ATS1 3 7 1

PHI LOSOP HY: I NTRODUCTI ON A

( LI FE, DEATH AND MORALI TY)
LDM Sample Examination
The real examination will be of two hours duration.
You will be given a list of nine questions. You must answer eight of them. Below is a
list of sample questions. The questions on the examination will be drawn directly
from this list.
Example questions
For each question, you should be able to answer it in about 300 words, but there is no
limit on the length of your answers.
Each question is worth an equal number of marks.
I have arranged the questions into rough groupings, corresponding to the most
relevant parts of the unit. But for some questions, you might need to draw on
materials from more than one part of the unit to give the best possible answer.
Rights, utilitarianism, and trolleys
1. What is the idea of stringency for a right? Illustrate the idea with two different
rights that might be of different stringency.
2. What should a utilitarian think about rights? Do rights really exist? Would it
ever be justified, for a utilitarian, to respect rights, even if that led to a worse
outcome overall?
3. What is Thomsons preferred account of why it is permissible to pull the lever
in TROLLEY? Does the account succeed?
4. Utilitarians seem to be committed to some surprising conclusions about the
morality of killing. Illustrate one or two of these conclusions, and try to
explain why the utilitarian has such a surprising view.
Self-defence
5. Describe Michael Otsukas position with respect to using violence in self-
defence against innocent persons. Explain his reasons for his view.
6. Killing an innocent threat in self-defence is wrong, but excusable. Explain
this claim, and discuss its plausibility.
7. What is the Hobbesian rationale for a liberty-right to engage in self-defence?
What will the Hobbesian likely think about harming innocent threats in self-
defence?
Speciesism, animals, and equality
8. What is Singers principle of equality? How would our behaviour towards
animals have to change if we were to adopt this principle? Why?
9. Does the principle of equality give a good explanation of what is wrong with
racism? Why/why not?
10. For Singer, the morality of taking an animals life depends in part on whether
the animal is a person. Explain why this makes a difference.
Abortion
11. Conventional liberal views on abortion are untenable. Either we must accept
that infanticide is no worse than abortion, or we must adopt a very
conservative anti-abortion view. Discuss why a philosopher might think this
is true.
12. Judith Thomsons violinist case shows only that women have a right to
remove a fetus from their bodies. Therefore her argument is not a successful
defence of abortion. Discuss both of the following: (i) Why might
someone say this? (ii) Is this view correct?
13. Discuss the idea that abortion is wrong because of the potential properties
possessed by the fetus (such as the potential for personhood, or autonomy, or
some other morally significant property). Does this idea provide a good reason
to think that abortion is morally wrong?
Cultural relativism and moral methodology
14. How would you characterise the difference between virtue ethics and the
approaches we have been looking at in most of the unit?
15. Is there a conflict between the virtue of being a good parent and the principle
of equality? Explain your answer.
16. What is cultural relativism? If cultural relativism is true, does it have any
implications for how we should treat people from other cultures? In particular,
should we be tolerant of people from other cultures?
17. If moral relativism is true, then people who appear to disagree with one
another about morals are actually talking past one another. Explain this
claim. Is this a good objection to moral relativism?