PHIL 160 Final Exam

What are prima facie duties?

A prima facie duty is a duty that you must fulfill, unless it conflicts with another stronger duty. (EX//autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence and justice)

Describe the two capacities that an entity must have in order to count as a person according to Kant.

A rational being ought to be rational. It should embrace its nature and use its theoretical (ability to think in general terms and believe in accordance with the evidence) and practical rationality (ability to put distance between one's self and one's desires, and to formulate long-term plans, and to act on principle).

Explain how theological voluntarism differs from the idea that God determines what he will command us to do by consulting some independent standard.

An action is right in virtue of the fact that it doesn't violate God's commands. Right acts are right because God commanded them; before he did so, they were neither right nor wrong.

State P (Pluralism)

An action is morally right iff it best fulfills one's most important prima facie duty (or duties) in one's particular context of action (violating less important prima facie duties to the smallest possible degree).

State CR

An action is morally right iff it is permitted by the moral code of the society in which it is performed.

What does an argument need in order to be sound?

An argument is sound IFF it is both valid and factually correct

Precisely what sort of form must a valid argument have?

An argument is valid if all the premises are true, and guarantees the truth of the conclusion (whether premises are actually true or not)

Define validity

An argument is valid iff it is such that the truth of the premises would guarantee the truth of the conclusion: if all the premises were true, then the conclusion would have to be true, too.

What does it mean to say that x is necessary for y?

x is a necessary condition for y if x does not occur/obtain, then y will not either in order for y to occur/obtain, x must also occur/obtain y only if x

What does it mean to say that x is sufficient for y?

x is a sufficient condition for y if x occurs or obtains, then y must also occur or obtain

Examples of Sufficient Conditions

"If you're in Lawrence, then YOU'RE IN DOUGLAS COUNTY" "Anything that is a square has got to BE A RECTANGLE"

Examples of Necessary Conditions

"In order TO BECOME PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, you must be a native-born citizen of the United States" "You won't GET INTO THE POOL AT THE YMCA, unless you are wearing a swimsuit"

What traits does Warren think we would look for to decide whether an entity has moral status?

1. Consciousness: first-person awareness of external objects and events, the capacity to feel pleasure or pain, 2. Reasoning: the developed capacity to solve new and relatively complex problems, 3. Self-motivated activity: the capacity to initiate movement "independent of external control," 4. Communication: the capacity to transmit messages of an indefinite variety of types (on an indefinite number of topics), 5. Self-understanding: the presence of a concept of oneself, awareness of oneself.

State AU

An Action is morally right IFF it maximizes hedonic utility

Explain the main idea behind each premise of the Socrates' Euthyphro argument.

1. If DC is true, then either theological voluntarism is true, or else the acts God commands are right by some independent standard. (p ➔ (q v r)) 2. It's not the case that theological voluntarism is true. (~q) (conception of morality by theological voluntarism implies that, without God, nothing would be right or wrong ,God's commands are arbitrary, and this threatens the idea that God is good (omnibenevolent), gives us bad explanations for what makes acts right and wrong and is is mysterious) 3. Therefore, if DC is true, then the acts God commands are right by some independent standard. (p ➔ r) 4. If the acts God commands are right by some independent standard, then morality is not the monopoly of religion: we can look for the standard that God himself uses and apply it directly. (r ➔ s) 5. Therefore, even if DC is true, then morality is not the monopoly of religion: we can look for the standard that God himself uses and apply it directly. (p ➔ s)

What argument does James Rachels propose instead of the utilitarian argument for the legality of PAS? Evaluate this argument.

1. If an action or social policy serves the best interests of everyone concerned and violates no one's rights, then it is morally right. 2. PAS—if legalized and practiced in accordance with rules like those adopted in California—would in at least some cases serve the best interests of everyone concerned and would not violate anyone's rights. Part of Rationale for Line 2: If you request PAS yourself while competent, and PAS causes your death, this does not violate your right to life. 3. Therefore, PAS—if legalized and practiced in accordance with rules like those adopted in California—is morally right in at least some cases.

What is Jeff Jordan's argument against same-sex marriage?

1. If there is an irresolvable public dilemma about issue x, and there's no overriding reason to prefer resolution by declaration, then the state should pursue a policy of accommodation. 2. There is an irresolvable public dilemma about same-sex marriage. 3. There's no overriding reason for the state to resolve the dilemma by declaration. 4. Therefore, the state should not sanction same-sex marriages, thereby accommodating those who are opposed to it (perhaps it can offer civil unions).

Explain both premises Kant uses to establish his conclusion to let others to make their own choices for themselves.

1. You should make your own rational choices for yourself. 2. You should not make an exception for yourself. If these premises are true then you should allow others to make their own life-defining choices for themselves

State Kant's CI2 (the Formula of Humanity)

An act is morally right iff in performing it, the agent treats him- or herself and all others as ends-in-themselves.

Which premise of Jeff Jordan's argument does David Boonin reject? Why does Boonin seem to think that it would not "accommodate" LGBTQ individuals to have, e.g., civil unions?

3. There's no overriding reason for the state to resolve the dilemma by declaration. Denial of equal protection under the law constitutes is an affront to the equal dignity of gay people, and a denial of basic rights enjoyed by all other Americans. So there is overriding reason for the state to resolve the dilemma by declaration, just as it did in over-turning segregation laws and laws against interracial marriage. Furthermore, it does not "accommodate" the interests of same-sex couples to keep same-sex marriage illegal! So neither course of action accommodates everyone.

Explain all of the main objections to AU (PEEPING TOM)

A 'peeping Tom' spied on [Angelynn] through her bedroom window and secretly took pictures of her undressed. Further suppose that he did this without ever being detected and that he used the photographs entirely for his own pleasure, without showing them to anyone. Now, under these circumstances, the only consequence of his action seems to be an increase in his own [pleasure]. If AU is true, then it would be morally okay for the 'peeping Tom' to take pictures of Angelynn without her consent.

Explain the technical terms associated with the CR theory

A SOCIETY is a collection of people living in close proximity one to another, who share many beliefs and values, political and economic institutions, and many social customs. Sometimes, the members of a society will share a language, a cuisine, and/or a style of dress. The MORAL CODE of a society are beliefs about what behavior is morally acceptable and/or morally forbidden that are widely shared within a society; what the vast majority of people believe about morality.

Explain the main idea behind AU in your own words

A person's act is morally right if and only if it produces the best possible results for everyone in that specific situation.

State DC

An action is morally right IFF it does not violate any one of God's commands

What is the distinction between active and passive euthanasia?

Active Euthanasia: The physician administers a drug (or allows the patient to self-administer a drug) that terminates the patient's life. Passive Euthanasia: The physician withholds crucial life-saving treatment, which in turn causes the patient's death.

What is the fundamental project of moral philosophy?

As Socrates and other Greeks conceived it, it is to explain what makes morally right actions right (and wrong actions wrong)

What does it mean to treat someone as an end‐in‐themselves?

Basically, treating people as end-in-themselves means treating them with respect—in a way that recognizes that they are free and equal rational choice-makers. The total opposite of treating someone as an end-in-themselves is to treat them as a "mere means,"

What additional two goals/justifications of punishment does Hugo Adam Bedau discuss?

Bedau says the main function of punishment is to reduce crime. Bedau says a secondary goal of punishment is to express indignation.

Would either of the two goals/justifications that Hugo Adam Bedau discusses ever support the use of the death penalty?

Bedau says the main function of punishment is to reduce crime. The death penalty doesn't reduce crime more than lifetime imprisonment. Bedau says a secondary goal of punishment is to express indignation. However, this goal can justify the death penalty only in a very small number of rare cases, where the importance of expressing indignation outweighs all other factors (e.g., genocidal leaders like Adolf Eichmann, Saddam Hussein, perhaps Slobodan Milosevic and Ratko Mladic.)

State and explain the principle of benevolence

Beneficence means treating others with kindness and courtesy. It means expressing concern for the welfare of others through your choices and actions. If you can remove a current evil or harm, and you can easily do so, beneficence says you should do so.

Explain all of the main objections to AU (SMALL SOUTHERN TOWN)

Billy Bob is the Sheriff in a small southern town. There have recently been a series of brutal murders in this town. The townspeople are very scared and panicked. They are demanding that the police catch the killer, so that they can hang him and go back to living in peace. Police and city officials believe the town's minister - who recently committed suicide - was behind the brutal murders. But they don't have any hard evidence, and the townspeople would never accept this (they all loved the Minister). To make matters worse, last night there was a "copy cat" crime: somebody killed the barber and made it look like one of the serial killer's crimes. If he authorizes a frame-up hedonic utility is maximized by the real criminal goes unpunished. If AU is true, then Billy Bob is morally obligated to authorize the frame-up.

One premise in a popular argument for criminalizing drugs states that "The government should prohibit people from doing things that harm themselves." Why does Michael Huemer reject this premise?

Consider some examples of things people do that are harmful (or entail a risk of harm) to themselves: smoking tobacco, drinking alcohol, eating too much, riding motorcycles, having unprotected or promiscuous sex, maintaining relationships with inconsiderate or abusive boyfriends and girlfriends, maxing out their University of Colorado credit cards, working in dead-end jobs, dropping out of college ... Should the government prohibit all of these things? No. The government should not attempt to prevent self-harm.

Give an example of a behavior that is illegal on the grounds that it puts others at risks, even though it doesn't necessarily violate anyone else's rights.

Drunk driving

Explain all of the main objections to AU (ORGAN HARVEST)

Dr. Denton is a famous transplant surgeon at a top-rated medical facility. Today, he has five patients who are in need of transplants. Sadly, there are no organs available. All these patients are great benefactors to society. If any of them die, many people will be very sad. Dr. Denton is thinking about how sad this is when he is on his way to the free clinic across the street, where he sees a few patients each day out of the kindness of his heart. Mr. Digit is again in the waiting room at the free clinic. His finger is hurt. Mr. Digit is a social outcast who lives entirely alone. He has no family left and no friends. Glancing at Mr. Digit's medical records, Dr. Denton sees that Mr. Digit has a perfect tissue match for each of his five organ-needy patients, he could put Mr. Digit under general anesthesia, harvest his organs, and kill him with a lethal dose of morphine. If AU is true, then it is morally permissible for Dr. Denton to kill Mr. Digit and harvest his organs.

What policy do you think it makes sense to adopt on drugs given the degree to which they put other people at risk? Should all drugs be treated similarly?

Drug addicts are going to find a way to get drugs no matter what. If we make it legal, it will be less likely to put others at risk because of taxes placed upon the drugs, the elimination of cartels, and therefore less innocent bystanders deaths. Not all drugs should be treated similarly as some have more of a toll on the body and cases more harmful actions.

State Noonan's assumption about killing and the right to life (KRL)

If x has a right to life, then it is morally wrong to take actions resulting in x's death unless another life is at stake.

Leiser considers four interpretations of the idea that homosexuality is unnatural. According to the first, homosexuality violates the law of nature. According to this interpretation, is homosexuality really unnatural and or necessarily wrong?

Homosexuality violates descriptive laws of nature is false, There is no law of nature to the effect that "homosexual sex acts never occur." Homosexuality does not violate the laws of nature, therefore it is not necessarily morally wrong.

Explain all of the main objections to AU (GRANDPA)

Grandpa has worked for fifty-five years as a welder. He is now 78 and retired. He was a great contributor to his community. But now he is tired. He has been looking forward to spending his golden years fishing, which he really enjoys. On a particular morning, there are several actions that Grandpa could perform. Hedonic utility is maximized if he goes downtown and work making soup for people at the homeless kitchen. If AU is true, then going to work at the soup kitchen is morally obligatory for Grandpa.

Why does James Rachels reject the utilitarian argument for the legality of physician‐assisted suicide?

Happiness ... is only one among may values that should be promoted: freedom, justice, and respect for individual rights are also important. ... Therefore, the first premise of the utilitarian argument is unacceptable (If an action or social policy serves to increase the amount of happiness in the world or to decrease the amount of suffering in the world, then it is morally right.). Suppose a person is leading a miserable life - full of more unhappiness than happiness - but does not want to die. ... [T]he person should not be killed; that would be plain, unjustified murder

What is the point of Socrates' Euthyphro Argument?

He sought to show that even if the Gods exist, there is a deeper explanation for right and wrong then their commands.

Huemer writes that taking drugs exercises one's right to control one's own body and does not necessarily violate anyone else's rights. Why does he believe this? Explain.

Huemer concedes that drug use sometimes harms others, but he says it does not harm others in ways that warrant criminal penalties. [I]t is not just that we are punishing [drug-users] for no good reason. We are punishing them for exercising their natural rights. ... [A] person has the right to exercise control over his own body - including the right to decide how it should be used, and to exclude others from using it. [D]rug use seems to be a paradigm case of a legitimate exercise of the right to control one's own body. Drug consumption takes place in and immediately around the user's own body; the salient effects occur inside the user's body. If we consider drug use merely as altering the user's own body and mind, it is hard to see how anyone who believes in rights at all could deny that it is protected by a right ...

Leiser considers four interpretations of the idea that homosexuality is unnatural. According to the fourth, it involves using one's genitalia contrary to their proper function. According to this interpretation, is homosexuality really unnatural and or necessarily wrong?

Human genitalia may not have an objective function/purposes. Or, they might have multiple functions/purposes (including pleasure). Therefore according to this interpretation homosexuality is not necessarily morally wrong.

Why does Singer reject the sort of view that is held by Kant and Warren?

Human infants are similar to the severely mentally handicapped, and the permanently comatose who lack theoretical and practical reason, yet they are still our moral equals.

We considered two objections to the morality and legality of physician‐assisted suicide (PAS): (a) that it involves "playing God," and (b) that it violates the hippocratic oath. How should the defender of PAS reply to these objections?

If "playing God" means "introducing innovations into the course of nature," then this would mean that all medicine is morally wrong. This is not plausible. If "playing God" means "making life-or-death decisions in a flippant, unserious, or reckless way," then this is wrong, but it's unclear that participating in PAS is always "playing God." If "playing God" means "causing someone to die who would otherwise have lived," then PAS is definitely playing God, but it is unclear exactly why "playing God" is wrong. The modern version of the oath does not include these phrases

Can a valid argument have a false conclusion?

If a valid argument has a false conclusion, then at least one premise must be false

Explain what makes right acts right according to Pluralism

If it fulfills the most important prima facie while violating less important ones to the smallest degree possible

What trait does Singer believe determines whether a creature has moral standing, or not? Explain his reasoning.

If it is Capable of suffering and/or experiencing enjoyment or happiness—i.e., if its life could go better or worse for it. If a being suffers there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration. No matter what the nature of the being, the principle of equality requires that its suffering be counted equally with the like suffering—insofar as rough comparisons can be made —of any other being.

Main objections to CR that we discussed in class (FAUZIYA)

In 1996, a 17-year-old girl named Fauziya ... fled her native country of Togo, in West Africa, to escape what people call 'excision' [surgical removal of the clitoris and labia minora to deny women sexual pleasure]. Her father, who owned a successful trucking business, was opposed to excision, and he was able to defy the tradition because of his wealth. But her father died and under the authority of her aunt was prepared to be excised. Fauziya with the help of her mother escaped. If CR were true then it is morally permissible for the doctor in Togo to mutilate Fauziya against her will.

State and explain the principle of autonomy

Informed and rational self-governance, i.e., freedom from controlling influence by others and from personal limitations that prevent choice. Autonomy requires the absence of external constraints—and the presence of critical mental capacities for voluntary decision-making. To respect a person's autonomy is to recognize a person's capacities and perspective, including his or her right to hold certain views, make certain choices, and take certain actions based on personal beliefs and values.

How does soundness differ from validity?

validness is one of the necessary conditions for soundness, whereas a premise can be valid without the argument being sound

Precisely what characteristics must laws have according to King in order for breaking them to be morally okay?

It degrades human personality. It treats some human beings as objects or things. It is enacted by a group who would object to being bound by it, themselves. Those who are affected by it had no say in whether it would be enacted.

Main objections to CR that we discussed in class (SLAVERY ADVICE)

It is 1840. Bob has just moved from New Hampshire to Alabama, where he has bought a bed and breakfast. Bob notices that some of the white people in Alabama own slaves. The slave-owners work the slaves for 12-hour days in the hot sun; they punish disobedient slaves severely; they routinely sexually assault and rape female slaves. From talking to his neighbors, Bob learns that all this is completely accepted by the vast majority of people in Alabama—even by the slaves, themselves! The moral code of Alabama society permits owning slaves and treating them quite cruelly. Bob had heard about slavery, but after seeing it up close, he is very troubled. He says to himself, "I know what the people down here believe, but I wonder: is it really morally okay for people to behave like this?" If CR is true, then Bob can find out everything relevant to the answer of his question by finding out what the moral code of Alabama society says about slavery.

What does CR really imply about the morality of tolerance?

It is arrogant for us to judge other cultures? If the moral code says "Be tolerant!", then one should be tolerant. If the moral code says "Kill all the infidels!", then one should be intolerant. In other words, CR does not necessarily support tolerance. It all depends on the local culture's moral code. If you want to claim that tolerance is a universal value, subscribing to CR will not let you do it.

Explain all of the main objections to AU (NEAREST AND DEAREST)

Mary rushes home from work when she hears that her apartment building is on fire. She is worried about her little daughter, Reanne. When Mary gets home, she sees that Reanne is trapped inside. The fire department is supposedly on their way, but they have not yet arrived. Mary runs inside, hoping to save Reanne. On the second floor, she sees that her neighbor, Paul, who is a cancer researcher at an important clinic, is also trapped underneath a beam. She knows that his work may save hundreds of lives. If she moves the beam off Paul, part of the frame will collapse on her daughter. She realizes that she can only save one person. Mary knows that it would maximize utility to save Paul. If AU is true, then Mary did the morally right thing.

Main objections to CR that we discussed in class (NO MORAL PROGRESS)

Moral progress occurs when a group of people go from having false beliefs about what is right and wrong to having true beliefs about what is right and wrong—and then acting in accordance with these improved beliefs. If CR is true, then when the moral code changes on some issue like this, people do not go from having false beliefs to having true beliefs. CR requires that the majority is never failing in their moral opinions. Whatever they believe is true, merely because they believe it. This makes self-correction and change for the better impossible. If CR is true, then it never counts as moral progress when the moral code of a society changes.

Can a valid argument have true premises and a false conclusion?

No, because the truth of the premises would have to guarantee the truth of the conclusion

Thomson rejects KRL, the idea that if a being has a right to life, then it is morally wrong to take actions resulting in its death unless another life is at stake. Explain her reasoning.

On her view, just because an entity has a right to life does not mean that it is morally wrong to take actions that result in its death. Uses the case of famous violinist for her reasoning.

According to King, when one breaks unjust laws, how must one go about it?

One who breaks an unjust law must do it openly, lovingly ... and with a willingness to accept the penalty. ... [An] individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and willingly accepts the penalty by staying in jail to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the very highest respect for the law.

How does Singer approach moral standing?

Peter Singer proposes that we all have exactly one moral right: the right to equal consideration of interests.

How does Primoratz reply to the objections that (a) the death penalty violates a person's absolute right to life, and (b) the death penalty is irrevocable and irreparable?

Primoratz agrees that the right to life is fundamental; however, he denies that it is absolute. He argues that if the right to life is absolute, then it is morally wrong to kill in the course of a just war or revolution, and it is morally wrong to kill in self-defense. It is not morally wrong to kill in the course of a just war or revolution, or in self-defense. Therefore, the right to life is not absolute. Every punishment is irrevocable. So this merely shows that we need to correct "deficiencies, limitations, and imperfections of criminal law procedures." Abolition would result in murderers receiving less than they deserve.

Which justification for punishment does Primoratz use to argue for the moral and legal permissibility of the death penalty?

Primoratz defends retributivism as a general justification for punishment: Punishment is morally justified insofar as it is meted out as retribution for the offense committed. When someone has committed an offense, he deserves to be punished: it is just, and consequently justified, that he be punished. This retributivist theory of punishment, he says, implies that the use of the death penalty is morally obligatory (not merely permissible).

Why may Warren's criterion not rule out the idea that third‐trimester fetuses are persons?

Recent scientific research shows that fetuses have the neurological connections required to feel pain at approximately the 24th week of pregnancy (the physical substrate for this is called the thalamo-cortical complex). However, until birth, fetuses are in a dream-state due to a range of neuroinhibitory and sleep-inducing substances produced by the placenta and the fetus itself (adenosine; steroidal anesthetics, allo- and pregnanolone; prostaglandin D2). Still, third-trimester fetuses have some minimal form of consciousness. Therefore, they do not lack all the traits. So P2 is false (as stated by Warren).

Leiser considers four interpretations of the idea that homosexuality is unnatural. According to the third, homosexuality is unusual. According to this interpretation, is homosexuality really unnatural and or necessarily wrong?

Rejects the idea that since homosexuality is uncommon and abnormal, homosexual sex acts are morally wrong. The underlying idea here would also imply that writing with one's left hand is morally wrong. According to this interpretation homosexuality is not necessarily morally wrong.

State and explain the four main justifications for state punishment.

SOCIAL DEFENSE: it confines the dangerous so that they cannot harm the public. DETERRENCE: it prevents the occurrence of future crimes (people will not commit them out of fear of punishment) REHABILITATION: it reforms the criminal so that he/she is no longer prone to commit crime. RETRIBUTIVISM: it serves a punitive function ("pay back"); it is proportionate retribution for the crime committed.

Some people believe that marriage is intrinsically procreative or involves "comprehensive union", and that this rules out same-sex marriage as a conceptual possibility. What might be said in response to these ideas by defenders of same-sex marriage?

Some people do not desire to have children or are biologically incapable of having children. There is nothing "illegitimate" about their marriages. Furthermore, if a man becomes handicapped from the waist down, he can still legitimately marry a woman. Therefore, either comprehensive union is not necessary, or it need not involve coitus.

Explain why there are two possible interpretations of the DC meaning

Socrates asks Euthyphro is the right commanded by the Gods because it is right, or is it right simply because it is commanded by the Gods? His point being that if DC were true, and the right actions are the ones that God commanded, we can still ask what makes these actions right? Are actions made right SIMPLY because God commands them (so that he could have made any actions right by commanding them) or does God command the right actions because he sees that they are right by some INDEPENDENT standard? It must be one or the other

Define "soundness."

The "bottom line" on arguments: a sound argument is a good argument, and an unsound argument is a bad argument

Why does CI2 lead to moral dilemmas?

The Atomic Bomb case shows how CI2, together with moral rationalism, leads to moral dilemmas. CI2 implies that there are situations where no action is morally right and no action should be performed. In these dilemma-cases, it offers no way of ranking bad alternatives from best to worst (or from "least wrong" to "most wrong"). But C12 is false as there is always some action that should be performed—some action that is at least less bad than the alternatives.

Explain the technical terms associated with AU

The HEDONIC UTILITY of an act is the total amount of pleasure that would be produced by the act for everybody concerned, minus the total amount of pain that would be produced by the act for everybody concerned. An act MAXIMIZES hedonic utility just in case no alternative action would produce more hedonic utility. An agent's ALTERNATIVES consist in all the things that the agent could do in the circumstances.

Explain the main idea behind CR in your own words

The idea that a person's beliefs, values, and practices should be understood based upon that person's own culture, rather than be judged by the criteria of another.

State and explain the principle of justice

The moral obligation to act on the basis of fair adjudication between competing claims. As such, it is linked to fairness, entitlement and equality. gratitude, reparation, fidelity

Define ethics

The normative study of human conduct, more specifically the attempt to achieve a systematic understanding of how we ought to live and why (subject-area within the discipline of philosophy)

Explain Warren's personhood thought experiment.

The question which we must answer in order to produce a satisfactory solution to the problem of abortion is this: How are we to define the moral community, the set of beings with full and equal moral rights, such that we can decide whether a human fetus is a member of this community or not? Imagine a space traveler who lands on an unknown planet and encounters a race of beings utterly unlike any he has ever seen or heard of. If he wants to be sure of behaving morally toward these beings, he has to somehow decide whether they are persons, and hence have full moral rights, or whether they are the sort of thing which he need not feel guilty about treat as, for example, a source of food"

When does King believe it is morally acceptable to break laws?

There are two types of laws: there are just and unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that 'An unjust law is no law at all.' ... I can urge men to disobey segregation ordinances because they are morally wrong. (it is morally okay to break unjust laws)

Leiser considers four interpretations of the idea that homosexuality is unnatural. According to the second, homosexuality is unnatural because it does not occur in nature. According to this interpretation, is homosexuality really unnatural and or necessarily wrong?

There have been documented cases of homosexuality in other animal species. Therefore homosexuality is not necessarily morally wrong.

Thomson rejects KRL, what example does Thomson use to cast doubt on this principle?

Thomson presents a thought experiment about a famous violinist to convince us of this. You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist's circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. The director of the hospital now tells you, "Look, we're sorry the Society of Music Lovers did this to you--we would never have permitted it if we had known. But still, they did it, and the violinist is now plugged into you. To unplug you would be to kill him. But never mind, it's only for nine months. By then he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you." If KRL is true, then it is morally wrong for you to unplug yourself from the famous violinist. But Thomson believes that it is not morally wrong for you to unplug yourself from the famous violinist.

For Kant, why ought one to let others to make their own choices for themselves?

Under Kant knowing what rationality requires, then you should allow others to make choices for themselves, too (unless their doing so threatens someone else's ability to do the same).

What is the distinction between voluntary and involuntary euthanasia?

Voluntary Euthanasia: The patient gives free and informed consent to the treatment that brings about their death. Involuntary Euthanasia: The patient explicitly refuses to consent to the treatment that brings about their death.

Can a valid argument have false premises?

Yes, some arguments are valid based upon the format, but have factually incorrect premises

What is a moral dilemma?

a conflict in which you have to choose between two or more actions and have moral reasons for choosing each action

What is an argument (in philosophy)?

a series of considerations (the "premises") that are presented by an author in support of some point of view that he or she wants to convinces us of (the "conclusion")

What four things (a)‐(d) does Kant say are required in order to treat individuals as ends‐in‐themselves?

a) You do not maim, damage, or kill him* b) You respect his autonomy, by treating him only in ways to which he would consent c) Your treatment of him enables him to satisfy his duties of self-perfection Though self-perfection always requires (c) avoiding self-destruction (etc.) and enabling others to do the same, one cannot saying precisely how much self-perfection is required. Similarly, though philanthropy requires (d) some amount of charitable giving, exactly how much cannot be specified. Positive duties of self-perfection: cultivate understanding Negative duties of self-perfection: avoid body mutilation d) You help him with his permissible projects (those that do not involve treating others as mere means)