Philosophy Exam 2

How do those factors play out with respect to climate change? (Hint: Scientists and international cooperation).

"Brilliant" scientist told us & international cooperation would help solve the issue. •We called the scientist brilliant but then do not listen to what they say. However, f we all cooperated and listened to these brilliant scientist we could solve the problem.

Explain the three central features of utilitarianism that Rachels identifies (Ch 8)?

1. Only consequences matter 2. Only happiness or unhappiness of the consequences matter 3. Strict impartiality

When 2000 college men were asked if they had ever forced sex w/o consent, how many said yes? 1/5, 1/16, 1/50, 1/100, or 1/1000?

1/16

What % of films allegedly meet these requirements? 1/10, 1/3, ½, 3/4, 9/10?

1/2

According to this article, what percent of college woman are sexually assaulted? 1/3, 1/5, 1/10, 1/20, 1/50, 1/100?

1/5

What percent of married women in dual earner households out earn their husbands? 4% or 30%?

30

What % of CEO in Fortune top 1000 companies are women?

4

Explain the arguments each would use against the other's views

A Utilitarian would said that retributivism increases the suffering in the world. They believes that is argues for an increase in suffering without any benefits. Moves the world away from maximum happiness. •A retributivist says that utilitarianism fails to respect persons and human dignity because a person chose to be treated that way. Using crime as a deterrence uses people as means to an end to get them to be like you want them to be. Rehabilitation manipulates people to be how you want them and therefore does not let them be an autonomous person

Give a utilitarian evaluation of the rightness or wrongness of euthanasia. Do you agree with this account?

A Utilitarian would say that is may be right to euthanise an individual in certain circumstances. That is, when it brings max happiness. In the case of Sigmund Freud, the Utilitarian would argue that is was the right action because Freud was in so much pain that he could theoretically bring noone happiness. Because killing him would bring Freud into a world without pain it would therefore increase overall happiness.

Define feminism both as we did in class and from your own perspective. Are you a feminist? Why or why not?

A commitment to ending the subordination/domination/oppression of women

Provide a utilitarian defense or critique of our use of animals for food

A defense: if we did not use animals to feed some humans then we would run out of food for the population. When you eat meat you are filled up easier than if you just eat veggies. Yes, we may be able to feed some with veggies but to sustain the entire population we must use animals for food. Therefore, the benefits of human survival shall outweigh the negatives.

Are humans natural? Are we just as natural as beavers or birds? Are humans part of nature? Are we (also?) separate from it and importantly different? What does Hettinger think about this issue? What do you think?

AME believe that humans are fully natural but Hettinger believes human are both natural and unnatural. We are biological creatures, evolved with and dependent on the earth but we are also moral, social, psychological technical, economic, and political beings.

Does our society reward people because of superior natural endowments that they possess and/or because they were born into a wealthy and well-educated family? Is this just? Fair? Is it treating people as they deserve to be treated?

Absolutely, and the policies that can justify this are resources/organizations that help disadvantaged people or the situation(s) they are in

Do humans today have a responsibility to manage earth? Consider these reasons for answering "yes:" "There is no pristine nature left; Humans have altered everything on earth," "We are already managing earth and must learn to do it well," "We have so disrupted nature that it can no longer survive on its own w/o our management," and "Without human management of the planet, nature will not longer provide the benefits to humans we need to survive."

According to Hettinger, he would say no. He would say that instead of assuming the responsibility of continuous management of the earth we must abandon our assault on it. He says it anthropocentric for us to assume that without us nature would not survive because we have altered it. He seems to argue that nature does not need us to thrive. It may need us to assist to survive because humans have damaged so much, but it does not need constant management.

State Kant's "categorical imperative." What does it mean?

Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become universal law. It means that if the rule that you act by is one you'd be willing to have everyone follow all the time, than it is permissible.

Identify and explain some of the main ideas behind what Hettinger identifies as "Age of Man Environmentalism." Consider its views on preservation, restoration, rewilding and the value of naturalness. What does it say about humans managing the planet, about the relationship between humans and nature, about how to understand nature? Contrast those ideas with what Hettinger calls the views of "traditional environmentalism."

Age of Man Environmentalism: •Responsibility to the earth •Made the earth/nature the way that it is today •Manage the earth •Provide preservations, restore, and rewild •There is no place where humans have not touched/influenced •Humans are of nature Traditional Environmentalism: •Have no responsibility to the earth •Management of people and not the environment •Rewild as much as possible, but restore and preserve if necessary • The rarity of untouched nature provides greater value •Humans are separate from nature •Must use the social sciences to fully understand humans and is not needed to fully understand the rest of nature

Explain and give an example of an absolute moral rule. Do you think there are any such rules?

Anscombe on absolute moral rule: •Killing innocents as a means to end is murder •Prohibition on killing innocents is one inviolable rule •Don't be tempted by hope of consequence

What is "the Anthropocene?"

Anthropocene- humanity with its technology remaking the planet.

Describe some of the ways in which it has been claimed that women and men think and act differently. Are their personalities (on average) different? If so, how so? If so, what accounts for this? Nature? Nurture?

Aristotle said that "women are not as rational as men." Kant said "women have no civil personality and should not have a voice in public life" it has also been said that women are weaker or get their feelings hurt more. Rousseau: They possess different virtues, neither better than the others. But it turns out that men's virtues fit them for leadership and women's for home and hearth •Own opinion next • a. Nurture: Women think differently because of social role to which they have been assigned • i. Been assigned to do the housework and take care of children • ii. Values of care could be part of this psychological conditioning • b. Nature: Since women are child-bearers, women's nature as mothers makes them natural care-givers • i. They come equipped by nature with required (care giving) skills and mentality

What is an "artifact?"

Artifact- something created/designed/constructed by humans

Describe Dennett's story where his body and brain and himself all get separated.

Asked to go fetch a radioactive atomic warhead a mile underground Tulsa, Oklahoma. Its harmful radiation would affect the brain, but the not rest of his body. Leave his brain behind in a vat in Houston, Texas. Hook up radio links between his brain and his body. Dennet wonders whether he is in a vat looking at his body or outside the vat looking at his brain (hence, "Where Am I"

Explain why a consistent utilitarian must include the pleasure/pain of animals in deciding what it is right to do.

Because a utilitarian is only concerned with maximizing happiness and if an animal can feel pain or is a sentient being then it must be included in the calculation. Whose suffering does not matter, it just matters that is happens.

Explain why a utilitarian commitment to equal consideration of the interests of humans and sentient animals, does not mean they should be treated the same

Because humans have capabilities that other animals do not have that may cause humans to suffer more. For example, losing ones mother would be different for a human vs. an animal.

Why does the determinist think our choices are determined? How are they determined?

Because there are circumstances that exist before that determine how we act and what we do. Law of nature also applies and it governs everything including our actions. Given the laws of nature and the circumstances before us, we were determined to make the choice we made.

State the test. Hint it has 3 (or perhaps 4) requirements. What is it a test for?

Bechdel test (/ˈbɛkdəl/ bek-dəl) asks whether a work of fiction features at least two women who talk to each other about something other than a man. The requirement that the two women must be named is sometimes added.

How might one answer the question, why be virtuous? How does Aristotle answer it?

Being virtuous makes you a better person. •Aristotle says that people lead better lives by being virtuous and doesn't have the vice of being overindulgent. Hettinger in class: "It seems that Aristotle gives an egoist definition of this. It is good for you and it is in your self interest."

What is the difference between the problem with the ozone layer and climate change problem?

Climate change: Fossil-fuel driving CC opening up parts of arctic to oil/gas exploration which may lead to more fossil fuel driven CC and more areas of Earth exploited for fossil fuels

What is the difference between a consequentialist moral theory and a non-consequentialist moral theory? Which can and which cannot support absolute moral rules and why?

Consequentialists say that any moral rule can be broken if circumstances demand it. Non-consequentialists believe right acts are determined by factors other than the consequences.Non-consequentialism supports absolute moral rule because somethings may not be done no matter what the consequences.

How do utilitarians respond to the objection that their views of morality have consequences that violate common sense.

Counterexamples to utilitarianism don't really maximize good consequences. Utilitarians go against common sense morality isn't a criticism of utilitarians but shows that common sense morality is flawed.

Using courage as an example, explain what Aristotle means when he says virtue is a mean between two extremes which are vices

Courage is a mean between extremes of foolhardiness (an excess) cowardice (a deficiency) in the face of danger.

Is cruelty to animals wrong on this view? Why or why not?

Cruelty is animals is not wrong on this view to some extent because they are only here for use of humans and therefore humans, on this view, can treat them however they want as long as they do not violate duties to other humans.

How will it be different from the Holocene in terms of stability?

Difference: the last 250 years, many species have gone extinct, CC (climate change) has become a real problem and nature has gotten screwed up. The Holocene was beginning 12,000 years ago when everything could stabilize itself and now that doesn't happen.

What has happened in the last 20 years to domestic violence rates, rates of sexual assault & rapes, and the share of housework and child care that men do?

Domestic violence rates have been halved since 1993, while rapes and sexual assaults against women have fallen by 70 percent in that time. In recent decades, husbands have doubled their share of housework and tripled their share of child care. And this change is not confined to highly educated men.

Define and then explain the relationship between domination and nature's autonomy.

Domination: Agent overwhelmingly comprising a subject's autonomy Nature's autonomy: letting it be self determining

What is dualism? What is physicalism? What is the "identity theory?" Explain and compare how physicalism and the dualism understand mental states and people.

Dualism: mental stuff -> consciousness/mind/soul. Physical stuff-> brain/body/physical world •Physicalism: only 1 kind of thing, namely physical stuff. Mind and brain are the same (identity theory)

Is one main message of our society and the media that what is most important for a woman is how she looks; that is, that a woman's worth depends on looks and it doesn't matter what her accomplishments are, she is judged on looks.

Easily, but there are also media sources that attempt to help women understand that their worth is not dependent on their body image or gender.

What is "evolutionary psychology" and how do some believe it explains some of the differences between men and women's values, psychology, and behavior?

Evolutionary psychology: claims that a major feature of human psychological life is due to natural selection. •Men and women think differently because it was the way it was needed for people to survive.// men can father hundreds of children but women can only mother one at a time. Men put more emphasis on getting women pregnant than fathering them and women have to focus investing heavily in each child. This perhaps explains the ethics of care and why men are more sexually driven than women.

Using the example of visiting a friend in the hospital, explain why Rachels thinks that virtue ethics handles moral motivation better than does either utilitarian ethics or Kant's universalizability ethics.

Ex: You are in the hospital and a friend comes to visit you due to utilitarian reasoning. It makes you happy and it makes him happy too. However, utilitarianism examines all other possibilities, what if he went to a nursing home, wouldn't that maximize happiness if everyone's interests count the same (Impartiality)? Rachel thinks that virtue ethics will give you a better account (in some cases) of what your motives should be when you act. Virtue ethics say be a good friend, visiting your friend in the hospital is what a good friend would do. Util. and self interest.

How important is the media in shaping our values? Does media "create consciousness?"

Extremely important, media is the main source of networking and outreach to all age groups and often shows cultural norms and what is accepted at the time

Explain the reasons for why one might think utilitarianism is too demanding a moral theory. How does the notion of strict impartiality fit into this criticism?

False that we should be equally concerned for everyone; reject strict impartiality. Equal concern for everyone is too demanding. Utilitarians are unable to make distinction of Duty v. Supererogatory

Explain why Rachels thinks an ethics of duty/obligation/principle is ill-suited to deal with the moral relations among family and friends. Does an ethics of care do better here?

Family and friends have a close relationship with you and you should therefore have some kind of obligation to them that you would not have to a stranger. Instead of calculating the best thing it should be something more of a caring nature. Ethics of care does better in this situation.

Describe some of the differences between feminist ethics ("care ethics") and the traditional male ethics of justice/principle? (This feminist ethics chart might help). You might also use the Jake/Amy drug stealing story.)

Feminist ethics (care perspective) differs from traditional male ethics (justice perspective) in multiple ways. 1.Feminist ethics believe in providing care, maintaining relationships, and communicating. Male ethics believe in the ethics of duty and obligation. They have respect for rights and personal liberty. Say that preventing violation of rights is most important. 2.Feminist ethics people define themselves as social in nature and believe in networks of relationships. They recognize interdependence. Male ethics people separate from others and define themselves by personal achievement. Believe it is self vs others 3.Feminist ethics highly values connectedness. Male ethics is more isolated moral agent and believe in self-governing. Believe everyone is entitled to pursue one's interests as long as it does not violate the rights of others 4.Feminist ethics believe their connections with people are a source of comfort and protection from isolation. Male ethics believe this connectedness is a threat to their autonomy and signifies dependence. 5.Feminist ethics reasoning is informal and personal. Male ethics reasoning is formal, legalistic. They tend to depersonalize.

Does advertising make women self-conscious and insecure

For the most part, but other companies are understanding this is a problem and work on correcting the issue.

Explain the similarities and differences between the Free Will, Determinism, and Compatibilism positions. What are each of their views on whether or not a person (1) has free will (2) is determined, and (3) could have done otherwise that what she did?

Free will -you choose to act one way rather than another you were free to have acted differently - you could have done otherwise - determinism must be false and aren't compatible Determinism -Your actions is determined by preceding causes sufficient to bring about the effect and so you aren't free to have acted differently -you couldn't have done otherwise -you don't have free will. DT and FW aren't compatible Compatibilism -Free will and determinism are compatible - You're free when certain psychological states determine the action rather than external forces - although your action was totally determined you acted freely because you had wanted to -It's determined in advance that you would choose cake - But true that nothing would have prevented you from having peach if you had chosen it instead of cake

Describe Kohlberg's "Heinz drug stealing story" experiment, what conclusion he draws about women and men's moral development and then explain Carol Gilligan's "Care Ethics" response

He asked young kids if they think Heinz should steal the drugs to save his wifes live. The answers showed the guys responded with an ethic of principle or that it could be solved by principle and that over all the man should steal the drug because his wifes life is worth more. Girls (Amy) responded with ethics of care and that he should find another way around the situation to prevent anything from happening. She was caring in a personal way not an overall for humanity way. •Ethics of care: argues for a feminist point of view in ethics and rejects idea that an ethic of care is a lower level of moral development •Nurture: Women think differently because of social role to which they have been assigned • i. Been assigned to do the housework and take care of children ii. Values of care could be part of this psychological conditioning •Nature: Since women are child-bearers, women's nature as mothers makes them natural care-givers • i. They come equipped by nature with required (care giving) skills and mentality

Jamieson and Nadzam use the example of "driving one's SUV to the 7-Eleven for a Slurpee" in order to make what point? (Hint: Responsibility/agency)

He is saying that in doing this, you may not be the direct cause of CC but you may be contributing to it and complicit in it because you know that it happens.

Is the value of naturalness and nature's autonomy more or less important in the Anthropocene? What does Hettinger think and why? What do you think?

He thinks that naturalness and nature's autonomy are more important to the anthropocene because there is less nature to value so it makes it more important

What is hedonism?

Hedonism - idea that happiness is the only thing good in itself or that pleasure is the only intrinsic good/pain is the only intrinsic bad

Does Rachels agree or disagree with hedonism? Why? In other words, does he think happiness is the only thing that matters intrinsically (i.e., is good in itself)? Explain how Rachels two examples count against hedonism (pianist with damaged hands and friend ridiculing you behind your back)

Hedonism - idea that happiness is the only thing good in itself or that pleasure is the only intrinsic good/pain is the only intrinsic bad •Rachel rejects it because hedonism falsely assumes that things are good and bad only in terms of how they make us feel

How will a defender of virtue ethics answer the question about how we should act? In other words, for virtue ethics right action is ______________?

Hettinger in Class: "Right action is: Do what Jesus would do. Do what the virtuous person would do."

What does Kant mean when he says that morality requires us to treat humanity as an end and never as a mere means? Give examples of treating humanity as a mere means . Now give an example of treating a person as an end in him/herself.

Humans are rational agents that bring morality in world. Treating humans as end-in-themselves = respecting their rationality/autonomy

Why does Kant think humans are special? And in what way are they special, according to Kant? Do you agree with him

Humans are special because... •Humanity is different and better than all •Humans have intrinsic worth, dignity, value above all price

What is the difference between an hypothetical and a categorical imperative? Give examples. Which kind of imperative does morality involve and why?

Hypothetical states that you should do something if you want something else. (if you want to go to law school than take the entrance exam). Categorical states that you do regardless of what you want, independent of any desires. Morality involves categorical imperatives.

Explain why some think dualism has trouble explaining causation between mental and physical states.

If mental states are not physical it becomes a mystery how they interact. The assumption is that only something physical can cause something else physical. However we know that there is an interaction between physical and mental states. Therefore, mental states must be physical states.

What is the difference between holding someone morally responsible and trying to train them to behave differently?

If someone is always determined and they do something that you punished them for then it would be like punishing a dog for chewing the rug, it's trying to train behavior. Holding them morally responsible would be when one has free will in choosing to do something.

What is "the sexy lamp test?"

If you can switch the female character w/ a sext lamp and the plot makes sense, it's a feminist production

ow does Dennett use the idea of putting a convicted criminal's brain in prison (but not his body) to show that you are not identical with your brain?

Imagine you committed a crime and they caught your brain (in a vat), but not your body. Locking up your brain and letting your body go free does not punish you. Your brain would be in prison, but you'd be on the beaches of Mexico drinking Pina Coladas. Seems clear they would not have successfully punished you or kept you in prison. So you are not your brain.This seems confusing at first but consider that your brain would be getting sensory information from the beach, not the prison.

Explain the notion of impartiality and some problems with impartiality as an ethical ideal. Does Rachels' conception of right action insist on strict impartiality in all cases? For what reasons does Rachels allow a departure from strict impartiality?

Impartiality is the idea that EVERYONE'S good or well being is accounted for. He rejects psychological egoism, ethical egoism. He says that location, time, and species is not relevant. Rachels does not believe in strict impartiality and says that because we are social creatures who can care about others, it is sometimes impossible to be impartial.

What reasons does Kant offer for thinking humans are special? It it true that these reasons apply only to humans and not other creatures?

In contrast, animals are a mere means to human ends •They have no intrinsic value but have instrumental Humans may not be treated as having merely instrumental value

Do you agree with Jamieson and Nadzam that in many ways love and nature are inseparable?

In some ways I agree. If you care for things that are not in your face doing something for you then I think it increases your compassion and love for others. (This is just my opinion and I was just putting an answer, feel free to put your own).

What has happened to job segregation by gender in the last 50-60 years?

In the last 10-15 years? Consider computer science as an example.The 1970s and 1980s brought an impressive reduction in job segregation by gender, especially in middle-class occupations. But the sociologists David Cotter, Joan Hermsen and Reeve Vanneman report that progress slowed in the 1990s and has all but stopped since 2000. For example, the percentage of female electrical engineers doubled in each decade in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. But in the two decades since 1990 it has increased by only a single percentage point, leaving women at just 10 percent of the total.

Identify at least one reasons to think humans are part of nature and at least one reason it is important to distinguish humans from nature

Inside of us, we are all natural beings. We were created by the universe. Made of up natural elements. •But there's a difference: someone killed by a man vs. one killed by an earthquake. It doesn't fill rational to say they were both killed by nature.

Explain and give examples of the difference between intrinsic (valued for its own sake) and instrumental value (valued as a means to something else).

Intrinsic- valued for own's sake EX:Pleasure Instrumental- valued as a good/means EX: money

What is "radical virtue ethics" and why does Rachels object to it? Does Rachels reject virtue ethics entirely?

It is the idea that virtue ethics is complete in itself and ethics does not need a theory of right action in addition. •He rejects it and tells us to get rid of the notion of right action or morally wrong action and substitute virtue or vice descriptions ◦Yes, he does reject it entirely.

How does it respect nature's autonomy?

It only lets nature do what it wants to a certain extent, to what humans think it the normal pristine. It does not respect its autonomy all the way through.

If free will is indeterminism, what effect does that have on moral responsibility?

It undermines moral responsibility because it had no cause and therefore wasn't determined by your beliefs, personality or desires it seemed it happened without a cause and wouldn't make sense to punish here either.

The free will proponent thinks some things are determined and some things not. Give concrete examples of each.

It was only your choice that decided which it would be •You could have chosen a peach even if everything else had been exactly the same as it was up to that point when you in fact chose cake •It's an open possibility that you'll choose a peach until the moment •Some things are determined in advance. Like the sun will rise at a certain hour. Not an open possibility that it won't

What does Rachel's suggest that feminist ethics (based on caring and preserving personal relations) would say about our moral obligations to children with HIV in the developing world? To farm animals (in contrast to pets)? Contrast the feminist ethics response with the (male) "ethics of principle" response. Which is better on your view?

It would say that without a personal relationship caring can't take place so there is no obligation to caring for the children overseas. This is to suggest that caring in a personal way is better than impersonal. •We have a relationship to our pets so we have a moral obligation to them rather than to farm animals. •Men have dominated public life and therefore developed an ethic of principle (male ethic) and obligation, in private life, where women generally dominated calculating and bargaining does not apply being loving and caring do. That is where ethics of care arises.

Explain the argument for dualism that claims that mental states do not have locations, weights, or shapes.

Mental states don't have locations (or other physical characteristics) like physical states do so they must be different •How much weight does it weigh and what shape is it and it it stationary or moving •Is an argument for dualism If mental states aren't physical it becomes a mystery how the 2 interact; how mental states can causally affect physical states or how a physical state can casually affect a mental state (the mind) •Assumption -> only something physical can cause something else physical •But we know this casual interaction happens •Thus mental state must be physical states •This is an argument for physicalism

What is "speciesism?"

Mere fact of being human is what makes us superior

What are some reasons for thinking the nature on earth today is significantly artifactual?

Most of the nature we see today is manipulated to fit a certain purpose for humans. We have created it to be what we want. Dam the water when we need it to stop, changed how the forest grows when we want a neighborhood. It goes on and on.

Describe and explain Rachels own moral theory (what he calls "Multiple-Strategies Utilitarianism"). How does it conceive of right action? In what way is it utilitarian? In what way does it involve Kantian respect for persons? In what way does it incorporate virtue ethics?

Multiple-Strategies Utilitarianism: Combo. of impartially promoting a general welfare (max. happiness) Then there is a Kantian perspective thrown into it which considers if a person is deserving of the benefit. ◦E.x. If your neighbor refuses to give you a ride when your car breaks, then when his car breaks down, you should not give him a ride because he is not deserving of it. ◦Hettinger In Class: "He takes this back and says that if we treat people like we deserve, the society improves. He justifies treating people as they deserve is leading back to utilitarianism. In the end this is utilitarian justifiably."

What is Nagel's view on this debate (is he a dualist or physicalist)? Does he think physical science will be able to explain everything?

Nagel's response: -Not enough to make something painful that it causes you to yell and is usualy caused by injury -pains are pains because they feel a certain way. It's different from all their relations to causes and effects as well as the physical properties they have - Nagel doesn't believe that inner aspect of pain and can be analyzed in terms of any system of causal relations to physical stimuli and behavior •Nagel thinks that reasons against purely physical theory of consciousness so strong that likely a physical theory of the whole of reality is impossible

What are the "natural and social lotteries?" Give examples.

Natural Lottery: Some people are born with High/Low IQ, height, etc. •Social Lottery: Some people's parents read to them and parent them - some people's parent have drugs around the house and are friends with them.

Explain how Hettinger defines "naturalness" and "nature." On his account, does nature exist only when something is "pristine" and "untouched by man?" Does nature exist in urban parks? In the human person?

Naturalness- the degree to which an entity is not influenced by humans. •Nature- that which is outside of human domination and retain significant autonomy from humanity. Also, the given, unbidden, aspects of the world. ◦No, it exists even when it is not virgin nature. Nature does exist in urban parks, think about the birds. And it defiantely does in the human body.

What does it mean to say nature is "amoral?" That it is "other?" That it is "sublime?" That it is "home."

Nature as amoral: respecting nature because of its blind force and power •As the other: respecting it for its radical otherness. •As the sublime: Profound aesthetic significance in its overwhelming power and vastness

Jamieson and Nadzam note that "Book of Matthew tells us sun shines on just and unjust alike." What does this have to do with geo-engineering, humility and compassion?

Nature has always been something we had to rely on to keep us alive and therefore we must be good to it. But now, that is not the case and many people rely on technology to fix things they screw up so there is not humility involved

What is a "nature lover?" Are you a nature lover? Why or why not?

Nature lover: relation to nature helps define them

Give an example where someone fails to consistently apply a moral reason.

Nazi patrol asks dutch captains where they are going and whos onboard: wrong to lies also wrong to kill innocent people

If act A made 10 beings happy and act B made 50 beings happy would a utilitarian be committed to saying act B is better than act A? Why or why not? (Consider degrees of happiness)

No a utilitarian would not say that act B is better than act A because while act A only made 10 people happy and act B made 50 people happy it does not include how happy it made them or the amount of unhappiness in each scenario. However, it depends on the degree of happiness each individual is experiencing. This is a big component of utilitarianism

Does Rachels think an ethics of care should replace an ethics of principle/justice? Does he think we should reject the ethics of care?

No he does not think that ethics of care should replace that of principle and justice because feeling and emotions are often an unsteady guide of character and at one time led people to think that women are subordinate to men.

Should humans manage the earth's climate? Should humans decide which plants and animals will survive in which places on earth? Do we have a choice?

No we should not manage any of that. Rather quit messing with it. In some cases, when human assistance is needed then we must give it mindfully but not continue to manage. Yes, we have a choice.

If act A made people happier overall than did act B, would a utilitarian be committed to saying act A is better than act B? Why or why not? (Consider effects on all sentient beings)

No, because if act B made one person happier than the overall happiness of act A, then the Utilitarian would say that act B is better than act A

Should our society be based solely on what people deserve? That is should wealth, power, employment, status be based only on what people deserve? Why or why not?

No, just because someone is lucky does not mean they are not entitled to something. If everyone got what they deserved then there would be alot of people with nothing and a few with something.

If act A made all beings overall happier than did act B, would a utilitarian be committed to saying act A is the morally right act? Why or why not? (Consider alternatives that produces even more happiness)

No, just because you provide more happiness in act A doesn't mean that act A is morally right.

Explain how brain transplants undermine the idea that you are wherever your body is

Obama brain transplant example: Imagine putting your brain in President Obama's body and taking Obama's brain and putting it in your body. Would you be in the White House or in class? You would be in the White House! If you asked the person in the White House (who looked like Obama but had your thoughts what they had for breakfast, they would give answers from the brain, not the body. This implicates that memories play a critical role in who you are.

What is the difference between respect for nature as a duty and as a virtue?

Our duty would be because we have been given the responsibility to take care of it because we use it so much but Jamieson says it is also a virtue and should be used in ethics because it is a way to show respect for ourselves.

What are two important factors that led to successfully addressing the ozone problem?

Ozone layer problem: CFC's in air conditioners and spray bottles are causing the ozone layer to deteriorate

How does this story cause trouble for physicalism's view of the person (that you are identical with your brain). (Consider looking into a vat where your brain is,)

Physicalism argues that one's thoughts are identical with brain states. If we assume Dennett's thoughts are located wherever he is, then his thoughts are not identical to his brain states as they are separated from them.

Jamieson identifies 3 reasons for respecting nature as prudence, meaning, and psychological wholeness. Explain what he means by each of these reasons.

Prudence: it's in our own interest. /// it is in our own interest to fight CC so that we have a safe place to live •Meaning: for many, nature is an important background condition for their lives to have meaning./// landscape, how everything is country may be important to southern identity •Psychological Wholeness: respecting the other is essential for respecting ourselves. Failing to respect is a type of narcissism.

Does Rachels think the virtues are the same for everyone or does he think virtues are culturally or socially relative? Give examples

Rachels believes in Multiple-Strategies Utilitarianism: A combo. of impartially promoting a general welfare (max. happiness) Then there is a Kantian perspective that he says only if this person deserving of this benefit. ◦E.x. If your neighbor refuses to give you a ride when your car breaks, then when his car breaks down, you should not give him a ride because he is not deserving of it. ◦Hettinger In Class: "He takes this back and says that if we treat people like we deserve, the society improves. He justifies treating people as they deserve is leading back to utilitarianism. In the end this is utilitarian justifiably."

Explain what Rachels means when he says impartially promoting the interests of everyone rules out considerations of race, sex, species, location, time, and preference for oneself. Do you agree?

Rachels means that we must exclude race, sex, species, location, and time from our considerations because they are discriminatory prejudices (mainly race and sex). He also says that where the interests are is not important (location) not is time relevant and we must consider future generations interests as much as ours (time). Finally, he says that humans are a very small part of the history of the world and we should take into consideration the interests of all sentient beings (species)

Explain in what way Rachels' view a "morality w/o hubris."

Rachels view is a morality without hubris because he stresses modesty when discussing humans' place in things. He says we are recent arrivals on the planets and everything on the planet is not here just for us, but it was here long beforehand and we should not think of ourselves as the most important part of creation. He rejects the anthropocentric view of morality.

What is the relation between domination of nature and respect for nature? Are humans dominating nature in your opinion?

Relationship: Nature is increasingly affected and governed by humans and is therefore losing its autonomy. Nature in some way has always been affected by humans but today, the degree by which it is done is becoming one of a dominating nature. To respect nature would be to use it by more than mere means however, that is not what happens. •In my opinion, humans are dominating nature.

What are the two principles of retributivist punishment and explain how utilitarian violates each.

Retributivism objects utilitarians view of punishment... •Fails to respect persons and undermines human dignity •Deterrence uses people as a means to an end (prevent crime) •Rehab manipulates these people's personalities and molds them into what society wants them to be Utilitarians violates retributivism justice (people should only be punished becauses they committed a crime and punishment should be proportional to crime) •No limit on punishment to the guilty •Nothing limits punishment to the amount deserved

Explain why retributivists think that punishment shows respect for the person punished.

Retributivism shows respect for people by treating them as they deserve. By allowing people's conduct to determine how we respond to them, we respect their free choices and give them control over their lives

What is rewilding?

Rewilding- turning nature loose on a path we did not specify

What is rule utilitarianism (as opposed to act utilitarianism)?

Rule Utilitarianism: Principle of utility is guide for choosing rules, not individual acts

What does Kant mean when he says that moral rules must be universalizable? Give an example of a rule of action which Kant believes is not universalizable and explain why it is not (hint: is it self-defeating and/or not reversible?)

Rules must be not self defeating, reversible and consistently applied to be universalizable. (cutting in line is self defeating is universalized)

Explain Nagel's main (taste of chocolate) argument for accepting dualism. Why does he think the experience of the taste of chocolate is not something physical? Why does Nagel talk about scientists licking your brain? If your brain did taste like chocolate to a scientist licking your brain (while you were eating chocolate), would that mean he perceived your taste of chocolate, according to Nagel?

Scientist will discover which states of the brain can be identified with which mental states (experience of tasting chocolate, for example) •We'll discover the experiences really are brain processes •Just as we have discovered that other familiar things have a real nature we couldn't have guessed until revealed by science •Might seem surprising that experience of tasting chocolate is nothing but complicated physical event in your brain

Explain why someone might think of nature as the enemy of humanity. Does this make sense in your own view?

Seeing nature as amoral can either make it seem necessary for dominating it OR respecting it. We can also see it as incredibly power and humanity as weak so it would put us at odds.

Why does the possibility of conflict in moral rules create problems for the belief in absolute moral rules?

Some moral rules conflict with each other and if they are absolute than we end up with a contradiction: one of them must not be absolute.

What is the "nature is pristine myth?" Do environmentalists' goals of preserving and restoring ecosystems involve the "pristine myth," that is, the belief that we should preserve untouched ecosystems and restore degraded ecosystems to a state they were in before humans influenced them?

That is has been untouched by humans and to restore it would be to put it back to the way it was before humans started to mess with it. Yes, environmentalists do believe in this myth.

Why might someone argue that free will requires determinism, rather than indeterminism (no cause)?

That person has free will to determine what they do before they do it.

What is the "Anthropocene?" Describe some of the human impacts that have led people to talk about the dawn of a new geological epoch named after humans.

The Anthropocene is a new epoch in the geologic timescale in which the mass changes that humans have created on the planet can be seen in the different rock layers since the halocene. Some of these human impacts are things like mass burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, and extinction of animals species

What is the difference between utilitarianism and ethical egoism?

The difference between utilitarianism and ethical egoism is that your happiness/unhappiness weighs the same as anyone else's in utilitarianism; whereas in ethical egoism your happiness is measured separately.

Evaluate these arguments in favor of physicalism: Everything else is made of matter, why not the mind? Unscientific to believe otherwise. Just like science discovered water made up of H2O (two gasses!), it will discover that mental stuff is made up of stuff very much unlike it.

The dualist reply to this argument is that the above mentioned discoveries were simply scientists finding out what smaller physical things made up a physical substance. However, dualist believe that in order to analyze states in terms of physical states it would involve analyzing an internal (and private) taste sensation by an externally observable physical substance. Say that science will NEVER be able to show that a mental phenomenon is a physical one.

Coontz suggests that boys/men need to liberate themselves from pressure to prove their masculinity because they are held back by a "male mystique" enforced by bullying and ostracism if they engage in "girlie" activities. What are her examples? Do you agree that this is a problem? Why or why not?

The masculine mystique leads to bullying and ostracism of boys who engage in "girlie" activities like studying hard and behaving well in school. One result is that men account for only 2 percent of kindergarten and preschool teachers, 3 percent of dental assistants and 9 percent of registered nurses. The masculine mystique is institutionalized in work structures, according to three new studies forthcoming in the Journal of Social Issues. Just as women who display "masculine" ambitions or behaviors on the job are often penalized, so are men who engage in traditionally female behaviors, like prioritizing family involvement. Men who take an active role in childcare and housework at home are more likely than other men to be harassed at work. Men who request family leave are often viewed as weak or uncompetitive and face a greater risk of being demoted or downsized. And men who have ever quit work for family reasons end up earning significantly less than other male employees, even when controlling for the effects of age, race, education, occupation, seniority and work hours.

Jamieson and Nadzam identify a particular problem in sacrificing today to make sure the future has certain goods. What is that problem? How serious a problem is it?

The problem is that we do not know what their future values would be and what they would appreciate in the future. We could change everything now and give up what we appreciate for them not to appreciate what we have done. (But they would have to appreciate things needed for survival like air and water and shelter)

Do feminists believe that men and women think differently? Which feminists?

There is no unified answer. Feminist from the 60 and 70s reject psychological differences but recent feminist do believe that they think differently.

Explain how Rachels "Multiple-Strategies Utilitarianism"-despite asking us to treat people as they deserve and acting virtuously-is really at bottom the utilitarian view that we ought to promote the general welfare. What are the "multiple strategies" for promoting the general welfare?

This is really a utilitarian view because Rachels justifies his arguments for desert and virtues by saying that acting based on these things promotes the general welfare aka produces the most happiness (utilitarianism)

What is the traditional "anthropocentric" view of moral standing/intrinsic value of nonhumans?

This is the view than non-humans (animals) have no moral standing and are not morally considerable in their own right. It is also to say they have no intrinsic value, and are solely for instrumental use.

In principle, could a computer program which is functionally equivalent to your brain (given the same inputs, it gives the same outputs as does your brain), be a substitute for your brain in terms of running your body (and being you?)? Would it be conscious?

This question hurts my head but I THINK a functionally equivalent brain could be a substitute as long as the inputs and outputs remained the same. As soon as they differed, the two would become different, as they did in the story.

How does treating people as they deserve to be treated enhance their freedom?

Treating people as they deserve enhances their control over their lives • If they want to be treated well by others, they will treat others well

What is involved in treating people as they deserve to be treated? What facts about a person are relevant in determining what she deserves? Consider: Her native intelligence, her fortunate social circumstances, her own past behavior, luck.

Treating people as they deserve to be treat involves treating them based on their past behavior as well as acknowledging them as free and responsible people. Rachels says past actions are the ONLY thing that matter when considering how people should be treated. He thinks that both the social and natural lottery should not play a role because it is a matter of luck and not deserved.

Explain and give an example of a "backward looking" moral considerations? What is the relationship between utilitarianism and backward looking moral considerations?

Utilitarian ignores backward-looking moral considerations/reasons •Utilitarians looks to the results of an action to determine if it's right/wrong; results are in the future so it ignores any considerations from the past •Ex: If I made a promise, I should keep it even if I'd be happier by breaking it

Explain the retributivist and the utilitarian view of punishment

Utilitarian- punishment is evil in itself apart from consequences because it causes unhappiness •Retributivism- punishment in itself good because it treats people as they deserve to be treated, justice requires it treats people with respect as autonomous agents, whose choices determine how others treat them

In what sense is utilitarianism a consequentialist moral theory?

Utilitarianism is a consequentialist moral theory by looking only at the consequences of your actions. This means that regardless whether you promised to meet someone if you level of happiness from staying home outweighs their unhappiness from you not being there then it is what you should do.

What is utilitarianism?

Utilitarianism is deciding whether a certain action is right or not based on the overall level of happiness produced by the action vs the overall level of unhappiness produced.

Explain why a critic of utilitarianism thinks it can't account for the moral concepts of rights and justice.

Utilitarians ignore considerations of justice/injustice ; it condones unjust behavior. punishment of innocent to save group.

How do these concepts purportedly show that utilitarianism's consequentialism (only the consequences of actions matter in determining their rightness) is false. Use examples to explain this criticism of utilitarianism. How might a utilitarian respond to this criticism?

Utilitarians ignore individual rights; it could justify violating people's rights like privacy •Rights aren't a utilitarian notion but a limit on utilitarian thinking. Rights put limits on what can be done to individuals for the good results that might come about

Explain the reasons why some think utilitarianism undermines personal relationships. Do you agree?

Utilitarians require we give up personal relationships because these relationships require partiality. We would do special things for friend etc. not a stranger which is partiality

What rationales would each give for punishment and what sorts of punishment would each accept? (Consider: Deterrence, rehabilitation of wrongdoer, and giving a criminal what she deserves.)

Utilitarians- deterrence, isolate criminals and rehabilitate wrong doers. No limit of punishment to the guilty nothing limits punishment to the deserved. •Retributivism - punishment treats people as ends in themselves to be treated

Explain how virtue ethics is different from an ethics of duty or right action. What do virtue ethics focus on that is different from traditional ethics (e.g., utilitarianism and Kantian non-consequentialism)?

Virtue Ethics focus on: Character as opposed to act. E.x. what traits make somebody good or what makes someone virtuous? Hettinger in class: "Be a good friend Kant and Util. lean to impartiality. This is what separates their views from virtue ethics because V.E.s say that you should be partial to your family and friends." Traditional Ethics include utilitarianism and Kantian non-consequentialism. Basically any theory that considers ethics of duty or right action.

Define what a virtue is and give examples of virtues (and opposing vices).

Virtue: A trait of character, manifested in habitual action, that it is good for a person to have ◦Courage ◦Generosity ◦Patience •Vice: Vices are those traits of character that leads us to avoid people ◦Impatience ◦Disloyalty ◦Dishonesty

Gates (in "Balancing the Burden of Unpaid Work") suggest that women in both poor and rich countries "do an outsized proportion of the unpaid work." Is this true in your family? a. Explain the story of the Tanzanian 14 year old girl.

We were still doing dishes late at night in the dirt under the moonlight at 10:30 at night. She doesn't even start her homework until after 10:30, whereas I saw her brother doing it when it was around 4 or 5 o'clock in the afternoon.

What is wrong with this goal?

What is wrong with this? Naturalness can be enhanced on its own without human touch. The only path IS NOT constant managing.

Evaluate the idea that humans have created nature or have created the earth as it is today. What is to be said in favor of this idea? Against it? Does nature now depends on us?

When answering this question through the perspective of an Age of Man Environmentalist yes humans have created nature/the earth as it is today through the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation and extinction of species. Age of Man Environmentalist view this as a positive thing and that people can now create preservations, restore certain species of animals and plants to where they had once lived, and rewild certain areas as deemed fit. Through an Age of Man Environmentalist perspective nature depends on the help of humans in order to remain healthy, otherwise people would use it all as resources etc. However when approaching this question through the perspective of a traditional environmentalist no humans have not created nature/the earth to what it is today. This is said because nature and the earth were here long before humans were and will continue to be here when humans are gone. Or if humans may have exasperated the current events it does not put humans in a position to be responsible in managing the earth. A traditional environmentalist does not believe that nature depends on humans to continue as stated before nature was here before humans and will be here well after humans.

Is "naturalness" value adding? That is, does something being (relatively) natural (uninfluenced by humans) frequently/typically make it more valuable than if it had been influenced by humans? Would the Old Faithful geyser in Yellowstone lose value if it was regulated by humans manipulation of its underground plumbing?

Yes, Hettinger believes that it is value adding. For example, we seem to admire an athlete when they are naturally gifted rather when they have to just put in a lot of effort. And it seems that Old Faithful does lose value because it is not longer nature doing its spontaneous work. Rather, it is the park controlling it. Some of the magic just disappears with that fact.

Is this concern equally true for men?

Yes, advertisements often show over-masculine traits and what "men" should ideally be like

Does naturalness come in degrees?

Yes, it comes in degrees. Little by little

Can naturalness return even without nature returning to how it was before it was influenced by humans?

Yes, naturalness can return without going back to how to was before. Nature changes but that does not make it have less naturalness once humans stop touching it.

Can humanization wash out of ecosystems so that they become more natural?

Yes, nature will restore itself to a normal balance.

Is its aim to restore nature to classic pristine ecosystems and manage them so they remain as such (museum pieces)?

Yes, that is the aim. Let it return and then manage it again.

Can the media be a powerful force for social change?

Yes, the media has the capability of being a very promotive or destructive tool of our society.

Does compatibilism accept the idea that we are determined? What kind of cause of our action does the compatibilist think is compatible with our free will and what kind not? What kind of cause of our action does the compatibilist believe allows for us being morally responsible and what not?

Yes, they accept that we are determined only because of our psychological processes. Our choices and desires are at free will but then we are determined to make a particular choice because of our desires. •You are morally responsible as long as the acts were determined by us and our processes that are flowing through us. If you are choosing a piece of cake because you want the cake and grab it then you are responsible for your choice. However, if someone grabs your arm or pushes you into it then you are not determined by your own nature so therefore you are not morally responsible. You are free as long as the causal chain of determining events flowed through you.

What weapon do the serial rapists use?

alcohol

What concrete public policy does Gates suggest for redistributing "unpaid work" in this country? Do you favor such a policy?

better family leave policy

Did they admit it reluctantly or did they brag?

brag

Does America lead the world in terms of women in national legislatures?

no

Explain what is at issue in the "mind-body problem." What are examples of conscious states? What are examples of physical states?

only physical stuff (physicalism, materialism) - Both physical and mental stuff (dualism) - only mental stuff (idealism)

Are campus rapists men who get drunk and make a one time mistake or are they serial rapists who target the most vulnerable women?

serial rapists

What is the main criticism of speciesism?

this is human bias and leads some to argue that women are better than men or one race is better than another

Does the media contribute to violence against women?

we found violence was a harsh word. We found harassment was a more appropriate term due to cat calling, inappropriate comments, etc. to women