Japan rapidly and without having to invade Japan itself; --A decision to invade a country in order to change its government in the hope of bringing about a stable peace in the region; --The employment of child workers in underdeveloped countries by a large multinational company. 3.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 07/01/2008 for the course POLI SCI 27 taught by Professor Doppelt during the Winter '08 term at UCSD.

Page1 / 9

Final Part 2 - Below are sample questions from Part II of the final Again we shall choose two questions from this list Part II General issues 1

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online