Bioethics Exam Test
What are the characteristics of good reasons in ethics? - answer-relevant to position
-provide evidence for a position
-support a conclusion as an argument
-appeals not to evidence but to a principle
-should not contradict each other and be logically consistent
truth – answer how premises correspond or not to the world
validity - answer the formal relations between premises and conclusion
Slippery slope - answer argument that a small change in the current practice will lead to
terrible results; no logical place to draw the line
Conceptual - answer once a small change is made, other changes will logically follow,
appeals to something good in human nature
Empirical - answer taking the first step unleashes something bad in human nature
Ad hominem - answer- "to the man"
-a personal attack on someone else
Tu quoque - answer--"you too"
--two wrongs make a right
--Justifying our actions by claiming that others have committed the same wrong
Straw man/Red herring - answerbringing up irrelevant issues; focusing on different
issue than one originally advocated because the different issue is easier to refute
ex) "We should reject Obamacare because it will lead to death panels where people are
forced to have advance directives before they know they are dying or know what their
options are."
straw man - answer--"So you're saying I evolved from a monkey? Then how come I
don't throw feces and climb trees?"
--Evolution doesn't make that claim, but by claiming that it does, the arguer is trying to
beat down a much easier argument.
Red Herring - answer--"So you believe in evolution? I'll bet your parents would be
disappointed in you."
,--The arguer is distracting from the issue by bringing his opponent's parents into this -
they have no impact on whether or not the theory is correct.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc - answer--"After This, Therefore, Because of This"
--confuses temporal priority with causality
--ex) "In the 1960s, women started working outside the home, and a few years later,
rates of divorce soared. Therefore, if we want to preserve the family, we should prevent
women from working outside the home."
--Just because one event occurred before another does not mean the first was caused
by the second ---- everything in history came before X event, it does not mean that they
are correlated
Appeal to authority - answer--using any authority to justify an argument
--Ex) Using an ant expert's opinion on rock bands
--Reasons and arguments justify a position, not just any authority
Appeal to feelings and upbringing - answer--using personal feelings or upbringing to
justify something
--Ex) "I was brought up to believe that men were the hunters and women were the
hunted, so a woman should wait until a man finds her and asks her out."
--You can be brought up the wrong way
Ad populum - answer--everybody does it
--Ex) "All the other physicians do it. Why shouldn't I take such gifts, too?"
False dichotomy - answer--"Either-Or"
--presenting an issue with only two extremes
Equivocation - answer--use of ambiguous language to conceal the truth
--Ex) "Sex offenders should only be allowed to live in certain areas, so Alan Jones
should not live here."
Begging the question - answer--when a conclusion that requires good reasons is
assumed without argument
--Ex) Saying only humans can be persons is begging the question which is whether only
humans can be persons
moral relativism - answer--saying that right and wrong is internally defined by each
society/culture so we can't judge other cultures for their practices because all of our
moral systems are right
--may sound nice in theory but in practice it allows for the Nazis to be justified because
"we can't judge that culture"
utilitarianism - answergggn
, 4 basic tenets of utilitarianism? - answerconsequentialism, maximization, theory of
value, scope of morality premise
Consequentialism - answerconsequences count, not motives or intentions
Maximization - answernumber of people affected by a consequences matter (the more
affected, the more important the result
theory of value - answera definition of what counts as good consequences
scope of morality premise - answereach being's happiness is to count as one unit
One cannot predict the future, so we don't know what the impacts are from actions -
answerConsequentialism (utilitarianism) raises the issue of..
Train problem example. What happens if people don't actually experience happiness in
the same quantity as utilitarianism suggests? We could potentially not be maximizing
happiness. - answerMaximization (utilitarianism) raises the issue of..
Premises can be false. Some people may actually experience happiness more than
others. Also the problem with animals... are they beings? - answerScope-of-morality
(utilitarianism) raises the issue of..
ignore the ppl who are probably gonna live, ignore the ppl that are probably gonna die,
and only try to save the ppl wavering on the edge of life and death. this will maximize
the possible # of lives saved - answerWhat are the applications of utilitarianism in public
health and situations of triage?
What is Kant's deontology and his opposition to consequentialism? - answer--duty/intent
matters rather than outcome
ends in themselves - answerKant believes that humans should always be treated as
"_____-_____-_________", never mere means.
traditional ethics are too male-centered. we should instead focus on compassion, care,
trust, family/friends, and cooperation, more "female" values. Nature vs. NURTURE
--reinforces gender stereotypes - answerWhat is the ethics of care?
people must display four cardinal virtues to be defined as a good person - answerHow
were pre-Socratic ethics exclusively role-defined?
--required virtues of compassion, knowledge of healing, and skill in human relations
--if you have these virtues, then you have the skills to perform a role well -
answerDiscuss the role of the physician according to ancient Greek medical ethics.
What are the characteristics of good reasons in ethics? - answer-relevant to position
-provide evidence for a position
-support a conclusion as an argument
-appeals not to evidence but to a principle
-should not contradict each other and be logically consistent
truth – answer how premises correspond or not to the world
validity - answer the formal relations between premises and conclusion
Slippery slope - answer argument that a small change in the current practice will lead to
terrible results; no logical place to draw the line
Conceptual - answer once a small change is made, other changes will logically follow,
appeals to something good in human nature
Empirical - answer taking the first step unleashes something bad in human nature
Ad hominem - answer- "to the man"
-a personal attack on someone else
Tu quoque - answer--"you too"
--two wrongs make a right
--Justifying our actions by claiming that others have committed the same wrong
Straw man/Red herring - answerbringing up irrelevant issues; focusing on different
issue than one originally advocated because the different issue is easier to refute
ex) "We should reject Obamacare because it will lead to death panels where people are
forced to have advance directives before they know they are dying or know what their
options are."
straw man - answer--"So you're saying I evolved from a monkey? Then how come I
don't throw feces and climb trees?"
--Evolution doesn't make that claim, but by claiming that it does, the arguer is trying to
beat down a much easier argument.
Red Herring - answer--"So you believe in evolution? I'll bet your parents would be
disappointed in you."
,--The arguer is distracting from the issue by bringing his opponent's parents into this -
they have no impact on whether or not the theory is correct.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc - answer--"After This, Therefore, Because of This"
--confuses temporal priority with causality
--ex) "In the 1960s, women started working outside the home, and a few years later,
rates of divorce soared. Therefore, if we want to preserve the family, we should prevent
women from working outside the home."
--Just because one event occurred before another does not mean the first was caused
by the second ---- everything in history came before X event, it does not mean that they
are correlated
Appeal to authority - answer--using any authority to justify an argument
--Ex) Using an ant expert's opinion on rock bands
--Reasons and arguments justify a position, not just any authority
Appeal to feelings and upbringing - answer--using personal feelings or upbringing to
justify something
--Ex) "I was brought up to believe that men were the hunters and women were the
hunted, so a woman should wait until a man finds her and asks her out."
--You can be brought up the wrong way
Ad populum - answer--everybody does it
--Ex) "All the other physicians do it. Why shouldn't I take such gifts, too?"
False dichotomy - answer--"Either-Or"
--presenting an issue with only two extremes
Equivocation - answer--use of ambiguous language to conceal the truth
--Ex) "Sex offenders should only be allowed to live in certain areas, so Alan Jones
should not live here."
Begging the question - answer--when a conclusion that requires good reasons is
assumed without argument
--Ex) Saying only humans can be persons is begging the question which is whether only
humans can be persons
moral relativism - answer--saying that right and wrong is internally defined by each
society/culture so we can't judge other cultures for their practices because all of our
moral systems are right
--may sound nice in theory but in practice it allows for the Nazis to be justified because
"we can't judge that culture"
utilitarianism - answergggn
, 4 basic tenets of utilitarianism? - answerconsequentialism, maximization, theory of
value, scope of morality premise
Consequentialism - answerconsequences count, not motives or intentions
Maximization - answernumber of people affected by a consequences matter (the more
affected, the more important the result
theory of value - answera definition of what counts as good consequences
scope of morality premise - answereach being's happiness is to count as one unit
One cannot predict the future, so we don't know what the impacts are from actions -
answerConsequentialism (utilitarianism) raises the issue of..
Train problem example. What happens if people don't actually experience happiness in
the same quantity as utilitarianism suggests? We could potentially not be maximizing
happiness. - answerMaximization (utilitarianism) raises the issue of..
Premises can be false. Some people may actually experience happiness more than
others. Also the problem with animals... are they beings? - answerScope-of-morality
(utilitarianism) raises the issue of..
ignore the ppl who are probably gonna live, ignore the ppl that are probably gonna die,
and only try to save the ppl wavering on the edge of life and death. this will maximize
the possible # of lives saved - answerWhat are the applications of utilitarianism in public
health and situations of triage?
What is Kant's deontology and his opposition to consequentialism? - answer--duty/intent
matters rather than outcome
ends in themselves - answerKant believes that humans should always be treated as
"_____-_____-_________", never mere means.
traditional ethics are too male-centered. we should instead focus on compassion, care,
trust, family/friends, and cooperation, more "female" values. Nature vs. NURTURE
--reinforces gender stereotypes - answerWhat is the ethics of care?
people must display four cardinal virtues to be defined as a good person - answerHow
were pre-Socratic ethics exclusively role-defined?
--required virtues of compassion, knowledge of healing, and skill in human relations
--if you have these virtues, then you have the skills to perform a role well -
answerDiscuss the role of the physician according to ancient Greek medical ethics.
