Philosophy 3100 - Ethical Theory
Paper #2
3-4 pages (900-1,200 words)
due Monday, April 23 in class
Option 1: Pre-Assigned Topics: Write a 3-4 page (900-1,200 word) paper on one of the following topics. Indicate at the top of your paper, by letter and name, which topic you have chosen. Please also read these paper guidelines. Although they were written especially for those not writing on a pre-assigned topic, they will still help you if you are doing a pre-assigned topic.
- The Organ Harvest Objection to Utilitarianism. One interesting objection to act utilitarianism is the organ harvest objection. What is act utilitarianism? What is the organ objection to act utilitarianism. Does it refute act utiliarianism?
Your paper should do all of these things:
(i) clearly explain act utiliatarianism;
(ii) clearly explain the organ objection to utilitarianism;
(iii) explain whether or not your believe this to refute act utiliarianism. If not, explain why. If you think it does refute act utiliarianism, you should consider what an act utiliarianism might say in response to the objection (such as the response we discussed in class), and why you think this response does not succeed. Alternatively, you might consider whether moving to rule utilitarianism might solve the problem, and perhaps whether this move brings with it new problems.
- The Experience Machine Objection to Hedonism. One interesting objection to hedonism about welfare is the experience machine objection. What is hedonism about welfare? What is the experience machine objection to hedonism about welfare? Does it refute hedonism about welfare?
Your paper should do all of these things:
(i) clearly explain hedonism about welfare;
(ii) clearly explain the experience machine objection; there are different ways to put the objection, so you'll have to choose what you think is the most interesting or best way to put it (you might also discuss other, less good ways to put it, if you have space)
(iii) explain whether or not you believe this to refute hedonism about welfare. If not, explain why. If you think it does refute hedonism about welfare, you should consider what a hedonist might say in response to the objection, and why you think this response does not succeed.
- The Problem of Innocent-but-Non-Universalizable Maxims for Kant's Categorical Imperative. One interesting objection to (the "formula of universal law" version of) Kant's categorical imperative is the problem of innocent-but-non-universalizable maxims. What is (the "formula of universal law" version of) Kant's categorical imperative? What is the problem of innocent-but-non-universalizable maxims? Does it refute Kant's principle?
Your paper should do all of these things:
(i) clearly explain Kant's categorical imperative;
(ii) clearly explain the problem of innocent-but-non-universalizable maxims, both in general terms and with examples;
(iii) explain whether or not you believe this to refute Kant's theory. If not, explain why. If you think it does refute Kant's theory, you should consider what Kant might say in response to the objection, and why you think this response does not succeed.
- Consequentialism vs. Deontology. One of the most important disputes in the normative ethics of behavior is whether consequentialism or deontology is true. What is consequentialism and what is deontology? Which one is true?
Your paper should do all these things:
(i) clearly explain both consequentialism and deontology;
(ii) explain your main reason or reasons for thinking one of these theories to be the right one (this might involve explaining problems with other theory);
(iii) identify and clearly explain what you take to be the strongest problem or objection to your view;
(iv) defend your view against this objection.
Option 2: Open Topic: Write a 3-4 page (900-1,200 word) paper in which you defend, by means of rational argument, a thesis of your choosing in the normative ethics of behavior or in axiology. Indicate at the top of your paper that you have chosen the "Open Topic" option. To assist you, please read the paper guidelines.