Download Christian Ethics – First Quarter Review Questions (pp. 46

Christian Ethics – First Quarter
Review Questions (pp. 46-86) – Test #2 – October 8, 2013
KANT
1. To what historical period does Immanuel Kant belong?
2. What did Kant want to be the grounding for his ethics? What kind of arguments for moral norms did he want to avoid?
3. Why does Kant disagree with Aristotle’s claim that the purpose of our reason is to direct us toward happiness? What does he think would
lead us to happiness more efficiently?
4. Explain how Kant and Aristotle differ in their views about the relationship between: guidelines for how to be moral, and guidelines for
how to be happy – are they one and the same thing, or two different things?
5. What kind of guidelines are “counsels of prudence,” according to Kant?
6. What kind of guidelines are “categorical imperatives,” according to Kant?
7. Kant disagrees with Aristotle’s view that happiness is the end or goal of human beings and the foundation of the moral life. In other
words, he doesn’t think happiness is the thing that is “good in itself.” How does Kant argue this position?
8. What does Kant think is the basis of morality – the only thing that is “good in itself”?
9. Explain why Kant thinks courage, intelligence/charisma, and happiness depend on a good will, in order to be good themselves. Use
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
examples.
Kant says we get a good will by “doing our duty.” What exactly does he mean by this?
From the “cases of Lloyd and Clarence,” explain how Kant thinks different action can a) be morally blameworthy, b) have no moral
worth, c) be morally praiseworthy, based on what kind of action is done and on the motivation for doing the action.
Explain how Kant might use the “case of Rex” to show that consequences should not matter in the moral evaluation of an action.
In what way is the categorical imperative a “moral law”? In what way is it not a moral law, as we typically think of “moral law”?
Explain in your own words what the two formulas (the “formula of universal law” and the “formula of the end in itself'") of the categorical
imperative require. Also be able to recognize Kant’s own definitions of these two formulas.
How would Kant evaluate the action of making a false promise to repay a loan, according to: 1) the “formula of universal law” and 2) the
“formula of the end in itself”?
Name the points of similarity and difference between Kant and Christianity, as mentioned in the book.
UTILITARIANISM
1. What does the term “consequentialist” mean, with regard to a moral theory?
2. Who are the three utilitarian ethical thinkers mentioned in the class notes on the historical background of utilitarianism?
3. Explain the classic utilitarian phrase, “the end justifies the means.”
4. What does the “principle of utility” state?
5. What is Mill’s definition of “happiness”?
6. What does the doctrine called “hedonism” maintain?
7. How does Mill claim his utilitarianism follows Jesus’ call to “love your neighbor as yourself”? How might a Christian deny this claim?
8. What are the steps in any utilitarian decision?
9. What are the two modern forms of utilitarianism? How do they differ?
10. What are the two major points of difference between utilitarianism and Kant?
11. How do utilitarianism and Christianity differ on the issue of intrinsically wrong (essentially evil) actions? How do utilitarianism and
12.
Christianity differ on the issue of intrinsic human dignity?
In what way can Christianity agree with utilitarianism, to some extent?
RIGHTS and ETHICS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
What is the two-part definition of rights?
Distinguish between “negative rights” and “positive rights.”
What two main questions do philosophers ask about rights?
What three basic rights does Locke think all people have?
What does Locke think is the source of rights?
How does Locke think we have access to the “law of nature”?
Explain Locke’s argument for the right to private property.
What kind of source for rights does Regan seek?
Regan thinks that if we deny rights to animals, we also have to deny rights to whom? Explain why he thinks this. Do you agree with his
reasoning? Why or why not?
What does Rawls think is the source of rights?
Explain what Rawls thinks is the typical problem with making social contracts, and his solution to that problem. Do you think his solution
is a good one? Why or why not?
What human motivation does Rawls emphasize in his rights theory? Do you think this motivation can be changed or not? Why?
Explain in your own words Rawls’ idea of a right to liberty (freedom) and equality of opportunity.
What are two ways of resolving a conflict between rights? Provide an example of each, from the two sides of the abortion debate.
Explain the points of agreement and disagreement between the Catholic Church and rights theories.
Immigration
1. What are the five common myths concerning Immigration?
2. What are the five facts used to debunk each myth?
3. Be familiar with the stories and experiences of each speaker from the assembly.