Question 1 point
Which of the following is NOT a claim that Simon Eassom makes about morality in his
article:
For an action to be a moral (or immoral) action, it must be performed by a human
‘agent’
For an action to be a moral (or immoral) action, the agent who performs it must be
able to reflect about whether the action is moral or immoral
For an action to be a moral (or immoral) action, the agent who performs it must
consider the action to be morally acceptable.
For an action to be a moral (or immoral) action, the agent must be free to perform the
action or to refrain from performing it.
View Feedback
Eassom never makes claim C in his article. He does make claim B, which on a quick reading may
look like the same thing, but in fact is not. Claim B simply says the agent must have the ability to
reflect on the moral status of the action, it doesn't say the agent must actually put this ability to
use. This is quite plausible since otherwise it seems we would not be able to be held responsible
for acts we carelessly performed without thinking them through.
Question 2 point
Based on the discussion in the course notes, which of the following would constitute an
investigation into normative ethics?
Investigating whether Canadians think it would be ethically appropriate for abortion to
be available on demand at any stage of a pregnancy.
Investigating the attitudes of Canadian nurses toward Euthanasia
Comparing the views of Americans and Canadians on gun control.
Investigating whether it would be ethically appropriate for human cloning to be
permitted in Canada
Investigating American attitudes toward capital punishment
None of the above
View Feedback
Options A-C & E all describe attempts to say what the ethical views of certain groups are. Thus,
they are all exercises in descriptive ethics. Option D, on the other hand, attempts to say what the
ethical 'facts' actually are, i.e., how things should be, rather than how they actually may be. Thus,
it describes an exercise in normative ethics.
Question 3 point
Based on the description of Moral Relativism in the Course Notes, which of the
following is a true claim about Moral Relativism?
Moral Relativism would be proved to be correct if we could find a culture whose view on
the moral status of stealing contradicted our own.
According to Moral Relativism, if everyone in a particular culture once thought that
slavery was ethically appropriate, then it would follow that there is nothing ethically
wrong with slavery today.
Moral Relativism declares that what is right and wrong is up to the individual to decide.
Moral Relativism tells us that the views of other cultures should always be respected.
None of the above
View Feedback
Options A - D are all incorrect. Therefore, option E (i.e., none of the above) is the correct answer.
Option A is incorrect since merely establishing that there are differences in the moral views held
, by cultures does not establish that there are no objective moral facts. Remember that even if
Moral Objecitivism is true, it does not follow that everyone will always be correct about what the
moral facts are. Option B is a little tricky, but also incorrect. The most a Moral Relativist could
conclude based upon the situation described in this option is that slavery would be ethically okay
within that culture at that time, but that's not what option B literally says. Option B makes a claim
about the present day. Since moral views can change over time and, according to MR, the
prevailing moral views determine the moral facts at that time and place, it's premature to base a
claim about the 'moral facts' of today based on information about the moral views of the past.
Option C is incorrect because it describes Moral Relativism as being subject to individual
preferences whereas the way MR is described in the course notes is in terms of the overall
preferences of a society or culture at a particular time. The view outlined in option C might better
be called 'Subjectivism'. Option D is incorrect since it makes a blanket ethical claim that is
supposed to apply in all cultures. This is entirely out of step with culture-specific nature of
morality as it is understood by Relativists. Imagine a culture in which the prevailing view was that
it was fine to condemn the views of other cultures. A Relativist would have to say that
condemning the views of other cultures was OK in that culture.
Question 4 point
Match the names of each of the philosophers below with the view that they held,
according to the article by Feiser, with regard to the 'metaphysical' status of morality.
[Note: You must match each philosopher to the correct view in order to receive credit for
this question.]
N
i
e
__ t
3_ z
_ s 1. Moral Relativism, cultural version
c 2. An 'otherworldly' Moral Objectivist view
h 3. Moral Relativism, individual version
e
William of
__2__
Ockham
__2__ Plato
__1__ Sextus Empiricus
View Feedback
The answers to the questions can be found in the two paragraphs immediately under the heading
"Metaphysical Issues: Objectivism and Relativism". Each of the philosophers named in the
question is explicitly mentioned in connection with one of these views.
4
(100.0
Attempt Score: /
0 %)
4
4
(100.0
Overall Grade (first attempt): /
0 %)
4
There are 4 statements listed below. Based on Pence's introduction to the text, match each
statement with the ethical theory it is most likely would be held by someone making that
statement. [Note: (1) You must match each claim to the correct theory in order to get
credit for this question. (2) Each theory should be used only once when answering the
question.]
1. Natural Law
, __ U Theory
3_ l 2. Kantian Ethics
_ t 3. Utilitarianism
i
Case Based
m 4.
Reasoning
a
t
e
l
y
,
m
o
t
i
v
a
t
i
o
n
d
o
e
s
n
'
t
m
a
t
t
e
r
f
r
o
m
a
m
o
r
a
l
p
o
i
n
t
o
f
v
i
Which of the following is NOT a claim that Simon Eassom makes about morality in his
article:
For an action to be a moral (or immoral) action, it must be performed by a human
‘agent’
For an action to be a moral (or immoral) action, the agent who performs it must be
able to reflect about whether the action is moral or immoral
For an action to be a moral (or immoral) action, the agent who performs it must
consider the action to be morally acceptable.
For an action to be a moral (or immoral) action, the agent must be free to perform the
action or to refrain from performing it.
View Feedback
Eassom never makes claim C in his article. He does make claim B, which on a quick reading may
look like the same thing, but in fact is not. Claim B simply says the agent must have the ability to
reflect on the moral status of the action, it doesn't say the agent must actually put this ability to
use. This is quite plausible since otherwise it seems we would not be able to be held responsible
for acts we carelessly performed without thinking them through.
Question 2 point
Based on the discussion in the course notes, which of the following would constitute an
investigation into normative ethics?
Investigating whether Canadians think it would be ethically appropriate for abortion to
be available on demand at any stage of a pregnancy.
Investigating the attitudes of Canadian nurses toward Euthanasia
Comparing the views of Americans and Canadians on gun control.
Investigating whether it would be ethically appropriate for human cloning to be
permitted in Canada
Investigating American attitudes toward capital punishment
None of the above
View Feedback
Options A-C & E all describe attempts to say what the ethical views of certain groups are. Thus,
they are all exercises in descriptive ethics. Option D, on the other hand, attempts to say what the
ethical 'facts' actually are, i.e., how things should be, rather than how they actually may be. Thus,
it describes an exercise in normative ethics.
Question 3 point
Based on the description of Moral Relativism in the Course Notes, which of the
following is a true claim about Moral Relativism?
Moral Relativism would be proved to be correct if we could find a culture whose view on
the moral status of stealing contradicted our own.
According to Moral Relativism, if everyone in a particular culture once thought that
slavery was ethically appropriate, then it would follow that there is nothing ethically
wrong with slavery today.
Moral Relativism declares that what is right and wrong is up to the individual to decide.
Moral Relativism tells us that the views of other cultures should always be respected.
None of the above
View Feedback
Options A - D are all incorrect. Therefore, option E (i.e., none of the above) is the correct answer.
Option A is incorrect since merely establishing that there are differences in the moral views held
, by cultures does not establish that there are no objective moral facts. Remember that even if
Moral Objecitivism is true, it does not follow that everyone will always be correct about what the
moral facts are. Option B is a little tricky, but also incorrect. The most a Moral Relativist could
conclude based upon the situation described in this option is that slavery would be ethically okay
within that culture at that time, but that's not what option B literally says. Option B makes a claim
about the present day. Since moral views can change over time and, according to MR, the
prevailing moral views determine the moral facts at that time and place, it's premature to base a
claim about the 'moral facts' of today based on information about the moral views of the past.
Option C is incorrect because it describes Moral Relativism as being subject to individual
preferences whereas the way MR is described in the course notes is in terms of the overall
preferences of a society or culture at a particular time. The view outlined in option C might better
be called 'Subjectivism'. Option D is incorrect since it makes a blanket ethical claim that is
supposed to apply in all cultures. This is entirely out of step with culture-specific nature of
morality as it is understood by Relativists. Imagine a culture in which the prevailing view was that
it was fine to condemn the views of other cultures. A Relativist would have to say that
condemning the views of other cultures was OK in that culture.
Question 4 point
Match the names of each of the philosophers below with the view that they held,
according to the article by Feiser, with regard to the 'metaphysical' status of morality.
[Note: You must match each philosopher to the correct view in order to receive credit for
this question.]
N
i
e
__ t
3_ z
_ s 1. Moral Relativism, cultural version
c 2. An 'otherworldly' Moral Objectivist view
h 3. Moral Relativism, individual version
e
William of
__2__
Ockham
__2__ Plato
__1__ Sextus Empiricus
View Feedback
The answers to the questions can be found in the two paragraphs immediately under the heading
"Metaphysical Issues: Objectivism and Relativism". Each of the philosophers named in the
question is explicitly mentioned in connection with one of these views.
4
(100.0
Attempt Score: /
0 %)
4
4
(100.0
Overall Grade (first attempt): /
0 %)
4
There are 4 statements listed below. Based on Pence's introduction to the text, match each
statement with the ethical theory it is most likely would be held by someone making that
statement. [Note: (1) You must match each claim to the correct theory in order to get
credit for this question. (2) Each theory should be used only once when answering the
question.]
1. Natural Law
, __ U Theory
3_ l 2. Kantian Ethics
_ t 3. Utilitarianism
i
Case Based
m 4.
Reasoning
a
t
e
l
y
,
m
o
t
i
v
a
t
i
o
n
d
o
e
s
n
'
t
m
a
t
t
e
r
f
r
o
m
a
m
o
r
a
l
p
o
i
n
t
o
f
v
i
