Reference no: EM133400565
Question 1) In this chapter, Rachels provides a number of situations and considers the moral arguments that arise for each of them. What do these situations have in common? That is, how are they similar?
Question 2) How are the situations different? What are your reactions to these situations? Who do you tend to side with? Do you think your reactions are consistent across all of the examples?
Question 3) How are the Spur (or Switch) and Fat Man (or Footbridge) Trolley Problems similar and different? What are your reactions to these situations? How do you explain the different reactions to the two situations.
Question 4) What is a slippery slope argument? Provide an original example. What does Rachels say about Slippery Slope Arguments? Are they generally good? Generally bad? Neither? What do you think (be sure to explain your views)?
Question 5) What is a benefits argument? Provide an original example. What does Rachels say about Benefits Arguments? Are they generally good? Generally bad? Neither? What do you think (be sure to explain your views)?
Question 6) What is the Minimum Conception of Morality (MCM)? What function does it serve for Rachels? What should we say about a person (or theory) that meets this conception? What are the two criteria that a person (or theory) must meet to satisfy the MCM? Explain each of them. Do you agree or disagree with Rachels about the MCM?
Question 7) How might these argument types (and others that Rachels discusses in this chapter), and the MCM, inform a discussion about the Trolley Problems? Is there any way to make a connection between them?
Question 8) What did you think of Chapter 1 of the Rachels text? Was it a helpful introduction to the subject? Did you find it easy? Difficult? About right?
Question 9) What did you think of the article "Clang Went the Trolley"? Interesting? Dull? Informative? Had you heard of these Trolley Problems before?