Class Notes (836,147)
Canada (509,656)
Philosophy (438)
PHIL 237 (84)
Lecture

PHIL NOTES.docx

3 Pages
111 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Philosophy
Course
PHIL 237
Professor
Sarah Stroud
Semester
Winter

Description
PHIL 237 Prof. S. Stroud Contemporary Moral Issues Winter 2012 Essay Questions for the Final Exam As noted in class, the final exam will contain a) a set of multiple-choice questions focusing on material covered since the midterm (you will receive no futher information about this portion of the exam), and b) a set of essay questions. FIVE of the essay questions below will appear on the exam, and you will have to answer all five. The multiple-choice portion of the exam will count for one-sixth (1/6) of your exam mark, as will each of the five essays. Because you are receiving all the essay questions in advance, our evaluation of the exams will reflect our expectation that you will have thought through and prepared a mental outline for each essay question in advance. This means we will be expecting answers to the essay questions that are well-organized and as in-depth as you can make them in c. 30 minutes of writing time per question. You will have to carry your essay outlines in your head, as no books or notes will be permitted in the examination itself. Be advised that each essay you write as part of your exam should stand alone as an independent essay which could be marked without looking at the rest of your exam. Therefore you cannot, as part of your response to one question, simply refer to your answer to another, even if the questions overlap–you must write out your answer to each question separately and in full. It is OK if this involves repeating in one essay a point you had already made in another. 1. Consider the following: Owning, and driving just for the pleasure of it, an expensive, gas-guzzling SUV. Singer, Wenz, and Sinnott-Armstrong all have (or would have) things to say from a moral point of view about this practice. What moral verdict would each deliver on this practice? What arguments, and/or moral theories, would each use to support his verdict? Which of these analyses do you find most cogent (if any), and why? Intro: Singer: initial purchasing is wrong. Driving would be wrong. Should have given to charity. Small actions make a difference, like in poverty. You have the capacity to make a difference; therefore you are morally obliged to make a difference. It’s the Wenz: All consumerist activity leads to social harm. It wouldn’t be virtuous You aren’t obliged but he wouldn’t endorses it just for pleasure sake. Buying an SUV in the first place is giving into consumerism. Virtue-Ethics approach. Sinnot-Armstrong: Although a single individual can’t make a difference and there’s no moral obligation to save environment on small scale, you should act in light of the performance. Although, it is morally better to avoid pollution. Based on principle. I would agree with Sinnot-Armstrong. Most practical and addresses our role as indivudials overlapping with the large scale responsibility of the government. 2. Consider the difference between following two scenarios: A) Person P1 makes a deci
More Less

Related notes for PHIL 237

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit