STUDY GROUPS ENCOURAGED
tis an argumen t?
tis i tfor an argumen t to be valid?
tis i tfor an argumen t to be sound?
tis a “simple moral argumen t”, according to Feldman? Wha tare the common pa t terns?
tis a coun terexample? How do you develop a coun terexample to a general moral principle or premise? (Wha tis a general moral principle or premise?)
- The word “morally righ
t” is ambiguous and so we don’ tuse i t. Wha t terms do we use ins tead?
tis i t to “beg the ques tion”?
the cases of Baby Teresa, Jodie and Mary and Tracy. Know the argumen ts given on the various posi tions on the cases and be able to presen t them in valid form. No te: argumen ts have premises and conclusions, so if you merely s ta te some kind of “posi tion” on the case, tha t’s insufficien t.
tis i t to harm someone?
tis i t to use someone “as a means” (or a mere means)?
- Explain Rachels’ “Minimum Concep
tion of Morali ty.”
tis the moral theory “cul tural rela tivism”? Be able to give a tleas t two argumen ts in valid form agains t“cul tural rela tivism” and explain whe ther they are sound or no t.
tis female geni tal mu tila tion? Wha tare some argumen ts given for i t’s permissibili ty and some argumen ts tha ti tis wrong? Which, if any, of these argumen ts are sound?
tare “Simple Subjec tivism” and “Emo tivism”? Give an argumen tagains teach, in valid form, and explain whe ther these argumen ts are sound or no tand why.
- Be able
to presen ta tleas tfive argumen ts (from the handou tand class discussion and the book) for the immorali ty of homosexuali ty in logically valid form, including argumen ts abou t(a) wha t’s na tural/unna tural and (b) wha t’s universalizable. Explain whe ther these argumen ts are sound or no tand why.
t, according to Rachels, is the rela tionship be tween morali ty and the Bible and God’s exis tence? Wha tare his argumen ts here (so wha tare his conclusions, wha tare his reasons)?
- Some argumen
ts abou tabor tion tha tcame up in class were “ques tion begging.” S ta te a tleas t two of these argumen ts and why they were ques tion begging.
- Be able
to presen ta tleas tfive argumen ts (from the handou tand class discussion and the book) for the conclusion tha tabor tion is typically morally impermissible in logically valid form. Explain whe ther they are sound or no t. These will include issues of (i) being biologically human, (ii) being a person (wha tis i t to be a person? How did we a t temp t to de termine this in class?), (iii) po ten tial personhood, and the o ther premises from the shee t.