Final Review Green World Hunger Red Abortion Blue Euthanasia Purple Sexuality 1 Explain Hardin s population cycle and what he thinks the World Food Bank would do to that cycle Hardin believes that all populations have a carrying capacity P1 At some point that population will reach a state of overpopulation P2 This will either be caused by an increase in numbers or a decrease in food resulting in a low ratio of resources to population Eventually some emergency or accident will cause a great decrease in population and the numbers will return to that of P1 or lower Then eventually it will return to P2 and the cycle will continue However Hardin believes that the cycle would change if the World Food Bank became involved The population would reach overpopulation move from P1 to P2 But every time an emergency or accident occurred there would be input from the Food Bank Therefore the population would not fall back to P1 because more food generally means more babies The population would again reach overpopulation P3 When another emergency occurred the Food Bank would interfere again causing an increase to P4 and so on In the end the only way to fall back to carrying capacity at P1 would be a catastrophe of scarcely imaginable proportions 1 Compare Singer and O Neill s arguments that we in industrialized nations ought to provide aid to alleviate the famine and hunger of those living in extreme poverty Singer argues that if a person is not donating to aid agencies they are doing something wrong He states that suffering and death from lack of food shelter and medical care are bad He goes on to explain that if a person can prevent something bad from happening without sacrificing anything nearly as important it is wrong not to do so Since a person can donate to aid agencies to prevent suffering and death from lack of food shelter and medical care without sacrificing anything nearly as important that person should donate to these agencies O Neill argues from a Kantian standpoint He believes that humans are required to treat other humans as an end not merely as a means This means that they must try to share and support others ends and activities They must act justly towards humans as rational beings and must not deceive others Since famine great poverty and powerlessness are bad things for other humans Kantians are required to help these humans in any way they can by trying to avert reduce or remedy famine 2 Explain Thomson s people spores example What is this example supposed to show about abortion Thomson s people spores example is explained as follows People spores float through the air A person is aware of this and they do not want children Therefore they seal all of their windows shut with the best mesh screens they can buy However it is known to that person that on very very rare occasion a people spore may still get in If a people spore does get in Thomson says that the person who grows from the spore has no right to use the mother s house He argues that they don t have the right even though the mother had voluntarily opened her windows and owned carpets and upholstered furniture A person may argue that if the mother did not want to be morally obligated to her child she could have lived a life with the windows shut and bare floors and furniture But Thomson s example is meant to show that this is foolish A person could get a hysterectomy but still be raped Or a person could go outside and be attacked They shouldn t be morally obligated to walk with an army because they don t want to be attacked Thomson s example is meant to show that sometimes people get pregnant when they do not want to and take measures not to He argues that there are some cases where abortion is just and some cases in which it is unjust Depending on the circumstances a mother would have to decide In this example he argues that it would be just to get rid of the people spore child because it has no right to use the mother s house 2 What is Warren s space explorer example who is captured by alien scientists supposed to show Explain the example Space explorer is captured by alien scientists They are going to clone him into thousands of humans and he will then be released and his clones will be treated fairly Warren says it is not wrong for him to escape and deny all of those possible people their lives His right to escape is greater than bringing all of those potential people into the world This example is meant to show that a fetus s potential to become a human does not make abortion wrong A mother s right to not want the child inside her is greater than the fetus s right to life because it is only a potential person 2 What does Marquis mean by a future like ours What is his response to someone who says that his view entails that contraception is wrong Marquis argues that killing is wrong because it deprives the victim of a future like ours By that he means a life of experiences activities projects and enjoyments that would constitute a future Hi is not concerned about the change in the biological state of a person once killed But he is concerned by that fact that once someone is killed they are deprived of any values that they had or may have come to value Killing is wrong because it deprives the victim of any value of their future Marquis argues that his paper does not entail that contraception is wrong He states that contraception prevents the actualization of a possible person s future of value Therefore critics may argue that he is saying conception is wrong because he states that futures of value should be maximized However Marquis does not argue this He argues that denying a human future of value is wrong But contraception does not deny anything a future of value because nothing exists yet 3 How does Rachels respond to the argument that active and passive euthanasia are morally different because in passive euthanasia the doctor does nothing whereas in active euthanasia the doctor kills the patient Rachels argues that there is no moral difference between killing and letting die When a person performs either of these they had the same end in mind as they acted or failed to act The difference between killing and letting dies does not make a moral difference If a doctor had let a patient die they would be held to the same moral standards as if they had given the patient a lethal injection For example if the doctor made a wrong diagnosis it would not matter if he had let the patient die or if he had given the patient
View Full Document
Unlocking...