PHIL152
First midterm exam -- Study guide

The exam will consist of 5 or 6 short-essay questions drawn from the following pool. I may throw in some objective questions as well.

1.Consider the following claim: Although I have no objection to capital punishment in principle, I would be more comfortable in a world without it. Why would somebody make such a claim? Do you consider it a reasonable one? Why or why not?

2.Should rehabilitation be a consideration in death row inmates who ask for their sentences to be reduced to life in prison? Once sentenced to death, should rehabilitation while awaiting execution be morally significant to society in considering a change in the sentence?

3.According to Bedau, the strongest practical objection to the death penalty is that it is inequitably applied. According to van den Haag, its inequitable application is not a serious objection to the penalty itself. Who is right, and why?

4.Although they're presented with the same kind of evidence, van den Haag concludes that capital punishment is a better deterrent than prison while Bedau concludes that it isn't. Explain the assumptions and reasoning behind these different conclusions. Which side do you agree with, and why?

5. What is the retribution justification for capital punishment? What arguments can be set forth in favor of it and against it? Which do you agree with? Disagree with? Why?

6.Imagine that you are a would-be parent who wants to reproduce by cloning. Develop the most compelling arguments you can in support of your wish. Include responses to the criticisms of reproductive cloning.

7. Do ethical concerns over embryonic stem cell research depend on whether a fertilized egg is considered a person with full moral rights to life? Is it possible to consistently support embryonic stem cell research and reject abortion rights? What arguments would show that one can consistently hold both positions? What arguments show one cannot?

8. How does concern over genetic engineering affect reasoning concerning all stem cell research, whether embryonic or adult stem cells? Should we simply let “nature take its course” and ban all stem cell research, as well as all cloning?

9. How does Steinbock reach the conclusion that embryos used in research lack moral status and thus may be used ethically for this purpose? What objections can be raised to her position?

10.What are the purported dangers of human cloning? How serious are they? Are they strong enough to support either banning or restricting the process?

11.Both Warren and Thomson defend a woman's right to an abortion, but they approach the issue with different assumptions. Explain these differences, and why Warren thinks that Thomson's are inadequate. Is Warren right? Why or why not?

12. How does Hursthouse's approach to the morality of abortion differ from the approaches of the other readings? Does it shed any light on the issue? Why or why not?

13. Which of the readings best represents a middle view in the abortion debate? Why? How well does it defend its position? In answering, be sure to contrast it to the other readings.

14. Thomson asks us to suppose a variety of unlikely scenarios as analogues to abortion. Why? Are they good analogies or bad ones? Why?

15.Where do you draw the line in determining the personhood of the fetus? How would you rebut the opposing arguments presented by the readings?

16.Technological improvements have made it possible to learn a great deal about the nature of a developing fetus, including genetic diseases it will likely develop later in life. What is the impact of this knowledge on the likelihood that more women will seek abortion so they can give birth to a “perfect” child? Is abortion for these reasons justifiable? Should women be required to give a good reason for having an abortion?

17.Is sex between consenting adults a purely personal matter, or does it have an important social dimension as well? In defending your answer, be sure to refer to the readings.

18.Do standard traditional and libertarian arguments apply equally to heterosexual and homosexual relations, or is homosexuality a special case of sexual morality? In defending your answer, be sure to refer to the readings.

19. Many considerations have been brought to bear on sexual morality. Which do you think the most central? Why? Which do you think the most trivial? Why?

20 Compare and contrast the goals of marriage in the essays by Weizweig and Mohr? What are the benefits of these relationships? What are the costs? What is the significance of legal sanction of these relationships?