A study guide is below, although questions are not limited to these questions:
EMP Ch. 3: Simple Subjectivism & Homosexuality
- State and fully explain the idea of simple subjectivism. If someone accepts simple subjectivism, how does he or she "translate" moral judgments (i.e., what does someone say when he or she says that something is wrong, or says that something is not wrong?
- Be able to give at least 2 valid arguments against simple subjectivism; be able to explain each premise – that is, explain why someone might think the premises are true (this will often involve explaining why something is a logical consequence of simple subjectivism). Explain whether you think the arguments are sound or not and why.
- What is emotivism? If someone accepts emotivism, how does he or she "translate" moral judgments (i.e., what does someone say when he or she says that something is wrong, or says that something is not wrong?
- Be able to give a valid argument against emotivism, i.e., for the conclusion that it is false.
- Explain what Rachels thinks the general nature of “moral truths” or “truths of ethics” are.
- Rachels thinks he can “prove” that some ethical judgments are true. What are the examples of his proofs? (What does he mean by a "proof" anyway?) Is he correct? Why or why not?
- Be able to state many common arguments against homosexuality (including those discussed in the articles in the RTD book) in valid form (and so add the premises needed to make the argument valid) and explain whether they are sound or not. Be able to state which, if any, premises are false.
- Rachels and Corvino also give arguments for the conclusion that homosexuality is morally permissible. What were those arguments?
3. Can a
4. Rachels discusses a number of challenges in appealing
1. Some people
2. Some people disagree abou
3. Be able
4. Be able
5. Since you should be able
7. Explain why a bumper
8. Some argumen
9. Some people ge
a. If fe
c. Therefore, killing