Reference no: EM132403537

Define the following terms:

1. Deontology:

2. Maxim:

3. Categorical Imperative:

4. Hypothetical Imperative:

5. Formula of Universal Law:

6. Formula of Humanity:

7. Consequentialism:

8. Principle of Utility:

9. Rawls' Difference Principle:

10. Veil of Ignorance:

11. Teleology:

12. Reparations:

13. Libertarianism:

14. Social Contract:

Multiple Choice:

1. Though John Stuart Mill agrees with Jeremy Bentham that happiness is the highest good, he argues out that "it is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied." By this remark he indicates how:
i. Some kinds of happiness are more desirable or valuable than others.
ii. According to the utilitarian principle, the greatest happiness is determined by the greatest number.
iii. Happiness ought to be desired (and thus is desirable) because people, in fact, desire to be happy.
iv. Uncultivated people are as competent to judge what happiness is as are cultivated people.

2. Suppose that a utilitarianclaimed that we are morally obligated to contribute to famine relief with all our money up to the point where we become equally poor. A critic could respond that this position ignores one central fact about human nature, namely, that we are more inclined to help members of our own family or culture than others, and therefore should not be expected to do what we are not inclined to do in the first place. To this the utilitarian would respond:
i. Taking care of those near us produces more overall happiness than taking care of others.
ii. The amount of need in some cultures is greater than in others; our own needs are greatest.
iii. While such feelings may be significant psychologically, they are irrelevant morally.
iv. Our moral obligations to promote the happiness of our family, friends, and immediate culture are more important than even obligations to protect the lives of others.

3. Sandel argues that injustices against minorities would be permitted under utilitarian principles, since the violation of the rights of a few might produce more overall happiness than respecting those rights. Utilitarianswouldrespond that, on the contrary, injustices against minorities would not be encouraged under their principles, because:
i. According to utilitarian principles, minorities have no rights.
ii. If unjust practices became the rule in a society, there would be more unhappiness.
iii. Minorities do not experience happiness and unhappiness in the same way as the majority of societies.
iv. Calculation of the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people does not necessarily have to include consideration of all members of a society.

4. According to Kant, virtuous actions are those that are done for the sake of duty. A good act is when we act for the right reason or with the right motive or intention. Kant limits the discussion of the moral character of actions to motives or intentions because:
i. The consequences are often out of our control and are valued differently by different people
ii. Only intentions produce the greatest good, which Kant defines as the greatest happiness for the most people.
iii. Moral decisions are conditioned by one's culture and by how one is raised
iv. Every time someone acts, he or she has a motive; but there are not always consequences to acts.

5. According to Kant, morality presumes that as a rational agent, I am able to do what is morally right because it is morally right. So, unless doing my duty is my motive in acting, my action is not morally good, because:
i. Actions that are done solely for the sake of doing my duty do not promote the happiness caused by the actions as much as actions done because they are morally right.
ii. Sometimes doing my duty conflicts with doing the right thing--especially when doing the right thing involves acting in accord with my religious beliefs.
iii. If my motive in acting is that I am willing to take responsibility for the consequences of my action, then my action is morally good.
iv. Acting with motives other than doing my duty--for example, acting out of instinct, passion, or interest--is not universalizable and thus cannot be the basis for rational behavior.

6. According to Kant, an action which has a motive or intention that cannot be successfully universalized:
i. Might be moral or immoral, depending on the consequences of the action.
ii. Might be moral or immoral, depending on whether the act is considered acceptable in the person's society.
iii. Is immoral.
iv. Might be moral or immoral, depending on whether the action is done freely.

7. Kant claims that I can determine whether all other rational beings are obligated to do what I am obligated to do by trying to see whether:
i. Certain practices are universally accepted throughout different cultures.
ii. Other examples of my action yield good consequences.
iii. The action would be universally good for all individuals.
iv. The motive of my action can be universalized without contradiction.

8. Kant argues that acting in accordance with duty does not make an action morally worthwhile; rather it is acting for the sake of or because it is one's duty that makes the act morally worthy. He makes this distinction to indicate how:
i. The consequences of one's actions might be good or bad depending on how much happiness is produced.
ii. Actions that are done freely are always morally good actions.
iii. The moral value of an action is determined by one's motives, not by the consequences of one's actions.
iv. Acting in a self-interested way differs from acting based on maxims.

9. Moral virtue, for Aristotle, entails acting in accord with the dictates of reason as determined by:
i. An objective, shared standard of right and wrong equally applicable to all people.
ii. The consequences of the actions.
iii. The mean or point of moderation between the extremes of possible alternative ways of acting.
iv. The denial of one's own interests in favor of the good of one's community

10. According to Aristotle, a happy life is a life of virtue, one in which the individual contributes to the good of his or her community and is respected for such contributions. At the heart of his description of the morally good life is one's honor in a society, because being an honorable individual means being someone who:
i. Recognizes how his or her own well-being is intimately linked to the good of the community.
ii. Appreciates how moral values vary from culture to culture and from individual to individual
iii. Can live a life of moderation without having be sensitive to or involved in social or civic affairs.
iv. Contemplates philosophical principles in order to understand the truths of nature.

11. Rawls conceives of the original contract as one to:
i. Enter a particular society
ii. Set up a particular form of government
iii. Establish the principles of justice for the basic structure of society.
iv. Establish the content of morality

12. The purpose of the veil of ignorance is to:
i. Ensure that the principles of justice are not too complicated for ordinary people to follow.
ii. Make the decision of which principles of justice to adopt simpler and easier.
iii. Show the many benefits of utilitatianism.
iv. Prevent participants from adopting principles of justice that unfairly advantage themselves.

True or False :

1. According to Aristotle, because happiness is not only the goal of all human beings but also defined by anyone as he/she sees fit, there is no ultimate standard of ethics.

2. In Aristotle's virtue ethics, moral value is a purely private matter, unconnected to how people interact with others in the community.

3. Deontological theories of ethics determine the moral value of actions in terms of their consequences.

4. For the utilitarian, the whole purpose of ethics and virtuous behavior is the production and increase of happiness.

5. According to the utilitarian principle of morality, one should always act so as to produce the greatest overall and long-term amount of happiness for the greatest number of people.

6. A deontological ethical theory is one that makes judgments about the morality of actions based on the ends, purposes, or consequences of the actions.

7. Kant's categorical imperative states that we should always act for the sake of doing our duty except when doing our duty conflicts with deeply held personal or religious values.

8. To act virtuously, Kant argues, means to act for the sake of doing one's duty-even if that means going against one's religious beliefs.

9. To say that a moral imperative is categorical means (for Kant) that the demand should be obeyed without exception, regardless of the negative consequences of acting on it.

10. Teleological ethical theories characterize moral obligation in terms of categorical rather than hypothetical imperatives.

Short Answer: Answer 2 of these (No more than 5 or 6 sentences on these).

(1) What does it mean to treat someone as a means and not an end in themselves? Use an example to illustrate your point.

(2) What does it mean to respect someone as an end in themselves and not as a mere means? Use an example to illustrate your point.

(3) The movie 13th makes an argument that there is a direct connection between slavery and the prison system. What is the connection? What is your take on this argument?

(4) Why does Sandel not think that a voluntary army is the most just way to recruit for the armed forces?

Essay: Answer one of the following questions.

(1) Presidential Candidate Elizabeth Warren recently proposed a new policy "Medicare for All." The plan would provide universal health coverage to all Americans, regardless of income. According to her campaign, the new program will not raise taxes on the middle class; instead, it will be funded through a higher tax on people with more than a billion dollars. Supposing the plan to be economically viable, it is just? In your answer, examine how a (1) libertarian (2) utilitarian, and (3) Rawls would respond to this question. Make sure to say both (i) what they would think and (ii) why they would think it.

(2) According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, President Donald Trump's budget plan for fiscal year 2020 proposes massive cuts for public services that help individuals and families afford basic goods. In particular, the budget proposes cutting $220 billion (about 30%) from SNAP (formerly food stamps), the program that provides food to low-income families and individuals. The budget would dramatically restructure how SNAP benefits are delivered and would cause 4 million people to lost SNAP benefits. The cuts would affect every category of SNAP participant, including the unemployed, the elderly, individuals with disabilities, and low-income working families with children. In large part, the cuts are necessary due to the tax cuts Trump enacted last year that reduced taxes for the wealthiest people in the country.

Supposing the plan to be economically viable, it is just? In your answer, examine how a (1) libertarian (2) utilitarian, and (3) Rawls would respond to this question. Make sure to say both (i) what they would think and (ii) why they would think it.

Attachment:- Home Test.rar