PHI 115 Exam II - A rough study guide made for PHI 115. The professor was William Harwood. PDF

Preview

Summary

A rough study guide made for PHI 115. The professor was William Harwood....

Description

Philosophy 115 Exam II ● Prima Facie: At first glance, recognize the greater duty (shining a flashlight outside in the sun, the light is still there, just not visible) Validity: Impossible for premises to be true and the conclusion false Sound: Argument is both valid AND true Tautology: Circular Reasoning Fallacy: a flaw in logic; an attempt in argument that fails Naturalistic Fallacy: the belief that an “is” claim (descriptive claim) can be translated into a “should” or “ought” claim (normative claim) Argument: a formal structure in logic; requires premises and a conclusion “Begging the Question”: Assuming the conclusion is true because of the premise Ex: I have an iphone, therefore iphones are the best cell phone.

● Know the ethical systems (the good, the bad, the ugly) -

Act Utilitarianism: MILL “Do the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of people with the least amount of bad” - Rule Utilitarianism: guidelines for an ethical life, don't have to use mill’s calculus. - Liberty (Individual) Rights: (negative rights - rights that the government leaves alone) “Your rights end at my body” - Problem: no sense of society, only works for those who are well off. - Humane Rights: if rights are violated -> laws fix it - Ex. Affirmative Action: looks at the problem w/in society to help fix the problem - Welfare Rights: LOCKE, (positive rights) push people who are below the baseline up - all rights adhere to the body - “my body is mine & can’t be taken” - rights are not created by law, laws are supposed to be enforce to protect my rights - D  uty Ethics: KANT, Universalizability Test - “Act in such a way that the maxim of your action must become a universal law of nature”, doing things because it’s moral (no gray area) - 3 Abstract Duties: Respect people Act on universal principle Act independently - Prima Facie Duties: At first glance, recognize the greater duty, DAVID ROSS 74 - Most important: Duty to save a life -  Virtue Ethics: Cares about the actor more than the action Actions lead to habits, habits define you

Finding a mean of morality in any situation (IE courage on battlefield vs. submission upon returning home to partner) - Moral Absolutism is the opposite of Relativism: both stop dialogue, we learn from dialogue, the only way society can know if we’re correct is through dialogue. Philo|sophy = desire for knowledge implies you don’t have all of the knowledge.

● Know feminism: the different concerns (e.g., patriarchy), the different movements (e.g., some important dates), the basic structure of Care Ethics, the import of language, and why we talked about sexual assault ○ Different Concerns: ■

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Patriarchy: society where men are the superior, hold the control and make rules, while the women stay home and take care of the children. Socially sanctioned. Misogyny: hatred of women Sexism: prejudice or bigotry on the basis of sex Exploitation: unfair usage Individual Bigotry: manifested in attitudes, emotions, and conduct of individuals Institutional Bigotry: manifested in laws, institutions, and practices (including language). Example: constitution. “Laws aren’t made about me.” -Dr. Harwood’s girlfriend probably

○ Important movements and dates ■ ■

■

Nation founding 1776 Feminism literature ● Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797): wrote “ Vindication of Women's Rights” ● Mill (1806-1873): wrote “The Subjection of Women” ● Betty Friedan (1963): wrote “The Feminine Mystique” Seneca Falls (1848) - 1st Convention on Women’s Rights ● Elizabeth Cady Stanton: co-author of “Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions” ○ didn’t include women in the Dec. of Independence ○ Have to explicitly say “women” ■ “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women a re created equal” ○ Women were deprived right to: ■ Vote ■ Initiate divorce ● Keep custody of the kids when the husband initiates divorce ■ Own property ■ Make business decisions w/o male supervision ■ Attend college

■ ■ ■

Civil War 1861-1865 Women suffrage 1920-- 19th Amendment Civil Rights Act 1964 ● National Organization for Women (NOW) founded in 1966 ○ Mainstream American feminism ○ Liberal, rooted in the commitment to extend the same rights to women ■ Lilly Ledbetter (2009)- Ledbetter was paid 78 cents for every dollars her 3 male coworkers made. The court ruled against her. ● Sued for 30 years of sexism→ blatant institutional sexism ● Legal, federal protection against sexual discrimination in the workplace ○ Made retaliation by employer illegal ● Sued again for being treated differently after losing the original court case and won! Yay female empowerment! ○ Care Ethics: ■ Gilligan’s conclusion- views linked to gender (reinforces stereotypes) ● Goal: avoid hurting others & maintaining relationships w/o hurting yourself ● Men emphasize justice: ○ stresses abstract rules, right to be left alone & free from interference by others. Would steal the medicine for partner 9 times out of 10 ● Women emphasize care: ○ Prioritizes caring, kindness, giving to others. Would try using diplomacy to finesse the medicine from the druggist before stealing it. ● Moral dilemmas are resolved by communication & sensitivity to certain circumstances ○ Moral reasoning seeks to balance others needs & your own ● Provides a critique of libertarian rights theorists. Points out the hypocrisy of people who say you need to steal the drug to help your wife, but then say it’s wrong for others. (Universal Healthcare) ■

Heinz’s Dilemma- there is a drug that will heal a man’s dying wife but the developer won’t sell it for cheaper or let him pay later so the man could afford it. The developer is the one who created the drug and believes that they should be able to benefit from the creation of it. The husband decided to steal the drug. So a man’s solution is to steal while a woman’s solution would be to talk with the developer more. ● Was Heinz Justified? ○ Act U: use Mill’s calculus- killing is worse than stealing, the bad can be resolved with jail ○ Rule U: stealing vs killing- use calculus

○

●

Kant: u  niversalizability, maxim=stealing to save a life, duty to fix systemic problem that only the rich can live ○ Prima Facie Duty:  duty to save a life is stronger than duty not to steal ○ Locke: Rights- protect your property (don’t steal), property is your body. You must kill a thief because they have hurt your body. ○ Welfare Rights: pharmacist shouldn’t be allowed to refuse sale but you must compensate the pharmacist ■ Create systems that can get to baseline ■ Not only what will help me but For the husband stealing the drug: (Gilligan), respect/right to life outweighs the right to property ○ Against: (Kohlberg) ■ Reasoning based on abstract rules (justice) = greater moral maturity

Influence of feminism (branched off into groups) Group 1 (Care Ethics) - developed ethics around trust & empathy

Group 2 -criticizes group 1, says it heavily reinforces stereotypes

Group 3 - argue that care & justice cannot be separated

Language Ethics: pg 83-84 ■ Sexist (gender biased language) ● Interwoven into society so deeply that we don’t even notice--systemic - Importance: language defines what you can think - #1 way of maintaining culture ○ using “human” instead of “man” etc. ○ Men referred to as Mr., while women are identified by marital status (Mrs, Ms. or Miss) ○ Names of occupations were male-oriented ○ The word “race” didn’t exist until fairly recently in America. Seems fishy ■ Speech Codes: attempt to block the overt expression in speech ● Jokes are haven for the expression of convert prejudice ○ If no member of the group is present, is there any harm? ● difference in reaction based on intent ○ Having a right implies protection against punishment, but peer pressure against racism is more desirable

○ Rape: the rapists’ motives are to enjoy illegitimate control over the victim, degrades an innocent person, or enjoys the victim’s suffering ■ Terrorism: the use of violence or the threat of violence in order to promote a social, political, religious or other ideology. Often characterized by soft targets (civilians) ■ Griffin: denies her of self-determination & personal autonomy without consent ● Inflicts pain of many kinds ● Fear is widespread in women ○ Constant threat of sexual assault everywhere, at any time ○ Women have pepper spray on their keychains, buddy system

○ Sexual Harassment: Women are having their autonomy taken away because they can’t do certain things out of fear that a man will harass them. (Can’t go out alone after dark, all carry pepper spray, sharp keychains, etc.) ■ “Harass”: persistent repeated aggravation or annoyance ■ Essentializing: where people make assumptions about what a person wants based on sex (women- children) ■ Anita Hill (1991) accused Supreme Court Nominee of sexual harassment ● Any sexually oriented act/practice involving intimidation, coercion, & unfair sexual conduct ○ Misuse of power & authority ● Court says--ANY sexually oriented practice that threatens jobs or work performance

\\\Don’t forget about the fear of retaliation by workplaces when it comes to reporting sexual harassment, injustice, etc///

● Know race/ethnicity: the different concerns (similar to feminism). the ostensible and real origin of race (if you weren’t there for lecture, get the notes) , the import of language, the basic structure of Affirmative Action ○

Race is completely a psychological concept (the rest of your life determined by skin tone)

○ Ethnicity: defined more by culture ○ Biological: we have evolved as social creatures whose survival is linked to groups. Us VS them, prejudice is natural

○ Pluralistic: in an ideal world, race and ethnicity differences would still hold social significance. Only in everyday life, they would be as important as religion ■ Continue to recognize racial, ethnicity, gender differences as socially significant ■ Problems with: Reinstate stigma and exclusion (how do you not turn it into racism?)

○ Assimilationist ideal: things like skin color, racial and ethnic classification, and gender roles would have no particular connection with how individuals are treated ■ In an ideal society similarity, race, gender, and ethnicity would essentially become irrelevant morally, socially and politically (race would be the equivalent to how eye color is now) ■ Problems with: forget the past (systematic racial bias), pretending biases don’t exist. ● Being “colorblind” has the opposite effect, need to recognize & call out the differences ○ Ignoring these differences weakens autonomy ○ Allows privileged group to ignore their privilege ■ Appears universal & neutral ○ Psychological-Sociological perspectives: 4 major types of factors supporting bigotry ■ Economic competition for limited resources invites shutting out entire groups from desirable jobs ■ Individuals frustrated by their own economic situation, or just deep-seated frustration, tend to blame others making them scapegoats ■ Some prejudice is linked to personality traits ■ Prejudice is just a response learned from the family or other groups (conformity to social norms) ■ Separate note from the 4 types- confirmation bias ○ Moral perspective: highlights role of choice in bigotry ■ Anti-semitism: not an opinion, it’s a passion chosen as the core of an entire personal identity ■ Jean Paul Sartre: prejudice is identity and a choice. Prejudice= pre-judge. By definition, is irrational. ● Scapegoating → fear of our own problems. Easier to blame someone else for the failure of my dreams ● Affirmative Action--Counteracting & promoting equal opportunity in education & workplace ○ Ensure prejudice doesn’t deny minority ○ Black doctor example ○ LBJ and affirmative action: two sprinters. Expect the shackled one to catch up. ○ Those against: ■ Reverse discrimination/ reverse racism ■ People assume that person is less qualified because they are a minority ○ Defenders of affirmative actions: ● They appeal to compensatory justice: obligated to make up for past/present injustices in all forms of racism ○ Women & minorities have a right to compensation

● Abortion: ○ The legal cases and their significance: ~ McFall  Vs. Shimp (1978) - McFall had bone marrow cancer and would die without a transplant of bone marrow from Shimp. - Shimp wouldn't donate and it went to court where it was ruled that Shimp can choose what to do with his body, (form of slavery) -

The law cannot require a person to use their body to save another person. - Form of slavery

~Roe  Vs. Wade (1973) -

Roe wanted abortion but it was illegal in Texas unless it was caused by rape. a ffirms the legality of a woman's right to have an abortion under the Fourteenth

-

amendment to the Constitution Right to privacy

~Planned  Parenthood Vs Casey (1992) -

A Pennsylvania law that required spousal awareness prior to obtaining an abortion was invalid under the Fourteenth Amendment

-

The supreme court didn’t know exactly what to do - “Undue burden”: imposed obstacles that prevent women getting abortions before - Restricted rights of women getting abortions - 24 hour waiting period - Spousal notification - Info disclosure - Parental consent for minors Change in viability

-

~ Yania  Vs. Bigan (1959) - Bigan dared Yania to jump in his well - Bigan watched her die and the family sued - Ethically wrong but not legally wrong - Technically no duty to rescue

○ Personhood and viability ■ Personhood - Six Characteristics ● 1. Sentience-  the capacity to feel, perceive or experience subjectively

● 2. Emotionality ● 3. Reason ● 4. The capacity to communicate ● 5. Self-awareness ● 6. Moral agency ■ Viability - Standard on which abortion is determined, when the being can live on it’s own (can live independently 22 weeks after conception) ● Planned Parenthood V. Casey ○ Religion’s complicated history vis-à-vis (WITH REGARD TO) abortion ■ Corpse - no soul, no person ■ 1869 - Pope Pius IX - Only then did abortion become debated ● Thomas Aquinas ○ Quickening - Way people talk about ensoulment -> when matter gains a soul ○ Biology - Doesn't agree^, doesn’t begin at conception, but when egg attaches to wall ■ The Principle of Double-Effect/Totality - Every person is created by God, so any action must treat them as a whole. ● Not my intent, not my responsibility ○ Ex. potential dose of morphine has 2 effects: ■ Control pain and death ○ Knowing but not intending that death will occur ○ Morally okay to perform an act that will have bad unintended side effects when the intentions are good ○ OK to do something that starts with good intent but ends poorly, but NOT OK to start with bad intentions that end well. (IE giving somebody morphine to numb pain and accidentally killing them AS OPPOSED TO giving them morphine to kill them) ● Justifies a mother’s life being threatened by baby ■ 3 places in the bible where women pregnant out of wedlock are stoned to death ● This is not considered as killing two people ○ Know Thomson, Warren, and Marquis’ arguments—pros and cons ■ THOMSON--”Defense of Abortion” ● Considers a fetus a person from conceptions ○ Argues mom’s right to body outweighs fetus right to life

○ A right to life doesn’t mean it’s wrong to kill it 1) The fetus has the right to use my body only if it is reasonable to hold me responsible for my pregnancy 2) If I tried to use birth control/contraceptives to prevent pregnancy, then I’m not responsible for my pregnancy 3) Therefore, if I tried to prevent pregnancy through use of contraceptives, then the fetus doesn’t have the right to use my body

●

●

● ● ●

●

● Wrong to abort when “indecent” ○ No one is required to be a good samaritan ■ Except in the case of pregnancy ○ No is even required to be a minimally good Is an acorn an oak tree? It is arbitrary to decide when something becomes human ○ Just because it is the same species (homo sapien) doesn’t give it a right to life (certainly doesn’t take precedent over the mother) ○ Biological connection ends the moment the baby breathes Violinist analogy- ethical claims are not dependent on convenience(time- 9 months vs 9 minutes? No change)(it will be either morally permissible or not, no matter the duration) ○ Violinist’s right to life doesn’t mean you HAVE to be hooked up to save him (it would be nice of you, but not required) ○ His right to life doesn’t outweigh my right to my body ■ Right to body (extends to property)--no one else can claim Ectopic pregnancy- fetus grows in tubes not in uterus- will kill the mother and fetus Principle of totality- treat everyone as a whole person Principle of double effect- if evil results from your action unintentionally it is not your fault. So you can abort a fetus if its going to kill the mom Smith and Jones Coat- It’s Smith’s coat so he has the right to it and he is not required to give it to Jones ○ Self defense argument ○ If we just stand by, we would probably be regarded as morally unjust. Note: cannot choose- choosing not to act.

●

●

●

● ●

○ If we help Smith, we will be considered a hero. ○ 3rd party can’t get involved ■ Removes personhood from the mom & gives it the fetus→ you have to recognize the woman in front of you as a person before the fetus ■ 3rd party can refuse to do the act (debate if this morally okay) ● Doctors able to refuse prescribing birth control to patients or performing abortions Expanding baby- the baby is innocent but you can still kill it for self defense. Having a right to life doesn’t mean the mother should have to hurt. ○ “Having a right to life does not guarantee having either a right to be given the use of or a right to be allowed continued use of another person’s body- even if one needs it for life itself.” Henry Fonda- he is not morally obligated to help you. Even if he did agree to help, he could drop out at anytime. So if it is a regular pregnancy a woman can decide that it is too much later. Burglar analogy- locks=contraception, you can still kill a robber after they break in even if the doors and windows are open, property(house)=body ○ Locke Pro Life tries to make fetus rights more important than mother’s life (transferring rights) Biological responsibility- adoption impossible ○ If you had an obligation to it because it is a part of you, that makes adoption illegal.

■ WARREN ● Abortion is okay at any time in pregnancy & under any circumstance ○ Says a fetus is not a person ○ A person is something with rights ● Burglar analogy- consensual sex, you have someone over ● If it’s wrong at all, it is always wrong (no excuse for rape, incest, etc) ● Being genetically human does not make you a person

● Fetus’ experience pain/suffering at the level of a goldfish- but we care because the fetus looks like us, so if that is right then slavery is justified ● Even a potential person has some right to life→ that right doesn’t outweigh woman’s right to an abortion ● 6 traits of personhood- fetus’  don’t have any of them ○ Consciousness (capacity to feel pain) ○ Reasoning (developed capacity to solve complex problems) ○ Self-motivated activity ○ Capacity to communicate ○ Presence of self concept & self awareness ● Alien Cloning analogy- can’t hurt an actual person to create a new person. “Rights of an actual person will always outweigh rights of a future person” (potential person) ● Cons: most hypocritical ○ Can’t be immoral because of a bad action that results ■ If it’s okay, then it’s always going to be okay ○ Feels can be in it Genetic sense -

Moral sense

Biological species “homo sapien”

-

-

Full-fledge person of the moral community 5 traits of personhood A fetus doesn’t have any of the 5 traits At no stage in fetal development where its enough like a person to have a significa...