ADVANCE INFORMATION ON MIDTERM EXAM PHILOSOPHY 162

ADVANCE INFORMATION ON MIDTERM EXAM PHILOSOPHY 162 - ADVANC...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
ADVANCE INFORMATION ON MIDTERM EXAM PHILOSOPHY 162 WINTER, 2008 The midterm exam will take place in our regular classroom (148 Sequoyah Hall) from 11:00 to 11:50 am Wednesday, February 6. No use of books or notes will be permitted at any time during this exam. We’ll supply paper, on which you will write your exams. The exam will cover all course materials—required readings, lectures, and handouts—up to and including the material for Monday, February 4. (Note: No exam questions will ask you to recall material from merely recommended readings.) Part 1 will consist of essay questions drawn from the list below. On the actual exam 3 of these questions will be posed, and you will be asked to write on one of them. Time allowed: thirty minutes. This portion of the exam counts for 60 per cent of your exam grade. Part 2 will consist of short-answer questions testing your comprehension of course readings and handouts. These questions will be drawn from the list below. On the actual exam, five questions will be posed, and you will be asked to answer three of them. This portion of the exam counts for 40 per cent of your exam grade. On the exam, your answers will be assessed according to the cogency of the arguments you make, the quality of understanding of course materials that you display, and the clarity of your prose. Part 1. Essay questions. 1. In Just and Unjust Wars Michael Walzer affirms a position that specifies under what conditions engaging in war is morally acceptable. This doctrine purports to distinguish what qualifies as a just cause for war from other putative justifications. According to Walzer, a just war is one of the following: a war against aggression or anticipated aggression, a counterintervention in a civil war struggle, support of a secession struggle, or a humanitarian intervention. Elucidate Walzer’s position on jus ad bellum , state his rationale for it, and defend or attack it. 2. In Just and Unjust Wars Walzer advances a doctrine of just warfare ( jus in bello ) that specifies the moral constraints a combatant in war must obey, if she is to qualify as fighting justly (in ways that are morally permissible). Summarize the core elements in Walzer’s position on jus in bello and defend or attack that position. 3. In “The Ethics of Killing in War” Jeff McMahan considers three claims: “(1) \that the principles of jus in bello are independent of those of jus ad bellum , (2) that unjust combatants can abide by the principles of jus in bello and do not act wrongly unless they fail to do so, and (3) that combatants are permissible targets of attack while noncombatants are not.” Summarize his responses to these three claims and his arguments supporting these responses, and attack or defend his position. 4. Let’s stipulate that
Background image of page 1

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 4

ADVANCE INFORMATION ON MIDTERM EXAM PHILOSOPHY 162 - ADVANC...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

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