Study Questions for
PHIL 105 Introduction to Ethics

Week 1
1. Haugeland's reading of Heidegger's work suggests that we become individual persons 
by first fitting into a network of social practices.  How does our individuality emerge 
from our conformism, according to Haugeland?
2. What does Heidegger mean by a "Dasein"?  What would it be like to be without one?
3. If Heidegger and Haugeland are right, does this imply that human beings are inherently 
social creatures?  What implications might this have for the study of ethics and 
morality?

Week 2
1. Why does Rorty give up on the idea of universal moral theories?
2. Rorty does think that there are moral facts, and he does think that they have 
tremendous importance for us.  Explain the status of these facts and what they do for 
us.
3. What does Rorty mean by "solidarity"?  Why is it so important?
4. Nussbaum suggests that there is something about relativists' actions that are out of step 
with their theoretical claims.  What is it?

Week 3
1. Where does Nussbaum look for something universal to base her moral approach on?  
How does this differ from some of the other views, of which she is critical?
2. Are there items on Nussbaum's list you think could be removed?  Are there items you 
would add that do not appear on the list?
3. What is the difference between capabilities and functioning in Nussbaum's work?  
How does it permit a moral pluralism without sinking into relativism?

Week 4
1. In what ways do utilitarians measure utility?  Is it a single thing, or a number of 
different things?  Which view do you find more plausible?
2. What is the difference between act and rule utiltarianism?
3. Why do deontologists set utility aside in determining our duties?  
4. Are there cases in which we have duties that supersede considerations of utility?  (One 
more for you: How many duties do act-utilitarians think there are?  What about rule-
utilitarians?)

Week 5
1. What is Kant's idea of a "categorical imperative"?  How do we reason our way to see 
clearly what it is?
2. What does Ross mean by "prima facie" and "absolute" duties?  How might this resolve 
some of the problems we have seen plaguing deontology?
3. What is autonomy?  Why is it so important to deontologists?  What is the difference 
between personal and moral autonomy?
4. What problems for deontology does Beauchamp mention?  What might deontologists 
say in reply to these?

Week 6
1. What do Aristotle mean by "character" "virtue" "vice" and "happiness" in his moral 
theory?  
2. What is it to strike the "golden mean"?  How does Aristotle suggest we know how to 
do this (assuming that we do)?
3. Virtue theory has been criticized for not providing adequate guidance for action, since 
it eschews explicit rules.  What would virtue theorists say to this?

Week 7
1. What does Dancy mean by "particularism" in an account of moral reasoning?  How 
does it relate to holism in an account of reasons?
2. Are there some things that are morally wrong, regardless of the situation?  What would 
particularists say about these cases?
3. Is particularism liable to some of the same objections as virtue theory, specifically 
those about its failure to guide action sufficiently?  What would particularists say 
about this?

Week 8
1. What is a right?  What is the difference between positive rights and negative rights?
2. What is the difference between retributive justice and distributive justice?  
3. What is Rawls's idea of the "veil of ignorance"?  How does it relate to his idea that 
justice is fairness?
4. How do libertarians criticize Rawls's account?  What do they mean by "coercion" and 
how does it play a role?

Week 9
1. How does the problem you have been working on relate to the theories described so 
far?  
2. Who is being harmed unfairly in the problem you are addressing?  How might those 
who disagree criticize your presentation of the situation?
3. How would your proposed solution rectify the situation?  Are there further problems 
related to justice that might emerge?  How would you respond to such problems?