PHL 116 Bioethics Exam 1 Study Guide

Finnis thinks abortion is ALWAYS wrong because every fetus... correct answer: is an organic unity Tooley argues that neonates (infants) do NOT have a right to life. correct answer: True According to the McCaughey's, who was responsible for the ensuring of the health of their fetuses? correct answer: God According to the author, Pence, not selectively reducing the fetuses exposed each to greater harm. correct answer: True What desires does Tooley think is necessary for a right to life? correct answer: The desire for continued existence. According to Marquis, abortion is wrong because... correct answer: it deprives the fetus of a future like ours. Marquis thinks abortion is wrong for the same reason killing an ordinary adult human is wrong. correct answer: True What does Thomson argue would have to be true in order for abortion to be wrong? correct answer: the fetus has a right to use the mother's body. Thomson makes a distinction between wrong actions that violate others' rights and actions that are not wrong, but merely _________. correct answer: indecent According to Purdy, because fetuses are uniquely dependent on their mothers: correct answer: women have moral reasons to consider how their actions affect their fetuses. Purdy claims that fetuses are moral persons. correct answer: False Asch claims that those with congenital disabilities gave a life less worth living than the non-disabled. correct answer: False Asch claims that those with congenital disabilities... correct answer: do NOT have permanently disrupted lives. According to Parfit, possible people are... correct answer: those whose future existence depends on our choices now. According to Parfit, future people and possible people can both be harmed. correct answer: False Thomson argues that her view does not permit infanticide. correct answer: True Define a valid argument. Spot an example of one. Identify the parts of an argument. correct answer: A valid argument is when all the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. an example is: P1. If puppies are green, then penguins can fly. P2. Puppies are green. C. Therefore penguins can fly. Conclusions are guaranteed when ALL the premises are true. You must accept an argument if this is the case. Explain the 'Trolley Problem' (i.e., the three versions of the case) and what it illustrates. correct answer: The Trolley Problem is a trio of cases where life or death of multiple people or a single person is decided. The first case is where Chester has the choice to pull the switch of a runaway trolley. The route that the trolley is going on has 5 people on the tracks but another route has 1 person on the tracks. Most people would say that Chester should pull the switch to change the direction of the trolley to kill the 1 person. The second case is where Chester has the option to let the trolley follow its route to kill the 5 people stuck on the tracks, or he has the option to pull a switch that drops a heavy set person in the way of the trolley stopping the trolley before it gets to the 5 people stuck on the tracks. Sometimes people change their choices to not drop the single heavy set person in the way because it is more personal. The third case is where Chester is a Dr. and has the choice to save 5 people only if he uses the organs of an innocently healthy person. Here is the case where people think that letting the 5 people die and the 1 person to live is correct. This is an inconsistent principle of commitment If in the first case it is okay to save the most lives, then it should be okay to save the most lives in the 2nd and 3rd cases. This lesson teaches that a principle is wrong if the commitments of the principle is inconsistent. Explain what the valence of a reason is. correct answer: The valence of a reason is which direction the moral reasoning considers more. An example may be that someone is for or against abortion. Whichever category a person has more morally relevant features, then the topic points in the direction of that reasoning. Identify a principle's commitments. correct answer: In the trolley problem, if one thinks that the first case should save the most lives but resulting in one life sacrificed, then all the cases should follow the same pattern. A commitment to the principle of this theory should remain throughout the rest of the cases where the most lives are saved no matter how personal the situation. Explain what being an object of direct moral consideration is. correct answer: An object of direct moral consideration means that because of the status something is, it has moral consideration. Human beings are objects of DMC, which means we have to treat them with certain respect and consider how they will be affected. Define 'fetus' and 'abortion', as used in class. correct answer: A fetus is an in utero human being. a fetus is a human being. Abortion is the killing of the fetus. Explain the basic 'problem of abortion', as covered in lecture. correct answer: Adult humans are direct objects of moral concern. Neonates (infants) are considered objects of direct moral concern as well because they develop into adult humans. Gametes, or sperm and ovum, are not objects of direct moral concern even though they have potential to become something more. The problem is that there is no morally relevant difference between a gamete and a neonate. With this we have an inconsistent claim. Another basic problem of abortion is that fetuses develop inside women who do have moral consideration. Explain Finnis' conception of 'organic unity' and its significance to the morality of abortion. correct answer: Finnis' meaning of organic unity is that he Explain how self-consciousness is relevant to the ethics of abortion, according to Tooley. correct answer: There are two kinds of mental states; beliefs, and desires. What people believe are usually because they are true facts. For example, Mt. Everest is the tallest mountain and everyone should believe this because it is a true fact. This is a mental state of the way to world is represented as it is. But, desires are different because it is what could be of the world including thoughts about yourself. This relates to ethics of abortion because for one to have desires, you must be self-conscious which develops later in humans. Fetuses do not have consciousness. Explain the fallacy of equivocation and give an example of its use. correct answer: Fallacies of equivocation are patterns of bad reasoning between the same word twice but with different meanings. An example of this is: 1. Only man is rational. 2. A woman is not a man. 3. Therefore, no woman is rational. Distinguish between beliefs and desires. correct answer: There are two kinds of mental states; beliefs, and desires. What people believe are usually because they are true facts. For example, Mt. Everest is the tallest mountain and everyone should believe this because it is a true fact. This is a mental state of the way to world is represented as it is. But, desires are different because it is what could be of the world including thoughts about yourself. Identify the argumentative strategy "parity of reasoning". Lesson: Marquis correct answer: Marquis says that we should treat like cases alike. This is the Parity of Reasoning. For example, if we kill a fetus, it is deprived of its future like adult humans, then abortion should be wrong. Explain what a counterexample is and be able to give one. Lesson: Marquis correct answer: A counterexample is where the principle in a case does not fit. you must test a claim to see if any objections come up, and if there are objections, then the case is a counterexample. Marquis explains that killing an adult human is wrong because it deprives them of a future. If we can find a way that killing an adult human does NOT deprive them of a future, then this principle is wrong and is considered a counterexample. For example, if Chester is standing on train tracks about to be hit by the train and killed but, a stranger shoots and kills him before the train comes, it seems wrong for the stranger to kill Chester because even though Chester was about to be hit and killed by a train, he had a few more seconds at life. Here it seems it is wrong to kill someone who is about to die, so this is a counterexample. Explain the problem of non-paradigmatic humans. Recap: Moral Status correct answer: The problem here is that it is unclear how to square our current moral practices with a justified account of DMC. We can call this the problem of non-paradigmatic humans (NPH). Paradigmatic humans are ordinary adult humans - they have all the characteristics that are paradigmatically human. NPH lack important characteristics. The problem of NPH is rendering our account of the DMC of adult humans consistent with our moral practices. Explain why the property of 'being human' isn't itself morally significant. Lesson: Finnis and Tooley correct answer: Some humans do not have the same capacities of other humans. For example, a neonate cannot do what an ordinary human adult can do. Cognitively, neonates and adult humans are different so, this makes the property of being a human morally insignificant. Explain Thomson's thought experiments and the significance of each for the ethics of abortion. correct answer: Thomson claims that abortion depends on the right for a fetus to use the mothers body. The example of a violinist attached to someone for blood defines the right to use one's body. Another thought experiment is the growing baby inside a mother, and if the baby is not aborted, the mother will die. There is no moral significance to the fetus compared to the mother's life in this example. This brings up the right to defense. Explain how rights and correlative obligations are related. Lesson: Thomson correct answer: Wrong actions are ones that violate a right. There are obligations that are expected of humans due to the rights humans have which makes rights and correlative obligations related. For example, if someone punches me in the face, it is wrong because it crosses the boundary of bodily security rights. Because of this right, there are obligations why that person should NOT punch me in the face. Explain the disagreement between Finnis and Tooley, and how Thomson disagrees with them both. correct answer: Finnis argued that abortion is always wrong, no matter what. Tooley argued that abortion is never wrong no matter what. Explain the way in which a mother's obligations to her fetus are constrained, according to Purdy, and the significance of that constraint. correct answer: A mother has moral obligations to her fetus according to Purdy. However, the obligations cannot be forced to follow. Explain Pence's objection to the McCaughey's reasoning. correct answer: Pence's objection is that if someone thinks they shouldn't interfere with God's plan, then it should apply for everything you do. The McCaughey's used a fertility drug which helped them get pregnant but it turned out they had 7 babies develop. Under Pence's argument, they should not have interfered with God's plan since they could not get pregnant naturally for a second time. Pence argues that if the McCaughey's used artificial fertilization, then they should consider selective reduction of the fetuses to minimize risk of harm to both the fetuses and mother. Explain Asch's two objections to the notion that the severely disabled would be better off non-disabled. correct answer: Asch explains that although the severely disabled may have a more difficult time getting around than a person in perfect health, and that they may be socially attacked for their wellbeing, people with congenital disabilities do NOT have permanently disrupted lives. She argues that accommodations should be made for the mentally and physically disabled. Asch also argues that the society should change their outlook on life towards a disabled person for the better. Asch claims the challenges that disabled people face are not much different from the challenges that regular humans face. Educating people about severely disabled people can help change the attitudes into positive behavior. Distinguish between 'possible persons' and 'future persons', as understood by Parfit, and the significance of the distinction for reproductive ethics. correct answer: A future person is someone who can be affected by the actions of present day people. A possible person is someone who has potential to be alive but is not guaranteed life because their existence depends on the choices we make in the moment. The significance of the distinction for reproductive ethics is what is considered a harm and what is not. We want to avoid harms. Parfit uses an example where a pregnant lady takes a job that could risk her and the fetus' health. This is putting the child in a harmful situation. An example of not harming a child is where a woman can get pregnant this month or the next month, but if she chooses to conceive this month, the child will be disabled in some way. However, if the woman waits until next month to conceive, the child will be in perfect health. The woman decides to conceive this month and the baby is born with disabilities. Parfit's argument is that the mother did not harm the child because if she would have waited a month to conceive, a different person would be born. This relates to the definition of a possible person because the woman had the choice to bare a child with disabilities or one without disabilities. Either way, the disabled child would be a different person than the healthy child. The conclusion is that possible people cannot be harmed, only future people. Explain how harm is comparative. Lesson: Parfit correct answer: Harm naturally contrasts with benefit. Both are comparative notions. For something to count as a harm to someone, it must make them worse off. Part of the comparative nature of harms and benefits is that one can point to the way things would be better (or worse) had the harm (or benefit) not occurred. If I stub my toe, I can explain how it counts as a harm by pointing to what I would have been like had I not stubbed my toe: namely, pain free.