PHI 208 Effective Communication - snaptutorial.com by najiba118

PHI 208 Entire Course ( 4 Papers for each Assignment, 2 Finals + DQs+ Quiz)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com This Tutorial contains 4 Papers for each Assignment, many DQs for each Week, Two Final Exam

PHI 208 Final Exam 50 Questions (2 Set)

PHI 208 Week 1 Assignment Ethical Questions (Physician Assisted Suicide Be Legal)

PHI 208 Week 3 Assignment Applying an Ethical Theory (Physician Assisted Suicide Be Legal)

PHI 208 Week 5 Final Paper (Should Physician Assisted Suicide Be Legal)

PHI 208 Week 1 Assignment Ethical Questions (Equal Pay for Equal Work)

PHI 208 Week 3 Assignment Applying an Ethical Theory (Equal Pay for Equal Work)

PHI 208 Week 5 Final Paper (Equal Pay for Equal Work)

PHI 208 Week 1 Assignment Ethical Questions (Just War Military Ethics)

PHI 208 Week 3 Assignment Applying an Ethical Theory (Just War Military Ethics)

PHI 208 Week 5 Final Paper (Just War Military Ethics)

PHI 208 Week 1 Assignment Ethical Questions (Gender Equality/Ethics)

PHI 208 Week 3 Assignment Applying an Ethical Theory (Gender Equality/Ethics)

PHI 208 Week 5 Final Paper (Gender Equality/Ethics)

PHI 208 Week 1 Discussion (Slavery)

PHI 208 Week 1 Discussion (argument against relativism)

PHI 208 Week 1 Discussion (Mary Midgley and James)

PHI 208 Week 1 Discussion (ring of Gyges) PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 1 (basic principle of equality) PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 1 Peter Singer and Animal Rights PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 2 (Tom Regan) PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 2 (Primary Goal) PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 1 (Tom Regan and Peter Singer) PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 2 (Drones) PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 2 (Singer and Moral Justification) PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion (Understanding Philosophy) PHI 208 Week 3 Discussion (Kantâ&#x20AC;&#x;s formulations) PHI 208 Week 3 Discussion (Kant Right Action) PHI 208 Week 3 Discussion (Morally Permissible to lie) PHI 208 Week 3 Discussion (Hero) PHI 208 Week 4 Discussion (Impact on the Environment) PHI 208 Week 4 Discussion (Aristotle)

PHI 208 Week 4 Discussion (Aristotle‟s virtue ethics) PHI 208 Week 4 Discussion (flourishing or successful life) PHI 208 Week 4 Discussion (Aristotle‟s account of eudaimonia) PHI 208 Week 4 Discussion (MacIntyre's account of practices) PHI 208 Week 4 Discussion (virtuous soldier) PHI 208 Week 5 Discussion (Condition for men and women) PHI 208 Week 5 Discussion (feminist ethical thinking) PHI 208 Week 5 Discussion (Virginia Held‟s article)

PHI 208 Week 1 Quiz

PHI 208 Week 2 Quiz

PHI 208 Week 3 Quiz

PHI 208 Week 4 Quiz

PHI 208 Week 5 Quiz **********************************************************

PHI 208 Final Exam 50 Questions (2 Set)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com This Tutorial contains 2 Set of Final Exam (50 Question each)

Question 1. Question : Which of the following would be an idea shared both by the teacher (Kevin Kline) from the clip of The Emperor‟s Club, and by either MacIntyre or Aristotle (or both)?

Question 2. Question : Heinz involves which crime

In Gilligan‟s article, the example of

Question 3. Question : Leon Kass argues that the primary responsibility of physicians is to:

Question 4. Question : According to Tom Regan, what is fundamentally wrong with our current system?

Question 5. Question : How have historians tended to treat typically male tendencies versus typically female tendencies?

Question 6. Question : What is Tom Regan‟s main criticism of the contractarian approach to ethical duties?

Question 7. on

Question :

According to Glaukon, justice is based

Question 8. Question : In the video “Drones Are Not Ethical and Effective,” Jeremy Waldron argues that drones are not ethical because their use involves

Question 9. Question : Utilitarianism is a form of what broader kind of ethical theory?

Question 10. Question : euthanasia is currently:

According to Rachels, active

Question 11. Question : Which of the following would be an expression of rule utilitarianism, rather than act utilitarianism?

Question 12. Question : What does Noddings say about male versus female language when opposing war?

Question 13. Question : What moral theory does Jeremy Bentham (with whom Singer seems to agree) endorse?

Question 14. Question : According to the video “Meet Your Meat”, which of the following is not true of how animals are slaughtered on factory farms

Question 15. Question : What does Singer say about other philosophers‟ attempts to argue that only humans have moral worth?

Question 16. Question : According to Rachels, many people accept the conventional doctrine because they believe:

Question 17. Question : Which of the following does not describe how egg-laying hens are treated in factory farms?

Question 18. Question : an action:

According to Kant, the moral worth of

Question 19. Question : Jeremy Waldron argues that drone warfare is neither ethical or effective because it

Question 20. Question : What does Singer say about finding the basis for moral duties in the “intrinsic dignity” of humanity?

Question 21. Question : In Kant Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, the maxim of an act is:

Question 22. Question : Thomas Nagel argues that all rules of engagement should be governed by the utilitarian principle that

Question 23. Question : Hill claims that a fruitful way to think about the badness of destroying the environment is:

Question 24. Question : Hill uses this technique in the middle of the article to examine ideas about the human‟s place within nature:

Question 25. Question : Kenneth Anderson argues that the fact that drones make the resort to force easier

Question 26. Question : What does Tom Regan say is the source of inherent value in an individual?

Question 27. Question : According to Thomas Nagel‟s article, “War and Massacre,” the absolutist position that creates no problems of interpretation is

Question 28. Question :

If Midgley is correct, moral scepticism

Question 29. Question : Which of the following does Tom Regan say about the utilitarian approach to animal ethics?

Question 30. Question : euthanasia involves:

According to Rachels, active

Question 31. Question : In Gilligan‟s example, the child named Amy focuses on this aspect of the Heinz dilemma

Question 32. Question : According to Gilligan, stages five and six of Kohlberg‟s analysis of moral development involve

Question 33. Question : is:

Kant explains that respect for a person

Question 34. Question :

Glaukon seems to think that people are

Question 35. Question : Nagel argues that the atomic bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were just like what other kind of action, just on a larger scale?

Question 36. Question : According to Thomas Hill‟s account of environmental ethics, a person might show a lack of virtue when they:

Question 37. Question : Hill refers to the ability to understand oneself, to face oneself, and to be honest about the kind of creature one is by this term: Question 38. Question : Michael Walzer argues that in the unique world of war, both morality and authority are

Question 39. Question :

Passive euthanasia is:

Question 40. Question : essentialism about gender?

What does Noddings have to say about

Question 41. Question : Which of the following does not happen in the “Meet Your Meat” to animals with diseases or injuries on modern factory farms:

Question 42. Question : In The Emperor‟s Club, what best describes the teacher‟s (Kevin Kline) response to his student‟s (Emile Hirsch) admission of cheating?

Question 43. Question : According to the scene from The Bridge on the River Kwai, what is the ultimate reason Colonel Nicholson (Alec Guinness) insists that the soldiers work hard to build the best bridge possible:

Question 44. Question : doctrine:

Rachels argues that the conventional

Question 45. Question : the Bechdel test?

Which of the following are questions in

Question 46. Question : What would best express Colonel Nicholsonâ&#x20AC;&#x;s (Alec Guinness) view regarding what makes a soldier, as expressed in the The Bridge on the River Kwai clip?

Question 47. Question : Which of the following does Peter Singer assert about the principle of equality?

Question 48. Question : According to Leon Kass, the drive to legalize euthanasia can be largely attributed to

Question 49. Question : Midgley analyzes the position that each society is a separate culture with its own values. This position is known as

Question 50. Question : According to Rachels, the case of Smith and Jones shows that:

Set 2 PHI 208 Final Exam (50 Question) Set 2

1. Question : According to Jeremy Bentham (as described by Singer) what should determine whether a being‟s interests should be taken into account? 2. Question : In the video “Drones Are Not Ethical and Effective,” Jeremy Waldron argues that drones are not ethical because their use involves 3. Question : Rachels claims that: 4. Question : The conventional doctrine is endorsed by: 5. Question : Which answer best describes Noddings‟s statements about how mothers frequently to feel about losing their children in war? 6. Question : According to Rachels, the “conventional doctrine” maintains that: 7. Question : In the article “War and Massacre,” Thomas Nagel argues that moral absolutism 8. Question : According to Midgley, moral isolationism 9. Question : How do we determine the difference between higher and lower pleasures, according to Mill? 10. Question : Gilligan claims that females tend to see relationships as these 11. Question : In the video “Sexism in the News Media 2012” some newscasters blame military women for this 12. Question : According to Kant, the moral worth of an action: 13. Question : Which of the following are questions in the Bechdel test?

14. Question : In Kant Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, the maxim of an act is: 15. Question : According to Rachels, the case of Smith and Jones shows that: 16. Question : According to Aristotle, we should begin ethical inquiry by specifying: 17. Question : According to Thomas Hillâ&#x20AC;&#x;s account of environmental ethics, a person might show a lack of virtue when they: 18. Question : Reason is a faculty that we have that: 19. Question : Aristotle states that if we ask what the highest good of human action is: 20. Question : Kant explains that respect for a person is: 21. Question : According to Leon Kass, the drive to legalize euthanasia can be largely attributed to 22. Question : According to Rachels, active euthanasia is currently: 23. Question : Kant claims that a good will is: 24. Question : Aristotle claims that the function of human life is: 25. Question : Aristotle conceives of a virtue as: 26. Question : According to the scene from The Bridge on the River Kwai, what is the ultimate reason Colonel Nicholson (Alec Guinness) insists that the soldiers work hard to build the best bridge possible: 27. Question : Why is it hard for physicians to understand palliative care? 28. Question : According to Tom Regan, what is fundamentally wrong with our current system?

29. Question : Glaukon thinks that deep in our hearts we all believe that 30. Question : According to Midgely, moral isolationism leads to 31. Question : Peter Singer‟s “basic principles of equality” applied to animals means: 32. Question : The Ring of Gyges gave the shepherd who found it 33. Question : What moral theory does Jeremy Bentham (with whom Singer seems to agree) endorse? 34. Question : According to Kant, suicide is: 35. Question : If the Ring of Gyges really existed, 36. Question : Kenneth Anderson argues that the fact that drones make the resort to force easier 37. Question : Which of the following does not describe how egglaying hens are treated in factory farms? 38. Question : What is Tom Regan‟s position about the use of animals in research and agriculture? 39. Question : In Hill‟s example, what did the wealthy eccentric man do to his yard after he bought a new house? 40. Question : Which of the following makes it difficult to calculate the utility of an act 41. Question : Rachels concludes that: 42. Question : According to the video “Religion, War, and Violence,” Just War Theory asserts that military intervention 43. Question : Hill would claim that a lack of aesthetic perception 44. Question :Midgley analyzes the position that each society is a separate culture with its own values. This position is known as

45. Question : Robinson argues that honor 46. Question : Robinson describes magnanimity and integrity as both primarily concerned with what? 47. Question : Thomas Nagel argues that all rules of engagement should be governed by the utilitarian principle that 48. Question : According to Held, the following have been aligned with femininity in the history of Western thought 49. Question : Feminist ethics is based around which of the following ideas 50. Question : According to Colin Stokes, in this film all the heroic, wise, and villainous characters are female. **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 1 Assignment Ethical Questions (Equal Pay for Equal Work)

The following assignment is an exercise designed to help you begin the process of addressing a moral issue, a process that will continue in the next two assignments. In this exercise, you will do the following: · Formulate an ethical question within one of the given topic areas from the list provided. · Provide an introduction in which you briefly explain the topic and the particular question on which you will focus your paper. ·

State your position on the question at issue.

· Identify one consideration that would support your position and one consideration that would challenge it.

executing innocent persons?” or “Is the capital punishment system racist?” 2. Part Two: Provide a Brief Introduction to the Topic Your introduction should focus on setting out the topic and scope of the discussion in a way that clearly establishes what exactly you will be talking about and why it is significant. It should also provide any necessary context such as the background, current state of affairs, definitions of key terms, and so on. You want to try to do this in a way that stays as neutral as possible, avoids controversial assumptions, rhetorical questions, and the like. In other words, you should try to construct an introduction to the topic that could be an introduction to a paper defending any position on the question at issue. It is important for your introduction to narrow down the topic as much as possible. Doing so will allow you to provide a more detailed consideration of the issues and explain the reasoning more clearly in later papers. In general, arguments and analyses are much stronger when they focus on addressing a particular issue thoroughly and in detail, and doing so often requires deciding on one particular question or point to discuss, and leaving other possible ones aside. You should label this section of your paper as “Introduction.” 3. Part Three: Provide a Position Statement State clearly and precisely the position you intend to defend on the question you have formulated. This does not need to be more than one sentence. Note that providing a position statement does not necessarily presume that you are confident in your position, that other positions do not have merit, or that you cannot change your mind later. However, for now, it is important to at least tentatively take a stand on a position you believe to be better supported than others. Label this section as “Position Statement.” 4. Part Four: Identify and Explain a Supporting Reason Identify and explain a plausible reason someone could give that

supports the position you have taken and be sure to clearly explain why you think it supports that position. The explanation should aim to be three to five sentences (shorter explanations are possible, but will likely be inadequate; longer explanations are likely to be too verbose). Label this section as “Supporting Reason.” 5. Part Five: Identify and Explain an Opposing Reason Identify and explain a plausible reason someone might give that would oppose or challenge the position you have taken and be sure to clearly explain why you think it would oppose or challenge it. The explanation should aim to be three to five sentences (shorter explanations are possible, but will likely be inadequate; longer explanations are likely to be too verbose). You should strive to articulate that reason in a way that someone defending a contrary position to your own would do. This requires stepping back from your own position and being able to think about the problem as objectively as you can. You should not attempt to respond to this opposing reason. Label this section as “Opposing Reason.” **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 1 Assignment Ethical Questions (Gender Equality/Ethics)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com

Ethical Questions. Please read these assignment instructions before writing your paper, and re- read them often during and after the writing process to make sure that you are fulfilling all of the instructions. Please also utilize the assignment guidance, the modeled example, and the outline provided. Overview The following assignment is an exercise designed to help you begin the process of addressing a moral issue, a process that will continue in the next two assignments. In this exercise, you will do the following: 路 Formulate an ethical question within one of the given topic areas from the list provided. 路 Provide an introduction in which you briefly explain the topic and the particular question on which you will focus your paper. 路

State your position on the question at issue.

路 Identify one consideration that would support your position and one consideration that would challenge it.

The question should be specific enough to discuss in six to eight pages (which is the length of the Final Paper assignment). For example, if you were interested in discussing the topic of capital punishment, a question like “Is capital punishment wrong?” would be too vague, and would need to be reformulated as a more specific question, such as “Should we execute people convicted of first degree murder?” or “Is it just to use capital punishment when there is the possibility of executing innocent persons?” or “Is the capital punishment system racist?” 2. Part Two: Provide a Brief Introduction to the Topic Your introduction should focus on setting out the topic and scope of the discussion in a way that clearly establishes what exactly you will be talking about and why it is significant. It should also provide any necessary context such as the background, current state of affairs, definitions of key terms, and so on. You want to try to do this in a way that stays as neutral as possible, avoids controversial assumptions, rhetorical questions, and the like. In other words, you should try to construct an introduction to the topic that could be an introduction to a paper defending any position on the question at issue. It is important for your introduction to narrow down the topic as much as possible. Doing so will allow you to provide a more detailed consideration of the issues and explain the reasoning more clearly in later papers. In general, arguments and analyses are much stronger when they focus on addressing a particular issue thoroughly and in detail, and doing so often requires deciding on one particular question or point to discuss, and leaving other possible ones aside. You should label this section of your paper as “Introduction.” 3. Part Three: Provide a Position Statement State clearly and precisely the position you intend to defend on the question you have formulated. This does not need to be more than one sentence. Note that providing a position statement does not necessarily presume that you are confident in your position, that other positions do not have merit, or that you cannot change your mind later. However, for

now, it is important to at least tentatively take a stand on a position you believe to be better supported than others. Label this section as “Position Statement.” 4. Part Four: Identify and Explain a Supporting Reason Identify and explain a plausible reason someone could give that supports the position you have taken and be sure to clearly explain why you think it supports that position. The explanation should aim to be three to five sentences (shorter explanations are possible, but will likely be inadequate; longer explanations are likely to be too verbose). Label this section as “Supporting Reason.” 5. Part Five: Identify and Explain an Opposing Reason Identify and explain a plausible reason someone might give that would oppose or challenge the position you have taken and be sure to clearly explain why you think it would oppose or challenge it. The explanation should aim to be three to five sentences (shorter explanations are possible, but will likely be inadequate; longer explanations are likely to be too verbose). You should strive to articulate that reason in a way that someone defending a contrary position to your own would do. This requires stepping back from your own position and being able to think about the problem as objectively as you can. You should not attempt to respond to this opposing reason. Label this section as “Opposing Reason.”

PHI 208 Week 1 Assignment Ethical Questions (Just War Military Ethics)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Ethical Questions. Please read these assignment instructions before writing your paper, and re- read them often during and after the writing process to make sure that you are fulfilling all of the instructions. Please also utilize the assignment guidance, the modeled example, and the outline provided. Overview The following assignment is an exercise designed to help you begin the process of addressing a moral issue, a process that will continue in the next two assignments. In this exercise, you will do the following: 路 Formulate an ethical question within one of the given topic areas from the list provided. 路 Provide an introduction in which you briefly explain the topic and the particular question on which you will focus your paper. 路

State your position on the question at issue.

路 Identify one consideration that would support your position and one consideration that would challenge it.

(not essay) format, with each part labeled and numbered as specified below. 1. Part One: Formulate the Question Read through the list of available topic areas, and select a topic on which you would like to write your next two papers. Formulate a specific, concrete, ethical question pertaining to that topic, and place that at the top of your paper. The question should be specific enough to discuss in six to eight pages (which is the length of the Final Paper assignment). For example, if you were interested in discussing the topic of capital punishment, a question like “Is capital punishment wrong?” would be too vague, and would need to be reformulated as a more specific question, such as “Should we execute people convicted of first degree murder?” or “Is it just to use capital punishment when there is the possibility of executing innocent persons?” or “Is the capital punishment system racist?” 2. Part Two: Provide a Brief Introduction to the Topic Your introduction should focus on setting out the topic and scope of the discussion in a way that clearly establishes what exactly you will be talking about and why it is significant. It should also provide any necessary context such as the background, current state of affairs, definitions of key terms, and so on. You want to try to do this in a way that stays as neutral as possible, avoids controversial assumptions, rhetorical questions, and the like. In other words, you should try to construct an introduction to the topic that could be an introduction to a paper defending any position on the question at issue. It is important for your introduction to narrow down the topic as much as possible. Doing so will allow you to provide a more detailed consideration of the issues and explain the reasoning more clearly in later papers. In general, arguments and analyses are much stronger when they focus on addressing a particular issue thoroughly and in detail, and doing so often requires deciding on one particular question or point to discuss, and leaving other possible ones aside. You should label this section of your paper as “Introduction.”

3. Part Three: Provide a Position Statement State clearly and precisely the position you intend to defend on the question you have formulated. This does not need to be more than one sentence. Note that providing a position statement does not necessarily presume that you are confident in your position, that other positions do not have merit, or that you cannot change your mind later. However, for now, it is important to at least tentatively take a stand on a position you believe to be better supported than others. Label this section as “Position Statement.” 4. Part Four: Identify and Explain a Supporting Reason Identify and explain a plausible reason someone could give that supports the position you have taken and be sure to clearly explain why you think it supports that position. The explanation should aim to be three to five sentences (shorter explanations are possible, but will likely be inadequate; longer explanations are likely to be too verbose). Label this section as “Supporting Reason.” 5. Part Five: Identify and Explain an Opposing Reason Identify and explain a plausible reason someone might give that would oppose or challenge the position you have taken and be sure to clearly explain why you think it would oppose or challenge it. The explanation should aim to be three to five sentences (shorter explanations are possible, but will likely be inadequate; longer explanations are likely to be too verbose). You should strive to articulate that reason in a way that someone defending a contrary position to your own would do. This requires stepping back from your own position and being able to think about the problem as objectively as you can. You should not attempt to respond to this opposing reason. Label this section as “Opposing Reason.” **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 1 Assignment Ethical Questions (Physician Assisted Suicide Be Legal)

State your position on the question at issue.

路 Identify one consideration that would support your position and one consideration that would challenge it.

Instructions The exercise must be at least 500 words in length (excluding title and reference pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. Be sure to include a title page and, if you include references, a bibliography. The exercise should be in outline (not essay) format, with each part labeled and numbered as specified below. 1. Part One: Formulate the Question Read through the list of available topic areas, and select a topic on which you would like to write your next two papers. Formulate a specific, concrete, ethical question pertaining to that topic, and place that at the top of your paper. The question should be specific enough to discuss in six to eight pages (which is the length of the Final Paper assignment). For example, if you were interested in discussing the topic of capital punishment, a question like “Is capital punishment wrong?” would be too vague, and would need to be reformulated as a more specific question, such as “Should we execute people convicted of first degree murder?” or “Is it just to use capital punishment when there is the possibility of executing innocent persons?” or “Is the capital punishment system racist?” 2. Part Two: Provide a Brief Introduction to the Topic Your introduction should focus on setting out the topic and scope of the discussion in a way that clearly establishes what exactly you will be talking about and why it is significant. It should also provide any necessary context such as the background, current state of affairs, definitions of key terms, and so on. You want to try to do this in a way that stays as neutral as possible, avoids controversial assumptions, rhetorical questions, and the like. In other words, you should try to construct an introduction to the topic that could be an introduction to a paper defending any position on the question at issue. It is important for your introduction to narrow down the topic as much as possible. Doing so will allow you to provide a more detailed consideration of the issues and explain the reasoning more clearly in

later papers. In general, arguments and analyses are much stronger when they focus on addressing a particular issue thoroughly and in detail, and doing so often requires deciding on one particular question or point to discuss, and leaving other possible ones aside. You should label this section of your paper as “Introduction.” 3. Part Three: Provide a Position Statement State clearly and precisely the position you intend to defend on the question you have formulated. This does not need to be more than one sentence. Note that providing a position statement does not necessarily presume that you are confident in your position, that other positions do not have merit, or that you cannot change your mind later. However, for now, it is important to at least tentatively take a stand on a position you believe to be better supported than others. Label this section as “Position Statement.” 4. Part Four: Identify and Explain a Supporting Reason Identify and explain a plausible reason someone could give that supports the position you have taken and be sure to clearly explain why you think it supports that position. The explanation should aim to be three to five sentences (shorter explanations are possible, but will likely be inadequate; longer explanations are likely to be too verbose). Label this section as “Supporting Reason.” 5. Part Five: Identify and Explain an Opposing Reason Identify and explain a plausible reason someone might give that would oppose or challenge the position you have taken and be sure to clearly explain why you think it would oppose or challenge it. The explanation should aim to be three to five sentences (shorter explanations are possible, but will likely be inadequate; longer explanations are likely to be too verbose). You should strive to articulate that reason in a way that someone defending a contrary position to your own would do. This requires stepping back from your

own position and being able to think about the problem as objectively as you can. You should not attempt to respond to this opposing reason. Label this section as â&#x20AC;&#x153;Opposing Reason.â&#x20AC;?

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 1 Discussion (argument against relativism)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com What do you believe is the strongest argument against relativism that was presented the readings for the week? Outline the argument presenting the reasons the author gives for thinking that relativism is inadequate. Finally, discuss relativism with your classmates in general. What are some relativistic beliefs you have held? Do you believe that they can be justified or do you plan on reevaluating those beliefs now that you have learned more about relativism?

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 1 Discussion (Mary Midgley and James)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com What are some relativistic beliefs that you have or that you find in society? What are those ethical beliefs and how do people justify those beliefs? Using the articles from Mary Midgley and James Rachels, present a critique of those relativistic beliefs. What reasons do you have for thinking that these beliefs are not consistent.

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 1 Discussion (ring of Gyges)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com In the excerpt from the Republic the example of the ring of Gyges is used to claim that humans only act morally because of fear that they will be caught. Present an example of someone being morally good out of fear and then present an example of someone being morally good out of an inherent desire to act in a specific way. Discuss with others the idea that morality is inherent and based on universal principles or virtues versus the idea that ethics is socially created and varies based on human social and political context. Which do you find to be more convincing? Which philosophical reasons would you present for thinking that your position is the best position?

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 1 Discussion (Slavery)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Slavery has been practiced world-wide since the earliest days of humanity and is still practiced in parts of the world even today. Even the Bible condones slavery. Yet today in America most people think that slavery is absolutely morally wrong. Polygamy has been practiced world-wide since the earliest days and is still practiced in parts of the world even today. Some major religions require polygamy. There are many holy men in the Bible who had multiple wives and concubines. Yet today in America most people think that polygamy is absolutely morally wrong. We even have laws against polygamy. Since the rest of time and the world says we are wrong, and we say that the rest of time and the world is wrong, then how can we decide what is right or wrong in relation to these two issues? Who gets to be the ultimate arbiter of moral right? Present the reasons you have for claiming that these acts are morally right or morally wrong. Try to come up with more examples of actions that are considered right and wrong based on different cultures and ages and share those examples with your classmates.

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 1 Quiz

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com PHI 208 Week 1 Quiz

1. Question : In “Active and Passive Euthanasia”, Rachels claims that when infants with Down‟s syndrome are denied necessary operations, the reason is typically: 2. Question : concludes that:

In “Active and Passive Euthanasia”, Rachels

3. Question : In “Active and Passive Euthanasia”, Rachels argues that the “conventional doctrine” that active euthanasia is always wrong while passive euthanasia is sometimes okay: 4. Question : In the “Ring of Gyges” excerpt from Plato‟s Republic, Glaukon suggests that people are “just” or good because: 5. Question : According to Glaukon from the “Ring of Gyges” excerpt from Plato‟s Republic, people are: 6. Question : According to the “Ring of Gyges” excerpt from Plato‟s Republic, The Ring of Gyges gave the shepherd who found it: 7. Question : will likely:

Leon Kass argues that legalizing euthanasia

8. Question : Leon Kass argues that the primary responsibility of physicians is to: 9. Question : According to the “Ring of Gyges” excerpt from Plato‟s Republic, Glaukon thinks that deep in our hearts we all believe that 10. Question : According to Mary Midgley in the article “Trying Out One‟s New Sword,” what is a feature of almost all cultures that shows why moral isolationism is wrong? 11. Question : In the article “Trying Out One‟s New Sword,” what does Mary Midgley use example of the samurai to illustrate? 12. Question : According to Rachels‟ article “Active and Passive Euthanasia”, many people accept the “conventional doctrine” that active euthanasia is always wrong while passive euthanasia is sometimes okay because: 13. Question : According to Rachels‟ article “Active and Passive Euthanasia”, passive euthanasia is: 14. Question : In “Active and Passive Euthanasia”, Rachels claims that most actual cases of killing, especially those outside of medical contexts: 15. Question : According to the assigned videos, why is it hard for physicians to understand palliative care? 16. Question : According to Glaukon from the “Ring of Gyges” excerpt from Plato‟s Republic, justice is based on 17. Question : According to Leon Kass, the drive to legalize euthanasia can be largely attributed to 18. Question : According to Rachels‟ article “Active and Passive Euthanasia”, the “conventional doctrine” is endorsed by:

19. Question : In the “Ring of Gyges” excerpt from Plato‟s Republic, Glaukon begins by claiming that “those who practice justice” do so 20. Question : In 2003, how many people died in Canada, according to the video “Dying for Care: Quality Palliative and End of Life Care in Canada”? **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion (Understanding Philosophy)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Using at least one quote from chapter six of Understanding Philosophy, describe the core principle of utilitarianism and discuss the problem of the “tyranny of the majority.” Find a real example of a current or past social practice, (or create your own fictional example) that illustrates this problem. Complete your post by evaluating whether the overall good generated by the practice outweighs the suffering caused by the practice.

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 1 (basic principle of equality)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Singer reasons for what he calls the â&#x20AC;&#x153;basic principle of equalityâ&#x20AC;?. What is this principle and how is it supposed to be applied? What reasoning does he give that this principle should be applied to nonhuman animals? Do you agree? On what basis do you think we should determine which types of beings should be treated with equal moral consideration?

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 1 (Tom Regan and Peter Singer)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Tom Regan and Peter Singer disagree about the best approach to animal ethics. What basic things do they agree about?

What do they disagree about?

How would their different views result in different conclusions about how animals should be treated?

Which of the two do you think gives a more rationally justifiable approach to discussing animal ethics and why? **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 1 Peter Singer and Animal Rights

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Peter Singer argues that eating meat is speciesism because it involves sacrificing the most important interests of members of other species for relatively trivial interests of our own species. Do you think Singer is correct or incorrect on this point? Is "speciesism" a real thing like racism or sexism? Why or why not?

Is there a compelling reason you can give why our preference for meat dishes is more important than an animalâ&#x20AC;&#x;s interest in not being killed (and raised in captivity)?

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 2 (Drones)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com After watching the videos “Drones are Ethical” and “Drones are Not Ethical,” provide at least one argument to show that the use of drones can be justified by utilitarian reasoning. And one argument to show that the use of drones cannot be justified by such reasoning. Complete your post by identifying which of these arguments you think is the most compelling, and support your choice with specific reasons. **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 2 (Primary Goal)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com

If the primary goal of utilitarianism is to generate the greatest good for the greatest number, a secondary goal is to minimize suffering. Using at least one quote from one of the required readings, discuss the ways in which these two principles are consistent or inconsistent with each other. If you think they are consistent, provide a real or imagined example that illustrates this consistency. If you think they are inconsistent, provide a real or imagined example that illustrates this inconsistency. Complete your post by discussing whether minimizing suffering is equal to, lesser than, or more important that generating the greatest good for the greatest number.

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 2 (Singer and Moral Justification)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Singer argues that there is no moral justification for denying moral consideration to animals. Can you think of a good moral reason why our moral consideration should include all humans, even those without the ability to reason, yet be denied to all non-human animals (some of whom have that ability)? What response might he have to your way of drawing the line between the types of beings that should get moral consideration and those that should not?

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 2 Discussion 2 (Tom Regan)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Tom Regan says that we all have equal inherent value by virtue of being „experiencing subjects of a life‟. What does it mean to be an „experiencing subject of a life‟? Do you think that being the subject of a life means that one has equal inherent value? Does it follow from that view that animals should be given rights to life and freedom?

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 2 Quiz

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com PHI 208 Week 2 Quiz

1. Question : According to the video “Meet Your Meat”, which of the following is true of how animals are slaughtered on factory farms 2. Question : In what way does Peter Singer think that speciesism is similar to racism and sexism? 3. Question : According to chapter 2 of Understanding Philosophy, utilitarianism is a form of what broader kind of ethical theory? 4. Question : According to Tom Regan, what is fundamentally wrong with the treatment of animals in our current system? 5. Question : What is Tom Regan‟s position about the use of animals in research and agriculture? 6. Question : According to chapter 2 of Understanding Philosophy, which of the following would be an expression of rule utilitarianism, rather than act utilitarianism? 7. Question : Which of the following statements is the strongest evidence that the person saying it is a utilitarian? 8. Question : What moral theory does Jeremy Bentham (with whom Singer seems to agree) endorse? 9. Question : The video “Meet Your Meat” can best be described as primarily communicating which message? 10. Question : Which of the following does Tom Regan say about the utilitarian approach to animal ethics? 11. Question : Peter Singer‟s “basic principle of equality” applied to animals means: 12. Question : Which of the following describes how egglaying hens are treated in factory farms, according to the video “Meet Your Meat”?

13. Question : According to John Stuart Mill, utilitarianism takes into account the happiness of: 14. Question : According to chapter 2 of Understanding Philosophy, which of the following makes it difficult to calculate the utility of an act, raising a potential problem for utilitarianism? 15. Question : What is a key feature of utilitarianism according to the assigned texts? 16.

Question :

Tom Regan‟s view of animals is that:

17. Question : What does Tom Regan say is the source of inherent value in an individual, whether human or animal? 18. that:

Question :

19. Question : account?

According to Mill, utilitarian morality holds What is speciesism according to Peter Singer‟s

20. Question : What is the point of Regan‟s discussion about Aunt Bea and utilitarianism‟s respect for human life? **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 3 Assignment Applying an Ethical Theory (Equal Pay for Equal Work)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com

Applying an Ethical Theory. Please read these assignment instructions before writing your paper, and re-read them often during and after the writing process to make sure that you are fulfilling all of the instructions. Please also utilize the assignment guidance and the outlined model provided. Overview The following short essay assignment is designed to help prepare you for an important part of the Final Paper. In this essay, you will do the following: · Choose either the same ethical question you formulated and introduced in the Week One Assignment, or a different one based off the list of acceptable topics. · Choose either utilitarian or deontological ethical theory to apply to the ethical question. ·

Explain the core principles of that theory.

· Demonstrate how the principles of the theory support a certain position on that question. ·

Articulate a relevant objection to that position.

or you may choose a different question, but it must be based off the list of acceptable topics. Your introduction should include a brief remark about the kind of theory you will be using to approach this question. The last sentence of the introduction should briefly summarize the conclusion or position on the issue you think is best supported by this theory and succinctly state what the objection will be. Bear in mind that your essay will not be concerned with your own position on this issue, but what someone reasoning along the lines of the chosen theory would conclude; this may or may not be the position you took in the Week One Assignment.

application. An objection articulates a plausible reason why someone might find the argument problematic. This can be a false or unsupported claim or assumption, fallacious reasoning, a deep concern about what the conclusion involves, a demonstration of how the argument supports other conclusions that are unacceptable, etc. You should aim to explain this objection as objectively as possible, (i.e., in a way that would be acceptable to someone who disagrees with the argument from the previous paragraph). Note that this does not necessarily mean that the objection succeeds, or that the conclusion the theory supports is wrong. It may be an obstacle that any adequate defense of the conclusion would have to overcome, and it may be the case that the theory has the resources to overcome that obstacle. Your task here is simply to raise the objection or present the “obstacle.” • Conclusion The conclusion should very briefly summarize the main points of your essay. **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 3 Assignment Applying an Ethical Theory (Gender Equality/Ethics)

the instructions. Please also utilize the assignment guidance and the outlined model provided. Overview The following short essay assignment is designed to help prepare you for an important part of the Final Paper. In this essay, you will do the following: · Choose either the same ethical question you formulated and introduced in the Week One Assignment, or a different one based off the list of acceptable topics. · Choose either utilitarian or deontological ethical theory to apply to the ethical question. ·

Explain the core principles of that theory.

· Demonstrate how the principles of the theory support a certain position on that question. ·

Articulate a relevant objection to that position.

question. The last sentence of the introduction should briefly summarize the conclusion or position on the issue you think is best supported by this theory and succinctly state what the objection will be. Bear in mind that your essay will not be concerned with your own position on this issue, but what someone reasoning along the lines of the chosen theory would conclude; this may or may not be the position you took in the Week One Assignment.

concern about what the conclusion involves, a demonstration of how the argument supports other conclusions that are unacceptable, etc. You should aim to explain this objection as objectively as possible, (i.e., in a way that would be acceptable to someone who disagrees with the argument from the previous paragraph). Note that this does not necessarily mean that the objection succeeds, or that the conclusion the theory supports is wrong. It may be an obstacle that any adequate defense of the conclusion would have to overcome, and it may be the case that the theory has the resources to overcome that obstacle. Your task here is simply to raise the objection or present the “obstacle.” • Conclusion The conclusion should very briefly summarize the main points of your essay. **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 3 Assignment Applying an Ethical Theory (Just War Military Ethics)

The following short essay assignment is designed to help prepare you for an important part of the Final Paper. In this essay, you will do the following: · Choose either the same ethical question you formulated and introduced in the Week One Assignment, or a different one based off the list of acceptable topics. · Choose either utilitarian or deontological ethical theory to apply to the ethical question. ·

Explain the core principles of that theory.

· Demonstrate how the principles of the theory support a certain position on that question. ·

Articulate a relevant objection to that position.

Instructions Write a five-paragraph essay that conforms to the requirements below. The paper must be at least 1,000 words in length (excluding title and reference pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. The paragraphs of your essay should conform to the following guidelines: • Introduction The introduction should clearly state the ethical question under consideration, and define the essential issues. You may build upon the question and introduction you provided in the Week One Assignment; or you may choose a different question, but it must be based off the list of acceptable topics. Your introduction should include a brief remark about the kind of theory you will be using to approach this question. The last sentence of the introduction should briefly summarize the conclusion or position on the issue you think is best supported by this theory and succinctly state what the objection will be. Bear in mind that your essay will not be concerned with your own position on this issue, but what someone reasoning along the lines of

the chosen theory would conclude; this may or may not be the position you took in the Week One Assignment.

â&#x20AC;˘ Body Paragraphs Each paragraph in the body should start with a topic sentence that clearly identifies the main idea of the paragraph. o Theoryexplanation Explain the core principles or features of the deontological or utilitarian theory and the general account of moral reasoning it provides. You must quote from at least one required resource other than your textbook that defends or represents that theory. A list of acceptable resources is available in your online classroom. o Application Demonstrate how the principles or features of the deontological or utilitarian theory apply to the question under consideration and identify the specific conclusion that results from applying the reasoning characteristic of that kind of approach. Your application should clearly show how the conclusion follows from the main principles and features of the theory as addressed in the previous paragraph. Please see the associated guidance for help in fulfilling this requirement. o Objection Raise a relevant objection to the argument expressed in your application. An objection articulates a plausible reason why someone might find the argument problematic. This can be a false or unsupported claim or assumption, fallacious reasoning, a deep concern about what the conclusion involves, a demonstration of how the argument supports other conclusions that are unacceptable, etc. You should aim to explain this objection as objectively as possible, (i.e., in a way that would be acceptable to someone who disagrees with the argument from the previous paragraph).

Note that this does not necessarily mean that the objection succeeds, or that the conclusion the theory supports is wrong. It may be an obstacle that any adequate defense of the conclusion would have to overcome, and it may be the case that the theory has the resources to overcome that obstacle. Your task here is simply to raise the objection or present the “obstacle.” • Conclusion The conclusion should very briefly summarize the main points of your essay. **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 3 Assignment Applying an Ethical Theory (Physician Assisted Suicide Be Legal)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Applying an Ethical Theory. Please read these assignment instructions before writing your paper, and re-read them often during and after the writing process to make sure that you are fulfilling all of the instructions. Please also utilize the assignment guidance and the outlined model provided. Overview The following short essay assignment is designed to help prepare you for an important part of the Final Paper. In this essay, you will do the following:

· Choose either the same ethical question you formulated and introduced in the Week One Assignment, or a different one based off the list of acceptable topics. · Choose either utilitarian or deontological ethical theory to apply to the ethical question. ·

Explain the core principles of that theory.

· Demonstrate how the principles of the theory support a certain position on that question. ·

Articulate a relevant objection to that position.

overcome that obstacle. Your task here is simply to raise the objection or present the “obstacle.” • Conclusion The conclusion should very briefly summarize the main points of your essay. **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 3 Discussion (Hero)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Think of someone real or fictional whom some people regard as a “hero” for helping others, stopping something bad or evil, and so forth, even though by doing so they violated what would normally be considered a moral rule (focus on morality; don't simply think of someone who broke the law). For example, they may have lied, broken a promise, stolen, harmed someone innocent, or even murdered, but done so with good intentions. (Note: this last part is crucial: make sure you explain what it was that they did that would otherwise be morally questionable. Also, it need not be someone you think is a hero.) Try to think of any example that we would either all be familiar with, or something we can easily look up (in other words, don‟t just make something up or describe something generic). Many examples are given in the guidance and the readings, including people like Robin Hood, Edward Snowden, etc. Please don‟t use an example that someone else has already used!

Now here‟s the fun part: once you have thought of your example, evaluate what they did according to Kant‟s Categorical Imperative. Is what the person did moral, or immoral, according to the CI? Do you agree with this evaluation of the action? If you agree, how would you explain to the person in your own words why what they did was wrong? If you don‟t agree and think that what they did was morally right, how would you respond to the question, “what if everyone did that?” **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 3 Discussion (Kant Right Action)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Kant famously states that the only thing good without qualification is a good will. On this basis, he holds that we can do the “right action” but not out of a good will, and that only actions done from a good will are morally praiseworthy. Do you agree with Kant? Provide an example (real or made up) of someone doing a good thing but out of a motive other than that of a good will, and give reasons for why you think Kant is right, or why you think Kant is wrong that this action lacks moral value. Discuss the importance of the will and how one can attempt to create a good will. If you do not think a good will is important discuss your reasons for believing that the will is not important in ethical action.

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 3 Discussion (Kant’s formulations)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com One of Kant‟s formulations of the Categorical Imperative says that one should always treat humanity, whether in oneself or in another, always as an end and never merely as a means. Briefly explain what that means. Consider a specific example from the world of business, either one that you have directly encountered or one you heard or read about, in which a company honored this principle, and consider another example in which a company failed to honor this principle. Be sure to clearly explain your examples with respect to Kant‟s theory, and refer to the other readings on business ethics when appropriate. If you find the example from a source on the internet or in an article be sure to share the source information with your classmates. Finally, state whether or not you believe that businesses could actually run according to a Kantian moral framework or if they must necessarily break Kant‟s laws in order to function according to normal business principles

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 3 Discussion (Morally Permissible to lie)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Is it ever morally permissible to lie to someone? Describe a circumstance in which it seems that lying might make more people happy than telling the truth. Would lying be the right thing to do in that circumstance, or is it our moral duty to tell the truth, even then? Consider what Immanuel Kant would say, and explain that with reference to this weekâ&#x20AC;&#x;s readings. Then, offer your own perspective. If you agree with Kant, consider and respond to an objection to his view. If you disagree with Kant, explain why. Discuss the positive and negative aspects of deontological theory as it relates to another of the theories you have encountered in this course.

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 3 Quiz

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com PHI 208 Week 3 Quiz

1. Question : Michael Walzer argues that in the unique world of war, both morality and authority are 2. Question : Nagel‟s argument in “War and Massacre” that hostility or aggression should be directed at its true object means that which of the following would probably not be permissible? 3. Question : In “War and Massacre,” Thomas Nagel argues that all rules of engagement should be governed by the principle that 4. Question : Jeremy Waldron argues that the current use of drone warfare is unethical because 5. Question : In the video “What Is Just War Theory?” Michael Walzer argues it is important to read the essays and memoir literature of soldiers because 6. Question : In the Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant argues that when I find someone in need: 7. Question : In Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant claims that “reason”: 8. Question : In the video “Drones Are Not Ethical and Effective,” Jeremy Waldron argues that one reason drones are not ethical because their use involves 9. Question : Which would be an example of acting from duty, according to Kant‟s Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals: 10.

Question :

A false promise, according to Kant, is:

11. Question : According to Nagel in “War and Massacre,” to which of the following groups of people is hostility most appropriately aimed? 12. Question : action:

According to Kant, the moral worth of an

13. Question : In the article “War and Massacre,” Thomas Nagel argues that moral absolutism 14. Question : In the Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals Kant claims that to act on „duty‟ is 15. Question : In Kant Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, the maxim of an act is: 16. Question : According to Kant in the Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, suicide is: 17.

Question :

Kant‟s theory of morality is best described as:

18. Question : According to Kant‟s Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, which of these is not important to morality? 19. Question : as a means:

Kant argues that we should never use people

20. Question : Kenneth Anderson argues that the fact that drones make the resort to force easier

******************************************************** **

PHI 208 Week 4 Discussion (Aristotle)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Aristotle says that the virtues are necessary for humans to attain happiness, but he means this in terms of something we might call “flourishing” or “living well”, which he considers quite different than simply feeling good. Thus, according to Aristotle some people might feel that they are happy, but because they lack the virtues they are not truly flourishing. However, imagine someone that is deceitful, selfish, greedy, self-indulgent, and yet enjoys great pleasure and appears to be quite happy. Is someone like this “flourishing” or not? Explain your answer this by referring to this week‟s readings and media, and if possible provide examples from real life and/or from literature, film, TV, etc. **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 4 Discussion (Aristotle’s account of eudaimonia)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com Is it possible for individuals to flourish if others with whom they are connected are not also flourishing? Consider this with respect to Aristotle‟s account of eudaimonia, as well as the other readings and media. Identify a community or practice in which you are involved in which the flourishing of the individual is tied to the flourishing of

others. Does this require that we limit certain rights pertaining to the individual (for instance, the right to free speech or to pursue monetary gain), in order to promote the flourishing of the group within that context? Be specific, and use examples when appropriate. **********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 4 Discussion (Aristotle’s virtue ethics)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com An important aspect of Aristotle’s virtue ethics is the idea that virtues are “habits” that we acquire over time, and like any habit, virtues affect not just what we do, but our desires and emotions as well. Focusing on either Hill’s article or Robinson’s article, how might this be important when discussing environmental ethics or military ethics (focus your discussion on just one of those, but feel free to discuss the other in reply to other people’s posts)? How would a virtue ethicist reply to someone who says that they wish they could do more to express concern for the environment or be more courageous, but are too “weak willed” to do that? Use examples from the assigned media when appropriate.

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 4 Discussion (flourishing or successful life)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com What are two virtues that you believe are important to living a flourishing or successful life in either Aristotle’s sense? Explain what goods in human life these virtues enable their possessor to fulfill. Provide examples of characteristic behavior that manifests these virtues, and contrast that with behavior that displays a lack of virtue. Do your examples confirm Aristotle’s view that a virtue is a mean between extremes of excess and defect? If so, explain what those extremes are; if not, explain why. Refer to this week’s readings and media to illustrate and support your claims.

**********************************************************

PHI 208 Week 4 Discussion (Impact on the Environment)

For more classes visit www.snaptutorial.com

Identify an area of life that has an impact on the environment (including non-human animals), and explain how the possession or lack of virtue may make a difference to how one conducts oneself within that practice with respect to that environmental impact. In other words, when it comes to our relation to the environment, what attitudes and behaviors would be characteristic of a virtuous person, and what attitudes and behaviors may be characteristic of a person who lacks the virtues? How can those who do not have the virtues develop those virtues so that they can reliably act and feel in appropriate fashion with respect to this issue? Be sure to be as specific as possible in your analysis, and support your analysis with evidence from the weekâ&#x20AC;&#x;s readings and media, including Hillâ&#x20AC;&#x;s article, â&#x20AC;&#x153;Ideals of Human Excellence and Preserving Natural Environments. *********************************************************************************