Short answer questions

These are short answer questions, requiring a minimum of two paragraphs of writing for your response.  A paragraph is at its bare minimum three sentences, but your responses should be substantial and exceed this minimum.

[By ‘sentences’, I mean full sentences.  Point form responses are far too vague to serve as acceptable.]

[5 points each, total 30 points]

1.      Kant argues in the preface to the Grounding, that a metaphysics of morals is necessary since “…what it is to be morally good, that it conforms to the moral law is not enough…” (Kant, 3.)  Introducing this position, discuss why Kant would argue this?  What does this tell us about the basis of Kantian morality (i.e., what makes an action morally good)?

2.      In his discussion of the first formulation of the categorical imperative (Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law). Kant draws a distinction between perfect and imperfect duties. Introduce the distinction between perfect and imperfect duties briefly illustrating with examples.

3.      Kant introduces the humanity principle (Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or the person of another, always as an end in itself, and never merely as a means) as another formulation of the categorical imperative.  This principle, he argues, rests on the dignity of human beings (he argues that human beings are “…objects of respect.” – Kant, p. 36.).  Why are human beings, according to Kant, ‘objects of respect’?  How does this position follow naturally (as Kant argues it does) from the first formulation of the categorical imperative?

4.      Mill modifies Bentham’s initial position in two main respects.  In the first Mill finds it necessary to make a distinction between quantitative and qualitative analysis of pleasures.  Discuss the principle of Utility generally and explain this distinction discussing why Mill argues that it is a necessary addition to Utilitarian morality (i.e., what specific criticism of utilitarian morality it is intended to address).

5.      Mill introduces the notion of political liberty in his On Liberty to address a specific criticism of the principle of utility (related to individual human rights) which was introduced by Michael Sandel (Justice, Episode 2, posted to moodle).  Introduce the notion of political liberty advanced by Mill and discuss how this notion might respond to the criticism introduced by Sandel.

6.      Rick Roderick, in his video: Kant and the Path to Enlightenment makes the following claim regarding both Kantian and Utilitarian morality:

“In fact, these two moral theories – in terms of just pure moral theories – still dominate all standard philosophical discussion. Now, it’s clear to me that one of them is more interesting than the other. I think you know which one is more interesting to me. [crowd laughter]. But I have got to warn you that there are knock-down objections to both, and by knock-down objections, I mean knock-down objections. We know that these theories are wrong because there are knock-down objections to them. The best way to look at both of them however might be as models of moral action. If by models we don’t mean the shopping mart idea of something we do once in a while, but as a way to think about a moral life, if you are interested in it.”

What does Roderick mean by calling these theories “models of moral action”?  It would seem that either Roderick is right, or he’s wrong.  In either case this would come down to making an argument.  Supporting your position with an argument (one that makes use of your understanding of the material studied in this course), how would you respond to this assessment of Kantian and Utilitarian morality?

Category: Essays