Act%20Utilitarianism%20-%20A%20Closer%20Look%20%28Wilhelm%2c%20Dr.%20Utility%2c%20and%20Trolleys%29-

Act%20Utilitarianism%20-%20A%20Closer%20Look%20%28Wilhelm%2c%20Dr.%20Utility%2c%20and%20Trolleys%29-

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Medical Ethics Darin Harootunian 9/26/11 2 Answer: The CDA is unsound it’s not deductively valid. Question 2a: Is the Revised Deductive CDA sound or unsound? Answer: Unsound. Premise 1 is false. The antecedent of the conditional can be true and the conclusion false. Step 3: Suppose the CDA is a non-deductive argument. Rachels never considers the CDA to be a non-deductive argument, at least not directly, not explicitly. After showing the CDA to be deductively invalid, he dispatches it. But after doing so, he turns his attention to another task: showing that Cultural Relativism is unlikely to be true. To do this, one thing that he must consider is whether the differences in moral codes across different cultures makes it likely to be the case that Cultural Relativism is true. Of course this is just to treat the CDA as a non- deductive argument. So let’s begin by formulating the CDA as a non-deductive argument: Step 3a: Formulate the CDA as a non-deductive argument. The Non-Deductive CDA
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 11/07/2011 for the course PHIL 164 taught by Professor Doviak during the Fall '07 term at UMass (Amherst).

Ask a homework question - tutors are online