1 Inherently dangerous GUN a Objects whose nature or design is sufficient to justify our prediction that they will cause harm independent of any empirical evidence Example nuclear weapons designed to cause harm confidently predict it will cause harm 2 Fundamental moral right GUN a A fundamental right is a non derivative right protecting a fundamental interest Not every interest we individually cherish is fundamental Fundamental rights standardly have conditions boundaries or restrictions on them such as the right to vote are conditional upon reaching a specified age and can be forfeited by emigrants and imprisoned felons 3 Fundamental interest GUN a Are integrally related to a person s chance of living a good life whatever her particular interests desires and beliefs happen to be For example living in a society that protects speech creates an environment within which each of us can pursue our particular interests goals needs and development whatever our interests happen to be 4 Derivative moral right GUN a Cannot be restricted without good evidence like fundamental rights Example Prima facie derivative right to consume alcohol the state can legitimately abolish or restrict alcohol consumption only if it can show that doing so is an effective means of protecting the public from harm Protecting the public from harm can be restricting drinking and driving 5 Equality retributivism EYE a View that the punishment should be equal to the crime Such as an eye for an eye Treat people as they have treated others 6 Proportional retributivism EYE a View that the punishment should be proportional to the crime Severity of the punishment should be commensurate with the seriousness of the wrong 7 Deterrence argument for the death penalty a Someone is deterred from committing murder by the threat of the death penalty only if his recognition of the death penalty as a possible consequence of committing murder explains why he does not commit it Nathanson believes the rejection of the death penalty would symbolize our support of respect for life and restraint of violence 8 Causal View of Sex TWO VIEWS a When sex is just another kind of pleasure and is permissible in the absence of love or affection This view leaves without adequate support the common judgements that are made about pedophilia and rape 9 Significance View of Sex TWO VIEWS a Sex has a romantic significance Has an explanation of why pedophilia and rape is wrong Children are unable to appreciate the full significance and can be traumatizing Forcing them to have sex is not like forcing them to engage in other activities 10 Marriage as a Universal Human Institution NORMAL MARRIAGE a Marriage is a public union between a man and a woman that creates rights and obligations between the couple and any children the union may produce Successful societies do this because they need babies 11 Moral dumbfounding Sexual Morality debate a When our views on moral issues are based on gut instinct reactions often disgust without us being able to give reasons in support of our judgements Example interracial marriage emotions like disgust are in no way indicative whether something is moral or immoral 12 Eugenic reasons for abortion Abortion debate a Type of reason for seeking an abortion Reasons relating to fetal abnormality 13 Therapeutic reasons for abortion Abortion debate a Type of reason for seeking an abortion Reasons relating to the life and health of the pregnant woman ESSAY 1 State Marquis s argument that abortion deprives the fetus of a future like ours valuable future Marquis Why Abortion is Immoral p 468 According to Marquis he uses the example of the wrongness of killing a normal adult human is best explained by the fact that it deprives the individual of all future experiences and activities of value His argument applied to abortion includes if a killing deprives the killed of an otherwise valuable future then the killing is wrong An abortion is a killing that deprives the killed of an otherwise valuable future therefore abortion is wrong An objection to this would be whether killing is bad depends on how much life one has left and how good one s life is 2 How is the practice of punishment justified according to the retributive theory of punishment How are particular punishments for particular crimes justified according to the retributive theory of punishment Answer both questions Textbook 537 539 The practice of punishment is justified according to the retributive theory of punishment Wrongdoers are viewed as attempting to take unfair advantage of others and law government society Justice demands that in response to crime the wrongdoer suffer some sort of deprivation One way of justifying the particular punishment would be by making the punishment fit the crime is a matter of doing to the wrongdoer the same kind of action that he or she did to his or her victim S Another interpretation includes the principle of proportionality which the appropriate moral measure of specific punishments requires that they be in proportion to the crime 3 How is the practice of punishment justified according to the consequentialist theory of punishment How are particular punishments for particular crimes justified according to the consequentialist theory of punishment Answer both questions Textbook 537 539 The practice of punishment is justified according to the consequentialist theory of punishment Punishment as a response to crime is morally justified if and only if this practice compared to any other response to crime will likely produce as much overall intrinsic value as would any other response A particular punishment for particular crimes is morally justified if and only if it would produce at least a much overall intrinsic value as would any other response For example having the death penalty possible positive consequences include deterrence and prevention possible negative consequences include the risk of executing innocents incitement and financial cost To determine whether or not the death penalty is able to be morally justified one would weigh the intrinsic value of implementing the death penalty to other punishments for such a crime 4 Explain van den Haag s argument that the improper distribution of the death penalty is not a reason for abolishing the death penalty from van den Haag A Defense of the Death Penalty p 547 Improper distribution cannot affect the quality of what is distributed be it punishments or rewards Justice is independent of the
View Full Document
Unlocking...