, Week One
intro to ethics
T U E S DAY ethics attempt makes
to determine what an action
right or
wrong
and provide some
systematic a n swe r to what we
ought to do and what sort
of person we
ought to be
rekly
questions
week 2 :
peoples beliefs cannot be deemed
right or
wrong
because they aren't
facts or statements .
they a re
things that people hold as values and
nobody else should be
saying that what another
values
person is
right or
wrong
.
should be the behind the
week 7 : ac t ion s thought of as ac tion
itself and the intention it
If consequence
·
.
had been the should also be blame
considered ,
then
consequences recognized You .
can't someone
for an
didn't
event
they intend to cause
.
week the and ethical should be
11 :
assuming
a traditional medical
setting ,
moral priorities
what the patient wa n ts . the strongest moral decision a doctor could make is one
purely with
their patient in mind ,
regardless of their bias ,
beliefs
, or
opinions
THURSDAY
Argument
syllabus quiz an
argument is a series of statements
, one
of which is
proved true or false by the rest .
↳ ↓
"Cito" conclusion premise
Prinz reading standard
form of an
argument is the numbered premises & conclusion
Prinz quiz
·
not all premises a re
explicitly stated ,
making a valid
argument not a
good argument
pre-reflection filling in a
missing premise can help to make the
argument stronger
, eve n
if its still not
a
good argument
if premier
a re true ,
conclusion will be t wo deductive
reasoning
hasthe
·
conditional
Statement
consegment
modus then Therefore
ponens
:
if x
y x
·
y
.
.
tollens
·
moder :
if x then
y
.
not
y
.
so ,
not x
affirming the
consequent (invalid) if then
Therefore
: x
y y p.
. .
denying the antecedentinvalid) :
if x then not x not
y
so,
·
y
. .
·
hypothetical syllogism if : x then
y
.
if y
then z . So
,
if x ,
then
.
z
connects a series
of conditional statements
valid
arguments don't have to sound which relies the trueness
of the premises
·
,
on
, Week Two
relativism
1- Level a
Attempt
reconstruc t an
argument from King ,
Prinz ,
Plato
, or Rachels
-Validity
&
duvalidity
be
modus
ponens - if 1. I we re true ,
then 3 wo u l d also true
·
if 12 a re true ,
that doesn't mean I has to be
if consequent is
affirmed
moder tollens could also be used
LevelA
be
must standard form 5-10 steps long valid
·
, ,
arguments a re
going
to be buried in
prose ,
look
for conclusion first
watch
for inter mittent conclusions check after conclusion too
·
,
·
not all text is
support
conclusion
premises
C cannabis harmful
:
is
1) Purpose of law is to protect . 2 :
there should be laws against cannabis
conditional
statement
2) there shouldn't be a law
against u s e.
e 1) ( -
C)
if cannabis is
harmful ,
then there should be laws
against it . 2)c-
...
3) -
L
if cannabis is as
harmful as
legal druge ,
then invalid
denying antecedent
be
it should also
.
legal
cannabis is as
harmful as
legal drugs
1) C-L
2) C valid argument ,
may
not be sound but i s valid
3) .
L
order
of the premiser
doesn't matter ,
conclusion must be later
though
then
if laws a re
unjust , they should be
disobeyed .
laws
segregation a re
unjust
laws should be
disobeyed
segregation
1) re D
2) w
).
3 D
intro to ethics
T U E S DAY ethics attempt makes
to determine what an action
right or
wrong
and provide some
systematic a n swe r to what we
ought to do and what sort
of person we
ought to be
rekly
questions
week 2 :
peoples beliefs cannot be deemed
right or
wrong
because they aren't
facts or statements .
they a re
things that people hold as values and
nobody else should be
saying that what another
values
person is
right or
wrong
.
should be the behind the
week 7 : ac t ion s thought of as ac tion
itself and the intention it
If consequence
·
.
had been the should also be blame
considered ,
then
consequences recognized You .
can't someone
for an
didn't
event
they intend to cause
.
week the and ethical should be
11 :
assuming
a traditional medical
setting ,
moral priorities
what the patient wa n ts . the strongest moral decision a doctor could make is one
purely with
their patient in mind ,
regardless of their bias ,
beliefs
, or
opinions
THURSDAY
Argument
syllabus quiz an
argument is a series of statements
, one
of which is
proved true or false by the rest .
↳ ↓
"Cito" conclusion premise
Prinz reading standard
form of an
argument is the numbered premises & conclusion
Prinz quiz
·
not all premises a re
explicitly stated ,
making a valid
argument not a
good argument
pre-reflection filling in a
missing premise can help to make the
argument stronger
, eve n
if its still not
a
good argument
if premier
a re true ,
conclusion will be t wo deductive
reasoning
hasthe
·
conditional
Statement
consegment
modus then Therefore
ponens
:
if x
y x
·
y
.
.
tollens
·
moder :
if x then
y
.
not
y
.
so ,
not x
affirming the
consequent (invalid) if then
Therefore
: x
y y p.
. .
denying the antecedentinvalid) :
if x then not x not
y
so,
·
y
. .
·
hypothetical syllogism if : x then
y
.
if y
then z . So
,
if x ,
then
.
z
connects a series
of conditional statements
valid
arguments don't have to sound which relies the trueness
of the premises
·
,
on
, Week Two
relativism
1- Level a
Attempt
reconstruc t an
argument from King ,
Prinz ,
Plato
, or Rachels
-Validity
&
duvalidity
be
modus
ponens - if 1. I we re true ,
then 3 wo u l d also true
·
if 12 a re true ,
that doesn't mean I has to be
if consequent is
affirmed
moder tollens could also be used
LevelA
be
must standard form 5-10 steps long valid
·
, ,
arguments a re
going
to be buried in
prose ,
look
for conclusion first
watch
for inter mittent conclusions check after conclusion too
·
,
·
not all text is
support
conclusion
premises
C cannabis harmful
:
is
1) Purpose of law is to protect . 2 :
there should be laws against cannabis
conditional
statement
2) there shouldn't be a law
against u s e.
e 1) ( -
C)
if cannabis is
harmful ,
then there should be laws
against it . 2)c-
...
3) -
L
if cannabis is as
harmful as
legal druge ,
then invalid
denying antecedent
be
it should also
.
legal
cannabis is as
harmful as
legal drugs
1) C-L
2) C valid argument ,
may
not be sound but i s valid
3) .
L
order
of the premiser
doesn't matter ,
conclusion must be later
though
then
if laws a re
unjust , they should be
disobeyed .
laws
segregation a re
unjust
laws should be
disobeyed
segregation
1) re D
2) w
).
3 D
