Ethics Exam 2

Front 1

Give first argument for ethical egoism that claims that altruismis self-defeating. Is this is a good argument forethical egoism?

Back 1

(1) We out to do what will best promoteeveryone’s interests. (2) The best way to promote everyone’s interests is foreach of us to adopt the policy of perusing our own interests exclusively.Therefore, (3), each of us should adopt the policy of perusing our own interestexclusively.

-Premise (2) is false (e.g. feeding faminevictims). Premise (1) conflicts with ethical egoism and creates an argument forbehaving like an egoist for non-egoistic reasons.

Front 2

Rachels’ best argument against ethical egoism that claims EE is unacceptably arbitrary andthe potential problem with this argument"

Back 2

(1) Any moral doctrine that assigns greaterimportance to the interests of one group than to those of another isunacceptably arbitrary unless there is some difference between the members ofthe groups that justifies treating them differently. (2) Ethical Egoism wouldhave each person assign greater importance to his or her own interests than tothe interests of others. But there is no general difference between oneself andothers, to which each person can appeal that justifies this difference intreatment. Therefore (3) Ethical egoism is unacceptably arbitrary.

-Ethical Egoism violates the Principle ofEqual Treatment: We should treat peoplein the same way unless there is a good reason not to. pAg9

Front 3

Rachels’first argument for the permissibility of active euthanasia (“The UtilitarianArgument from Mercy”)

Back 3

(1) Any action or social policy is morally rightif it serves to increase the amount of happiness in the world or to decreasethe amount of misery. Conversely, an action or social policy is morally wrongif it serves to decrease happiness or to increase misery. (2) The policy ofkilling, at their own request, hopelessly ill patients who are suffering greatpain would decrease the amount of misery in the world. Therefore, (3), such apolicy would be morally right.

Front 4

problem with The Utilitarian Argument from Mercy

Back 4

Premise (1) is false, i.e. The Principle ofUtility is mistaken. “[T]he promotion of happiness and the avoidance of miseryare not the only morally importantthings . . . freedom, justice, and a respect for people’s rights are alsoimportant.”

-Example 1: The restriction of the freedomof religion in order to increase the amount of happiness overall. -Example 2, which is directly related toeuthanasia: The Principle of Utility would make it permissible to kill amiserable person, because it would decrease the amount of misery in the world.

Front 5

Rachels’ second argumentfor the permissibility of active euthanasia (“Doing what is in everyone’s bestinterests)

Back 5

If an action promotes the best interests ofeveryone concerned and violates no one’s rights, then that action is morallyacceptable. (2) In at least some cases, active euthanasia promotes the bestinterests of everyone concerned and violates no one’s rights. Therefore, (3), in at least some cases, activeeuthanasia is morally acceptable

Front 6

Doerflinger’s argument againstactive euthanasia (and assisted suicide) (“The Life versus FreedomArgument)

Back 6

(1) If assisted suicide (including activeeuthanasia) is morally permissible, then assisted suicide (including AE) is theultimate exercise of freedom. (2) But it is not the case that assisted suicide(including AE) is the ultimate exercise of freedom [due to theself-contradictory nature of this claim]. Therefore, (3) assisted suicide(including AE) is not morally permissible.

Front 7

one objectionto Doerflinger’s argument

Back 7

Objection 1---The analogy between suicide andselling oneself into slavery is weak. Doerflinger’s response: A slave is not worseoff than a corpse. If the pro-choice autonomy position does claim the slave is worse off than a corpse, this isinconsistent with their original position.

Front 8

explain Nozick’s “experience machine” argumentagainst hedonism"

Back 8

The experience machine wipes out memory, andonce you get into it there is no going back to your life. For the rest of yourlife you experience a constant state of pleasure and happiness. Most of us would not choose an experience machineover real life. This shows that we think happiness and unhappiness are not allthat matter, so we reject hedonism.ty":

Front 9

know what a supererogatory action is and whyutilitarianism is unable to recognize this moral category

Back 9

Acts that go beyond the call of duty. This isnow required under utilitarianism.

Front 10

explain at least one of Doerflinger’s“slippery slope” factors

Back 10

“Slippery slope” factors:(1) The psychological vulnerability ofelderly and dying patients. (2) The crisis in health care costs. (3) Legal doctrines on “substitutedjudgment.” (4) Expanded definitions of terminalillness. (5) Prejudice against citizens withdisabilities. (6) Character of the medical profession. (7) The human will to power.