Copy of PHI-205_ Chapter 10 Questions

.docx

School

Union County College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

205

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by SuperHumanEnergy13643

Prof. Postiglione PHI-203-500 6 December 2023 Chapter 10 – Ethics – What Will It Be: Truth Or Consequences? 1. Explain the many different arguments being made in the case of Baby Theresa. 420-421 Some of the different arguments consisted of: taking the life of one to save many others, the baby will never be able to experience the world and will die soon anyways and required expensive hospital equipment and doctor attention that can be used for someone who can actually benefit from it, in terminally ill patients they have the option to “pull the plug” so what is the difference here, on the other side- they are healthcare professionals and have sworn to preserve life by any means necessary, they are healers and if they can’t heal then they are caregivers, there is also many legal implications with taking the baby life for the organs. 2. Ethics – term 421 Deciding what we should do in the case of Baby Theresa—and all the other moral dilemmas of the modern world 3. Normative ethics – term 421 the branch of ethics that makes judgments about what constitutes moral behavior and intention 4. Metaethics – term 421 the branch of ethics that studies the meaning of ethical statements and terms 5. What are some basic ethical questions? 421 Should we consider the long-term consequences for ourselves and society in deciding what is the right thing to do? Are there rules governing moral choices? If so, where can they be found? Are we bound to respect the integrity of a person under all circumstances, and (most difficult to agree on) what constitutes a person? Are there principles such as “care” or “help” that should be our guiding lights in making moral choices? 6. What are some issues raised in metaethics? 421-422 the question of whether absolute moral values exist (Are there actions that are always right/always wrong, or is morality determined by the customs of a particular society?);

the meaning of ethical statements (When I assert that a particular action is right or good, do I mean anything other than that I or a majority of people approve that action?); the meaning of ethical terms (When I say, “Cheating is wrong,” there seems to be no way to verify the statement without using other ethical terms: “Cheating is bad,” or “people shouldn’t cheat”). - Questions and issues are ever-changing as society changes 7. What is the ultimate ethical question? 422 Why be moral? Western Ethical Theories Consequentialist, or Teleological, Ethical Theories 8. Teleological ethical theory – term 423 an ethical theory that evaluates behavior in terms of consequences 9. What is the goal in all utilitarian approaches? 423 the goal is to maximize pleasure and minimize pain. 10. Explain how the parents of Baby Theresa were using a teleological ethical theory. 423 They looked to the consequences of possible actions and tried to choose the most desirable option among those available. If they could not take home a healthy child (clearly the most desirable consequence), the next best alternative seemed to them investing her brief life with meaning by donating her organs to other children who desperately needed them. Nonconsequentialist, or Deontological, Ethical Theories 11. Deontological ethical theory – term 423 an ethical theory that evaluates behavior in terms of adherence to duty or obligation, regardless of consequences 12. What matters for deontological theorists? 424 What matters is doing one’s duty; if you want to know what that means, look to ethical laws and principles rather than to consequences. 13. What was clearer with less technology? 424 Before the advent of today’s sophisticated technology, what it meant to do no harm was considerably clearer. (Hippocratic Oath) 14. Categorical imperative – term 424

a deontological ethical principle, developed by Kant, that states unconditionally that one must act in such a way as to desire his or her actions to become universal laws binding on everyone 15. What did Kant suggest when faced with a moral choice? 424 you should imagine a world in which everyone was required to do precisely what you are proposing to do right now. If you favor such a world, you should act as you are proposing; if you do not favor it, you should not do what you propose. 16. Explain the universalizability principle. 424 Kant’s ethical guideline asks you to mentally universalize your proposed action and imagine it as a moral law, binding on everyone. If you can will that what you are about to do should become the law of the land, and can do so without self-contradiction, Kant urges you to go ahead and do it; if you find the prospect of your private action becoming universalized frightening, you should not do it. 17. How did Kant believe it was never acceptable to treat people? 425-426 Swe must always treat people as ends in themselves, never merely as a means to an end. You may be pursuing a college degree as a perfectly legitimate means to a good job, a satisfying and productive career. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. One might even argue that the purpose or the nature of a degree is to serve as the means to an end. Even if your only goal were to increase your knowledge and wisdom, the degree would not be an end in itself but a means to help you achieve your goal. Kant asserted that even though things like degrees can appropriately serve only as means, people most certainly cannot. To use a person only as a way of making a sale, getting invited to join a club, or being promoted is to behave immorally, according to Kant. It is never permissible to treat people as if they were valued merely as a way of achieving something else. 18. What do people have that can never be compromised? 426 People are people, not things, and as such they have a fundamental human dignity that can never be compromised 19. What would Kant think about the case of Baby Theresa? 426 according to Kant it would be using Theresa merely as a means to an end (that of saving the lives of other ill children) and not treating her as an end in herself (a person with human dignity that can under no circumstances be compromised). If we use Kant’s categorical imperative as our yardstick and if Theresa qualifies as a person, we must conclude that no moral justification exists for taking Theresa’s organs; actually, to do so would be immoral.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help