SOLUTIONS MANUAL for Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues 10th Edition by Fiala Andrew, MacKinnon by welldoneassistant

TABLE OF CONTENTS What Do You Think? ..........................................................................................................................1 Review Exercises Solutions .................................................................................................................2

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1.

Is Socrates correct to suggest that it is wrong to return evil for evil and that two wrongs don’t make a right? Talking Points: Students should be considering this from a principled perspective: are these claims true and good? Students may want to make connections to what they’ve learned from parents or religion, which is great. Counter-examples could be considered: such as the justification of violence used in self-defense.

Do you agree with the idea that living well is more important than merely living? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to speculate about what makes life worth living. They should also be encouraged to imagine circumstances in which life is not worth living. Counter-examples could be brought up: for instance, the concern about who decides this; or a general prohibition against killing and suicide.

What would you do if you were wrongly convicted of a crime and sentenced to death? Would you try to escape? Do you think Socrates was wise to refuse to escape? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to imagine themselves into such a circumstance. And should be urged to think of the discussion not merely in practical terms

(i.e., is it possible to escape and can they get away with it?) but more importantly in moral terms–so that ideas about duty, rights, obligations, and responsibilities are on the table. 4.

What basic principles or virtues guide your thinking about these issues? Talking Points: Again, students should be encouraged to go beyond practical concerns. Virtues that may be discussed could include: courage, loyalty, honor, integrity, etc. Key principles might include: obedience to the law and authority, self-preservation (at any cost?), and obligations to friends and family.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. Determine whether the following statements about the nature of ethics are true or false. Explain your answers. a.

Ethics is the study of why people act in certain ways.

b. The solution to moral conflicts and ethical disputes is to accurately describe the way the world actually is. c.

The statement “Most people believe that cheating is wrong” is an ethical evaluation of cheating.

Solution: 1a. True or False (but it depends upon what we mean by “why”) 1b. False (factual descriptions are not the same as normative argument) 1c. False (the claim the “most people” believe it does not make it wrong; the majority could be wrong or mistaken). 2. Label the following statements as either normative (N) or descriptive (D). If normative, label each

as ethics (E), aesthetics (A), law (L), religion (R), or custom (C). a.

One ought to respect one’s elders because it is one of God’s commandments.

b. Twice as many people today, as compared to ten years ago, believe that the death penalty is morally justified in some cases. c.

It would be wrong to put an antique chair in a modern room.

People do not always do what they believe to be right.

I ought not to turn left here because the sign says “No Left Turn.”

We ought to adopt a universal health insurance policy because everyone has a right to health care.

Solution: 2a. N; R 2b. D 2c. N; A 2d. D 2e. N; L 2f. N; E

3. Discuss the differences between the ideas that ethics is subjective and that it is objective. Solution: To say that ethics is subjective is to say that our moral judgments are merely matters of opinion. This view risks becoming relativism. Those who maintain that ethics is objective believe that we can know what is true or false with regard to moral judgments. 4. Explain emotivism and intuitionism in ethical theory.

Solution: Emotivists claim that ethics is merely an expression of emotion (such as saying “yay” or “yuck). Intuitionists claim that ethical objects (like “the good”) can be known through the faculty of moral intuition. 5. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using naturalistic explanations in ethics. Solution: Naturalistic explanations can provide insight into the biological and psychological sources of moral life. But these explanations are merely descriptive. They are unable to provide normative guidance (or else they risk committing the naturalistic fallacy). 6. As they occur in the following statements, label the reasons for the conclusion as appeals to the motive (M), the act (A), or the consequences (C). a.

Although you intended well, what you did was bad because it caused more harm than good.

We ought always to tell the truth to others because it is right to tell the truth.

Although it did turn out badly, you did not want that, and thus you should not be judged harshly for what you caused.

Solution: 6a. C 6b. A 6c. M

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 2: Religion and Global Ethics

TABLE OF CONTENTS What Do You Think? .................................................................................. 1 Review Exercises Solutions ....................................................................... 2

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1.

Is there a unifying set of moral rules? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to consider constructing such a list, perhaps by doing some research on codes of ethics, documents such as the UN Declaration, and from religious texts. They should be encouraged to attend to overlap/similarity as well as divergence.

What values would you include as key values in a “global ethic”? Talking Points: Students can be encouraged to construct their own list of global ethical values. They may also be encouraged to consult other lists of ‘global ethics” values such as from the Parliament of the World’s Religions.

Is morality dependent on religious faith? Or can ethical principles be discovered by reason without appealing to religion? Talking Points: This is a difficult question that can be used by instructors as a jumping-off point for Plato’s Euthyphro. Students will likely disagree about this, which is okay as long as

there is civil discussion of the disagreement. Part of the discussion should include the issue of religious diversity (and/or pluralism, as discussed in the chapter). Students should be encouraged to think about “which religion?” and how can we manage religious diversity.

Are there basic principles that would allow us to “agree to disagree” and coexist despite our diversity? Talking Points: With this question the instructor might encourage students to think about the value of toleration (discussed in the chapter) as well as basic principles of civility and civil discourse, which presumably are also part of student life, an academic code of conduct, and the norms of discussion in the classroom. Might be a good opportunity for the instructor to discuss how they will manage diversity and discussions of religion in the classroom and in class activities.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. If you could develop a global ethic, what would its basic values be? Solution: Candidates for shared values of global ethics often include: toleration, hospitality, truthfulness, kindness, justice, moderation, courage, and others. A key to this conversation is trying to understand the degree to which different religions and cultures agree (and disagree) about ethics.

2. Describe the challenge of developing a global ethical perspective in light of religious and national

differences. Solution: Challenges come from the fact that people disagree about many things. Some religions have one God. Some don’t. And some people don’t believe in God. While some pluralists (such as Gandhi) think that there is a convergence of values, others doubt that this is true.

3. What is the history of the idea of universal human rights? How is this history susceptible to the charge that it is Eurocentric? Solution: The United Nations and other organizations that espouse and defend the idea of universal human rights have attempted to find common ground and overlapping consensus about key values. But some worry that the values proposed by cosmopolitan and secular systems of value import assumptions that only make sense with a Christian and European worldview. Key authors cited in the history of secularism and cosmopolitanism are often European authors such as Kant and the ancient Greeks. In reply, one might note that non European thinkers (such as Gandhi and the Dalai Lama) have been actively involved in trying to articulate a shared global ethics. It remains an open question whether the world can achieve consensus that it is not Eurocentric.

4. Explain arguments in favor of the divine command theory of ethics, as well as arguments against that theory. Is it true that if there were no God, then everything would be permitted? Solution: Arguments about the divine command theory of ethics extend back to Plato’s Euthyphro. Is good prior to God? Or is God prior to the good? Since Plato, philosophers have often suggested that ethical inquiry can occur independently of theological speculation. But

some religious people claim that without God, there would be no ethics. This discussion becomes even more complicated when atheists suggest that there actually is no God.

5. Is the humanistic or secular approach to ethics better than religious approaches to ethics? How so? Is the humanistic or secular approach antagonistic to religion? Solution: One argument in favor of secular ethics is that it allows diverse religious people to coexist. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was created as a way of allowing different Christian denominations to peacefully coexist. So secularism can be in the interest of religious people. But some religious people think that when God is set aside, morality is at risk. It is not always true, however, that secularism and religion are antagonistic to one another.

6. What does Socrates mean when he says in Euthyphro that the holy or pious is holy or pious because it is loved by the gods? Do you agree with his argument? Solution: In Plato’s Euthyphro, Socrates raises the question of whether God loves the good because it is good or whether things become good because God loves them. This is a version of the problem of divine command ethics.

7. Are you optimistic about our ability to develop a global ethical consensus across our national and religious differences? Why or why not? Solution: Some cause for optimism is the fact that institutions such as the United Nations and the Parliament of the World’s Religions exist and are working to build a global ethical consensus. But despite these efforts, there remain significant differences around the globe.

8. Do you think that all religions are pointing in a similar direction, or are there irreconcilable differences among them? Solution: Some pluralists (such as Gandhi) suggest that all religions (and nonreligions) basically teach the same thing. But this hopeful pluralistic vision runs aground on the reality of religious conflict and the lack of consensus across the globe about culture, religion, and ethics. Other pluralists will argue that it is naïve to hope for complete agreement. Rather, perhaps the best we can do is find a space for toleration and agree to disagree about our religious and ethical differences. 9. What is the value of love, compassion, and the Golden Rule—is this a religious idea or can nonreligious people affirm it? Solution: The value of love is central to the idea of the Golden Rule. Pluralists see it as a key value shared by all religions. And as Eleanor Roosevelt suggests, it is a value that can also be shared by nonreligious people—and that may be connected to the idea of human rights.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 3: Ethical Relativism

TABLE OF CONTENTS What Do You Think? ................................................................................. 1 Review Exercises Solutions .................................................................... 2

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1.

Are ethical disagreements inevitable given the diversity of culture, religion, and morality? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to speculate or do some research on the challenges of diversity. With the opening vignette in mind, this might involve issues in health care—but also education, policing, and so on. The question of “inevitability” may be understood in terms of descriptive reality of relativism. But students may also want to imagine a future in which there are more (or fewer) disagreements.

Can you imagine some values that could (or should) be shared, even in a case like the one described here? Talking Points: This question points toward issues discussed in this chapter (and the prior one) in relation to value pluralism. Shared values in the case discussed here might be care for children and a desire for health. There are also issues of patient autonomy and consent.

How important is cultural competency? In health care? In education? In legal structures? Talking Points: The case under discussion here is a

health-care case. There are other

examples in health care that students could discuss vaccines during the

—for example, disagreements about

COVID-19 pandemic. Most likely, students will have encountered

some form of discussion or even training in cultural competence in their educational experience

They may want to reflect on that, even if they were not aware of it at the

time. How has their education reflected this issue? (For example, in communication from schools in multiple languages.)

Similar issues can come up in criminal justice, voting,

and so on.

Is cultural competency a form of relativism? Talking Points: The issue to be discussed in the chapter is whether a commitment to cultural competence is really “relativist” or whether it is a nonrelativist affirmation of diversity and respect for cultures (i.e., tolerance). Instructors may want to push students on this question by asking about the degree to which doctors, teachers, and police might insist on some set of values and criticize cultural values that don’t fit the norm.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. Are there universal, objective moral values? Or are you convinced that relativism is true? Solution: With this question, students are asked to declare whether they agree with objectivism and moral realism—or whether they agree with metaethical relativism. Students should be using those kinds of concepts in their responses—including also using terminology such as skepticism and nihilism. 2. What is the difference between individual relativism (subjectivism) and social or cultural

relativism? Solution: Individual relativism or subjectivism reduces relativism to an individual level—maybe even a matter of taste. The social or cultural version of relativism locates value in some group. The challenge in thinking about social or cultural relativism is found in defining the group. Could a group of friends or a criminal gang define values in their own terms—and would that be coherent or morally acceptable? Even within subjectivism there is the problem of change —what should an individual do when their values change? 3. What is the difference between the descriptive claim that people do differ in their moral beliefs and the metaethical theory of relativism? Solution: The descriptive claim is empirical—and for the most part true. Different cultures do differ in their values and beliefs. But that empirical fact can be distinguished from the metaethical claim that there are no universal or objective moral values. The metaethical claim requires that we think about the existence, grounding, and knowability of values and moral judgments. 4. Do toleration, open-mindedness, and cultural competence depend

on a commitment to

cultural relativism? Solution: Some espouse relativism in an effort to be tolerant. They may embrace relativism in an effort to remain open-minded and to avoid ethnocentrism. But tolerance is typically promoted as a nonrelativistic value,

that is, a value that all people should accept, despite

cultural difference. One could ground tolerance in nonrelativistic commitment to something like liberty or respect for autonomy. 5. How would you know whether a moral disagreement was based on a basic difference in moral values or a disagreement about facts? As an example, consider the issue of climate

change discussed in the chapter. Are there other examples you can think of? Solution: Sometimes people disagree about factual claims. Other times they disagree about normative claims. In the climate case discussed here, the two students disagreed about the facts but agreed

that it would be good to improve present conditions and care about future

generations. Other similar examples will be discussed in the second half of the book. For example, with regard to the death penalty there is a factual/empirical question about whether it deters crime—and utilitarians who support the general idea of deterrence (and so agree about moral principles) may disagree about the moral justification of

the death penalty. Or to cite

another example, people may agree about the basic framework of the just war theory

, but

disagree about how it is applied given disputes about facts in a particular war. 6. What is moral realism? How does your understanding about the reality of the external world differ from your intuitions about morality? Solution: Moral realists claim that moral values are objective and real. Perhaps this means that moral values can be seen, known, or intuited (as in G. E. Moore’s intuition of the good). But one may suggest that there is a difference between seeing colors and intuiting moral good. Of course, one could be skeptical about the existence of the material world as well. But given the assumption that we have shared access to the empirical, there is still room for doubt about whether there is a shared intuition or knowledge of moral facts. 7. Why might social critics such as feminists be in favor of or against relativism? Solution: Social critics, such as feminists, may want to avoid judging other cultures in an effort to demonstrate solidarity and support. They may also suspect that the tendency to be judgmental and ethnocentric is a patriarchal tendency. But feminists and other social critics typically want to be able to criticize social formations that they think are unjust or wrong. As

Anita Superson points out, feminists need an objective value system that they can use to criticize patriarchy, rape, oppression and so on.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/ Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 4: Egoism, Altruism, and the Social Contract

TABLE OF CONTENTS What Do You Think?

Review Exercises Solutions

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. Is it a good idea that schools and universities promote community service? Talking Points: Students should consider their own experience of community service. Did they do it for altruistic reasons, or were they padding their resumes? They should also be encouraged to speculate about why schools and universities think this matters: is it for the public image of the school? Or is there some more altruistic idea behind public service? 2. Is it really altruistic service if it is required? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about the paradoxical possibility of required service. Are there solutions to this? Maybe by requiring it, it eventually develops beyond a requirement to having intrinsic value. Key concepts in this discussion might include the difference between instrumental and intrinsic value. 3. Is it wrong for people to engage in service activities as a way of padding a résumé ?

Talking Points: This may lead students to discuss the question of motivation and intention in ethics, which would be useful. If good outcomes are produced, do the intentions really matter? Students may also want to speculate about other cases in which people do good things for selfish reasons (e.g., in dating, in their families, or at work). 4. Can community service help people learn the value of altruism

even if they are

motivated to participate for egoistic reasons? Talking Points: Here students may want to think about how altruism is learned

Is it innate? Or do we learn it through doing it? It might also be of interest to discuss how community service is used as a punishment (and what this tells us about how we think punishment ought to function).

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. Explain the basic difference between psychological egoism and ethical egoism. Solution: Psychological egoism is a descriptive theory about our motivations; ethical egoism claims that it is good to be egoistic.

2. Explain how reciprocal altruism is connected to enlightened self-interest. Solution: Reciprocal altruism involves cooperative activity; self-interested parties may find it in their interest to cooperate.

3. Is psychological egoism true, and what must be shown to prove its truth?

Solution: Students may disagree about the truth of psychological egoism. But they should understand that some empirical approach would be needed to demonstrate its truth. They should also recognize the difficulties of isolating our intentions and motivations.

4. How is psychological egoism supposed to provide support for an argument for ethical egoism? What is one problem for this argument? Solution: Ethical egoism may be based

on the claim that we cannot help but be

motivated by egoistic motives. One significant problem involves the challenge of the naturalistic fallacy: just because we are egoistic does not prove that we ought to be so.

5. Summarize the arguments regarding the consistency or inconsistency of ethical egoism. Solution: Key points include the problem of universalizing egoism: can you say that I should maximize my own self-interest while others should do the same? And what happens when our interests conflict?

6. In what sense does the argument for ethical egoism based on economics support not egoism but utilitarianism—in other words, the view that we ought to do what is in the best interest of all or the greatest number? Solution: If we claim that the economy will flourish under laissez-faire capitalism, we may be claiming that this is good for everyone (and will promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number), which is in fact utilitarianism.

7. Explain how the prisoner’s dilemma can be used in discussions of egoism and cooperative endeavor. Solution: The prisoner’s dilemma shows that self-interested and noncooperative behavior can produce worse outcomes for those who are self-interested—and that it would be better if the self-interested parties cooperated.

8. How does the social contract provide a response to the challenge of egoism? Solution: The social contract involves an agreement among self-interested parties— an agreement that guarantees that they won’t cheat or take advantage.

9. How would care ethicists respond to the debate about egoism and altruism? Solution: Care ethics is critical of the impartial viewpoint, while also emphasizing a relational view of the self. They might suggest that human beings are relational and that there is not as much choice between egoism and altruism as we might suspect.

10.

How does the discussion of evolution (in Pinker) inform our understanding of the conflict between egoism and altruism? Solution: Pinker suggests that there is an evolutionary basis for cooperation, which helps to ground reciprocal altruism and other forms of altruism in naturalistic explanations.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 5: Utilitarianism

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1.

Is human population growth a problem? Talking Points: Students should be asked to imagine the kinds of problems caused by overpopulation. They should also imagine benefits of a growing population. Negatives could include traffic, environmental issues, disease control. Positives could include innovation, creativity, the importance of human life itself.

Should we take steps to limit population growth? What kinds of steps? Talking Points: This is a normative question. Not only should students imagine steps to be taken (including birth control, abortion, education, and empowerment of women), but they should also provide a justification. What moral ideas are being used in their thinking? This could push toward a conversation about eugenics—both positive (creative breeding) and negative (involving mandatory euthanasia campaigns).

Should the primary focus of ethics and social policy be the well-being of everyone, or should it be the rights and freedoms of individuals? Talking Points: The problem here is that if people have a right to reproduce,

overpopulation may result. But how do we justify limiting a person’s right to reproduce? This is a typical challenge for utilitarianism. Might also point toward a consideration of the “tragedy of the commons” as discussed in environmental ethics (and related collective-action problems). 4.

Do you think it is possible to promote general happiness for everyone (including future generations) without violating the liberty of some people? Talking Points: Here students may speculate about creative possibilities. Maybe paying people not to have children? Or some other non–liberty-violating incentive program. Of course, they will likely still need to discuss the possibility of balancing liberty/rights with utilitarian concerns. This could open up to a discussion of other such conflicts: pandemic restrictions and vaccinations, pornography and censorship, freedom of speech, and so on.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. State and explain the basic idea of the principle of utility or the greatest happiness principle. Solution: The principle of utility says that we should promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. 2. What does it mean to speak of utilitarianism as a consequentialist moral theory? Solution: Utilitarianism is focused on outcomes and results. It is not primarily interested in the abstract value of an act or the intentions behind the act

3. What is the difference between intrinsic and instrumental good? Give examples of each. Solution: Instrumental goods are useful for producing something else, such as happiness. For utilitarianism there is only one intrinsic (or noninstrumental) good, which is happiness (or pleasure). As an example, consider reading. It is good insofar as it makes us happy (and is thus an instrumental good). But this implies that reading is not good in itself, since the only

thing that is good in itself on this account is happiness. 4. Which of the following statements exemplify consequentialist reasoning? Can all of them be given consequentialist interpretations if expanded? Explain your answers. a.

Honesty is the best policy.

Solution: Could be consequentialist, if it is focused on happiness produced by honesty. b.

Eduardo has the right to know the truth.

Solution: The idea of a “right” to know the truth sounds like a non-consequentialist idea. c.

What good is going to come from giving money to a homeless person on the street?

Solution: The question of charity, as asked here, focuses on consequences. d.

There is a symbolic value present in personally giving something to another person

in need. Solution: The “symbolic value” of something may be understood in instrumental terms, that is, that this thing inspires others to do something similar. e.

It is only fair that you give him a chance to compete for the position.

Solution: Discussions of “fairness” are usually non-consequentialist, asking us to think about an abstract value such as equality or justice. f.

If I do not study for my ethics exam, it will hurt my GPA.

Solution: This is a straightforward focus on the consequences of studying. g.

If you are not honest with others, you cannot expect them to be honest with you.

Solution: This principle of reciprocity seems to be about the consequences of something like honesty. 5. Is utilitarianism a hedonist moral theory? Why or why not? Solution: Hedonistic theories focus on pleasure. Utilitarianism is hedonistic in a very basic sense. But as discussed in the chapter, it focuses on complex questions about measuring pleasure, and in Mill’s case, it asks us to consider qualitative differences among pleasures. 6. Using utilitarian calculation, which choice in each of the following pairs is better, X or Y? a. X makes four people happy and me unhappy. Y makes me and one other person happy and three people unhappy.

b. X makes twenty people happy and five unhappy. Y makes ten people happy and no one unhappy. c.

X will give five people each two hours of pleasure. Y will give three people each four hours of

pleasure. d. X will make five people very happy and three people mildly unhappy. Y will make six people moderately happy and two people very unhappy. Solution: Probable answers (depending on how one calculates the utilities—but notice that the calculation must simplify and make assumptions about intensity, duration, likelihood, fruitfulness, and so on): a. X b.

X—but depends

on how we evaluate the negative utility of unhappiness

in comparison with the happiness involved.

X—but depends on the intensity of the unhappiness and happiness

What is Mill’s argument for the difference in value between intellectual and sensual pleasures? Solution: Good answers will refer to the Socrates vs. pig comparison, while also explaining the idea of qualitative differences among pleasures. 8.

Which of the following is an example of act utilitarian reasoning, and which is an

example of rule utilitarian reasoning? Explain your answers. a.

If I do not go to the meeting, others will not go either. If that happens, there would

not be a quorum for the important vote, which would be bad. Thus, I ought to go to the meeting. b.

If doctors generally lied to their patients about their diagnoses, patients would lose

trust in their doctors. Because that would be bad, I should tell this patient the truth. c.

We ought to keep our promises because it is a valuable practice.

If I cheat here, I will be more likely to cheat elsewhere. No one would trust me then.

So I should not cheat on this test.

Solution: Probable answers a.

Act utilitarianism

Rule utilitarianism

Rule utilitarianism—if the idea of a “valuable practice” is pointing toward

some general principle of practice that will be repeated. d.

Rule utilitarianism

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 6: Deontological Ethics and Immanuel Kant

TABLE OF CONTENTS What Do You Think?

Review Exercises Solutions

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. Do we always have a duty to obey the law—even an unjust law? Talking Points: Students should consider the question of conscientious objection in multiple contexts, including the examples mentioned: soldiers, nurses, etc. They might be encouraged to compare with similar case in Chapter 1 (the case of Socrates) and the issue of civil disobedience (in Chapter 2). The main point here is to get students to think about duty. What are our duties? And what do we do when there are conflicting duties and when duty seems to run counter to utilitarian concern for the common good. 2.

Are you concerned about the consequences of disobedience, especially if it becomes widespread? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to question the issue of whether social order is their primary concern. The point is to get them to think about the difference between consequentialism and deontology (non-consequentialism). It might be useful here to follow up with the legendary problem directed toward Kant of whether lying can be justified when the Nazis come looking for Jews hidden in the attic. Would it be OK for the one hiding Jews to lie to the authorities in this case? Is

that example a matter of consequences–or a matter of conflicting duties?

Does the context matter? For example, whether it is a soldier or a nurse who refuses? And what about tax refusers such as Thoreau? Talking Points: Here students might want to dig into the specifics of cases. Can soldiers disobey in an unjust war? (How would they know, and should they be punished?) And what about nurses who refuse to participate in abortion or euthanasia (assuming these are legal activities). What kinds of duties to soldiers and nurses have: to provide care, to obey, or to their own sense of integrity? The tax refuser case can open to the question of general disobedience. It might useful here to introduce Kant’s idea of “argue but obey” = that we have a duty to obey but that we should be free to dissent, so long as we obey. Is this idea coherent? Is it a result of the kind of deontological theory that Kant proposes? From Kant’s perspective there are also the two questions of (1) can it be universalized? and (2) does it respect persons as ends in themselves?

How do we know what our duty is, especially when there is an apparent conflict between the duty to obey the law and the duty to avoid supporting injustice? Talking Points: Here we encounter the idea of a conflict of duties that will return toward the end of the chapter with the discussion of Ross’s idea prima facie duty. It might help to have students imagine lists of conflicting duties. The further question is how we know what our duties actually are. Again Kant’s two questions can help–

and this might open the door to the idea of a categorical imperative that helps us define our duty. The question that arises (with Ross in mind) is whether there is one conclusion or many about what the categorical imperative requires in specific cases. Finally, it is worth getting students to think about the problem of using happiness as a guide here: duty and happiness are not necessarily the same thing: happiness is empirical/psychological but (for Kant) duty is not.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. Explain why we might not want to locate an action’s moral worth in its consequences. Solution: Deontological theories of ethics focus on the intention behind an action as well as on the nature of the act itself. This focus makes sense if you think intentions matter and if you think that there is a set of commands or duties that must be followed and obeyed despite the consequences. Moreover, as Kant might suggest, we have control over our intentions in a way that we do not with regard to consequences, which is why Kant thinks that the focus of moral judgment should be on the will.

2. When Kant refers to “a good will” or “good intention,” does he mean wishing others well? Explain. Solution: Kant is talking about a will or intention that is oriented toward the moral law, that is autonomous, and that is good out of respect for morality (and for other

persons). The idea of “wishing others well” is more focused on consequences, and for Kant, this is less important than the purity of the will itself.

3. What does Kant mean by “acting out of duty?” How does the shopkeeper exemplify this? Solution: This means acting because of respect for the morality of things. It is not because of fear of punishment or hope of reward—but rather because doing your duty is simply the right thing to do. The shopkeeper example provides three possibilities. (1) Doing our duty because it is in our interest (e.g., the shopkeeper hopes customers will keep coming back if we treat them fairly). (2) Doing our duty because of natural inclination or sympathy (e.g., the shopkeeper likes her customers and feels friendly toward them). (3) Doing our duty because we know it is the right thing (e.g., the shopkeeper is fair because the moral law commands it). The last of these is what Kant means by acting out of duty.

4. What is the basic difference between a categorical and a hypothetical imperative? In the following examples, which are hypothetical, and which are categorical imperatives? Explain your answers. Solution: Hypothetical imperatives are about prudential means for obtaining an end. Categorical imperative is the moral law: based on universality and respect. a.

If you want others to be honest with you, then you ought to be honest with

them. This is Hypothetical. It is based on a desire for others to be honest. b.

Whether or not you want to pay your share, you ought to do so.

This is Categorical. It is a statement of a rule that always ought to be followed. c.

Because everyone wants to be happy, we ought to consider everyone’s

interests equally. This is Hypothetical. It is based upon the desire for happiness. d.

I ought not to cheat on this test if I do not want to get caught.

This is Categorical. It is based on the desire not to get caught.

5. How does the character of moral obligation lead to Kant’s basic moral principle, the categorical imperative?

Solution: Kant thinks that morality is universally obligating. Morality requires us always to do our duty, without undue regard for changing circumstances and uncontrollable consequences.

6. Explain Kant’s use of the first form of the categorical imperative to argue that it is wrong to make a false promise. (Make sure that you do not appeal to the bad consequences as the basis of judging it wrong.) Solution: A false or lying promise begins from a maxim that says something like, “when in trouble, make a false promise.” But if everyone believed this and behaved accordingly, it would make promising impossible—since no one would actually be making genuine promises and no one would believe any promise that anyone made.

7. According to the second form of Kant’s categorical imperative, would it be morally permissible for me to agree to be someone’s slave? Explain. Solution: Although Kant was not an abolitionist with regard to slavery, his theory can be used to criticize slavery. The second form of the categorical imperative tells us to respect persons as ends in themselves and to no use persons as means only.

This idea implies that slavery is immoral because it is disrespectful of the person on the slave and because a slave is used as a means.

8. What is the practical difference between a perfect and an imperfect duty? Solution: Perfect duties are morally required and invariably applied, unlike imperfect duties, which are flexible and depend in part upon context and circumstances. For example, we have a perfect duty to ourselves that requires us to respect our own personhood and refrain from committing suicide. But we have an imperfect duty to develop our talents. In the first case, suicide is always wrong. But in the second case, there is some flexibility about how we should develop our talents.

How can we use Kantian ideas to argue against racism and sexism? Solution: Kant’s theory emphasizes respect for autonomy and the dignity of persons. The second form of the categorical imperative tells us to respect persons as ends in themselves and never to use another person merely as a means. Kant failed to extend moral respect to non-White and non-European people. He also failed to consider women as fully equal to men. Kant’s views of race and gender were typical of his era. But more than 200 years later, we can go beyond Kant, while use Kantian ideas to argue against racism and sexism. That basic argument would hold that all human persons (of any race or gender) are deserving of moral respect. Furthermore, we could use the first form of the categorical imperative to argue against racism and sexism by claiming that racist and sexist policies and ideas fail the categorical imperative’s test of universality.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 7: Natural Law and Human Rights

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. Do refugees have a right to take refuge? Should they be protected against refoulement? Talking Points: Students should consider what the right to take refuge implies

including a right to housing, care, education, and so on. They should also make sure they understand the right to non-refoulement. To discuss these particular rights, it might help to draw up a list of fundamental human rights. Would that list include a right to protection against oppression? 2. Do you agree that refugees have a right to education, housing, freedom of movement, and work? Talking Points: Students may want to discuss each of the rights of refugees separately. Maybe they would want to consult key UN documents listing these rights. Again it might help to imagine how these particular rights of refugees are connected to a more basic set of rights. What about the costs of all of this? With this in mind, students may want to consider whether they are more sympathetic to

consequentialist arguments or whether they agree with a deontological or nonconsequentialist interpretation and application of human rights ideas. 3. What is the basis for your thinking about these rights? And about human rights in general? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to explore ideas about how human rights are grounded. Do they come from God? Are they self-evident? Are they inalienable? Do we have these rights by virtue of our humanity? Or are they connected to our membership in a political community? The refugee question puts this last point on the table: when you lose citizenship in a home community, do you nonetheless retain basic human rights? And who would enforce those rights, if you do not have membership in a political community? This points toward the difference between natural/human rights and civil rights. 4. Can you imagine good reasons for denying refugees the right to asylum? Do you agree with the U.S. policy of forcibly deporting Haitian refugees? Talking Points: With this question in mind, students should be encouraged to imagine both sides of the issue with regard to the U.S. deportation of Haitian refugees. Public safety and cost on the one hand (these are consequentialist concerns), with basic human rights on the other (a non-consequentialist focus). In evaluating concrete U.S. policy, students should be encouraged to do some research on the details—and to avoid knee-jerk political reactions to a complex moral question.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1.

What is the difference between the scientific laws of nature, the positive laws of political life, and the natural law?

Solution: The scientific laws of nature are meant to be descriptive laws that explain how the physical world works. The positive laws of political life are laws that are constructed by particular societies and governments. The natural law theory of ethics is focused on normative laws that transcend the positive laws of politics. But the natural law theory of morality is normative, unlike the laws of natural science. 2. In what way is natural law theory teleological? Solution: Natural law theory develops from a worldview that sees the world as having a teleological organization, which means that there are purposes and functions in nature (and which can be understood by reason). This depends on a certain metaphysical view of human beings and our place in the natural order of things. 3. What specific natural capacities are singled out by natural law theorists? How do these determine what we ought to do, according to the theory? Solution: Natural law focuses on our capacity to think, choose, and act. It views human beings as free and rational beings. This means that we ought to respect our freedom and our rationality. From this we can derive a basic right to life and liberty, including freedom of conscience and the right to property, possession, and the pursuit of happiness. 4. How is Aquinas's approach to natural law connected to his theological views? Solution: Aquinas is a Christian theologian who wanted to unite faith and reason.

He thought the natural law was connected to God’s eternal law. God has a plan for the universe, according to Aquinas, and morality is included as part of that plan. 5. How is natural law connected with Stoicism? Solution: The Stoics advise to act in accord with nature. They took this to mean that we should conform to a law of nature that is eternal and unchanging. This law was known by reason and common to all persons. 6. Describe the basic idea of rights according to early natural rights theorists such as Locke, including where they come from and how we know we have them. Solution: Natural rights theorists such as Locke claim that our rights are given to us by a creator. Locke said we are the “workmanship of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker.” This idea is similar to Jefferson’s idea that we are endowed by our creator with inalienable rights. These thinkers believe that our rights are inalienable and that it is self-evident that we have them. 7. Give examples of what sorts of rights we are supposed to have according to the theories of natural rights and human rights? What is the problem with merely stipulating a list of rights? Solution: Locke and Jefferson focus on the right to life, liberty, and possession (or property or the pursuit of happiness). The evolving international human rights doctrine includes a variety of other rights including, for example, the rights of refugees. This can also include other rights such as freedom of speech, the right to assembly, and freedom of religion. The problem with merely stipulating a list of

rights is that such a list does not provide a justification of the list. And since different people come up with different lists, we can end up with disagreement and the possibility of relativism. For example, there is an ongoing dispute about the relative importance of positive vs. negative rights. 8. What is the difference between natural/human rights and civil rights? Solution: Human rights or natural rights are those rights we are supposed to have by virtue of our humanity and without reference to the political communities to which we belong. Civil rights, on the other hand, are rights that are granted to us by virtue of membership in a community. The right to vote may be merely a civil right that depends on membership. But some may argue that voting is a human right. 9. Explain the criticism of natural law from the perspective of those who deny the idea of “human nature.” Solution: Existentialist philosophers claim that there is no human essence. Relativists also offer a similar challenge. The point is that there may be no universally valid account of human nature. And if this is so, the ontological, metaphysical, and teleological focus of natural law theory is called into question. 10. How have critics of slavery and proponents of women’s rights advanced our understanding of human rights and natural law? Solution: In earlier centuries, the natural law theory was used to defend slavery and patriarchal hierarchy. But this idea has been challenged by authors who ground their critique of these practices in a revised view of the natural law. Opponents of slavery such as Lysander Spooner claimed that slavery was a violation of natural right and natural law. And an early feminist like Mary Wollstonecraft argued that the rights of

humanity ought to include a vindication of the rights of women.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 8: Virtue Ethics

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. What kinds of virtues are important in a public health crisis and in other social emergencies?? Talking Points: Students should consider their own understanding and experience in thinking about key virtues. They should be encouraged to name specific virtues (e.g., courage, honesty, compassion, etc.). They may see that there are conflicting values here—and even that there are conflicts in the ways that specific virtues get applied. Other emergencies worth considering might involve earthquakes, storms, wars, etc. 2. Is it courageous to refuse to get vaccinated? Talking Points: Students will likely have strong opinions about vaccinations in general and the pandemic. It is OK for them to express their opinions about pandemic restrictions and vaccinations. But students should AVOID getting sidetracked by data on vaccinations, death rates, and so on. Rather, the question asks them to think about the meaning of courage. How do we define that term? How is it applied (and misapplied) in specific cases? It might be worth mentioning the issue that comes up at the end of the chapter: the question (discussed in

relation to Philippa Foot) about whether a “villain” is actually courageous. Can courage be evaluated apart from a more general account of human flourishing and the common good? 3. Are there different accounts of virtue that are relative to different cultures? Talking Points: The example here is about a difference between Confucian virtues and some other set of virtues. There is a risk of stereotyping here, so students should be encouraged to be careful in generalizing. They may also be encouraged to consult the data for themselves in terms of differences between Confucian and U.S. cultures. A significant question is whether culture explains this difference or whether there is some other causal explanation. The more general question is whether the virtues really are different in different cultures. Students should be encouraged to think about which virtues matter within their own families and cultures—and how those differ from other sets of virtues. 4. Is there one common set of virtues for all human beings? Talking Points: This question can connect to the discussion of relativism in Chapter 3. The question is about universality and the common good. Students might be encouraged to create lists of common virtues. They might compare these lists with other lists of key virtues discussed later in the chapter (e.g., the four cardinal virtues of ancient Greece, the three virtues we identify here in relation to Confucianism, the five yamas of Hinduism–or some other set of virtues, e.g., the virtues associated with Christianity or some other religion). Can a common set of virtues be derived? Or are we left with conflicting sets of virtues? And then: how might these different sets of virtues help us in response to a social emergency like the pandemic?

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. What is the basic difference between virtue ethics and other types of ethics we have studied?

Solution: Virtue ethics focuses on character traits, habits, and dispositions. It is not focused on producing social happiness. Rather, it is interested in happiness as eudaimonia (i.e., flourishing). Nor does it contain a list of prohibitions and/or duties (as in the case of deontology or natural rights). Rather, it encourages individuals to seek the “golden mean,” which is a middle path between extremes. 2. According to Aristotle, what is the difference between intellectual and moral virtue? Solution: Intellectual virtues are habits of mind that help us actualize the uniquely human good of thinking (or contemplation). These virtues are focused on the unique capacity of human beings to think and reason. Moral virtues are connected with our social nature—and also our animality. Moral virtues actualize our potentiality as social animals. 3. Explain the importance of character and habits in virtue ethics. Solution: Virtue ethics is interested in a person’s tendency to act in a certain way. Rather than focusing on moral judgment about concrete and specific actions, virtue ethics asks us to consider the overall disposition of a person to do the right thing, at the right time, in the right amount, and for the right reasons. Thus, virtue ethics focuses on adjectives that describe characteristics such as honest, compassionate, courageous, and so on. These adjectives identify certain traits or habits of human behavior connected to human excellence. 4. Give a list of some virtues and related vices; explain how these virtues contribute to eudaimonia. Solution: In the Greek tradition, there were four cardinal virtues: prudence (or wisdom), justice, temperance, and courage. In the Confucian tradition, three virtues were emphasized: courtesy, benevolence, and respect for elders. In the Greek case,

as explained by Aristotle, these virtues should lead to flourishing or happiness. Aristotle’s idea of happiness is known as eudaimonia, which is not simply pleasure. Rather, it is a way of being an excellent human being. 5. According to Aristotle, how is virtue a mean between extremes? Give some examples. Solution: Virtue lies between two “vices”—a vice of deficiency and a vice of excess. For example, courage is a mean between two extremes: rashness/foolhardiness (excessive fearlessness) and cowardice/timidity (too much fear). Or in connection with self-regard: pride is in the middle between humility (a deficiency of pride) and vanity (excessive pride). 6. Are there virtues that are excellences for all human beings, or are virtues dependent on our roles or our culture? Solution: There are different virtues that are specific to different people in different roles: soldiers have different virtues from teachers. This question also points us toward conflicts that arise in thinking about cross-cultural comparisons, say in the difference between Asian (Confucian) virtue traditions and Western traditions. But even with the Western tradition there are conflicting virtues. MacIntyre points out that Christian virtues are different from Greek virtues—for example, with regard to the importance of humility, faith, and other values. If there were to be a universal account of the virtues, we would need to have an account of the overall purpose and function of human life. 7. What does Aristotle say about slavery and gender hierarchy? Solution: Aristotle held that there were “natural slaves” and that women were

subordinate to men. He thought there was a natural hierarchy that put free male citizens at the top of the social structure. He suggested that for “natural slaves”—who lacked the capacity for intellectual and moral improvement—slavery could be both “just and expedient.” This theory is morally problematic—and authors such as Tessman have pointed out that we need to update and criticize Aristotle in this regard. 8. What kinds of virtues might be needed in a more egalitarian society than the one Aristotle lived in? Solution: Tessman points out that it is possible to have more inclusive virtues. Compassion, solidarity, and rebelliousness could be among a list of virtues needed to liberate people and create a more egalitarian society. Tessman also points out that this is morally and psychologically problematic, since those virtues (what she calls “burdened virtues”) will not be easy,. especially in a hierarchical culture that demands submission, obedience, and conformity. An example she discusses is anger, which may be useful for those on the receiving end of oppression. 9. Who most exemplifies the virtue of courage—the person who finds it difficult to be brave or the person who finds it easy to be courageous? Solution: This question is a matter of opinion/argument. But a significant issue for answering it is raised by Philippa Foot, who suggests we should think about the importance of moral effort. If someone is simply and habitually courageous, they may find moral behavior to be easy. But we also seem to think that the moral life should involve effort—and that if something comes easily and naturally, it may be worth less than something that requires a struggle. One part of the answer to this question

involves thinking about the value of moral education and social supports for virtue. 10. Can a virtue such as courage be used to describe the actions of a villain (can a bad person really be courageous)? Solution: This issue is raised by Philippa Foot. It might make sense to think that a bad person is courageous when doing their bad deeds. But ultimately Foot (and Aristotle) would remind us to think about the justice of the larger context. Aristotle suggested that it was difficult to be happy and good in a bad society. And Foot encourages us to look at the larger context. Rather, we need a larger point of view that considers the virtues in connection with one another and in the context of social life.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 9: Feminist Thought and the Ethics of Care

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. How important to you is the struggle for women’s liberation and equality? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about (or research on their own—or with instructor help) facts and issues involving women’s liberation movements (some of this is provided later in the chapter in the history of feminist and women’s movements). Some students may want to argue that women are already legally equal in developed countries. But that is the result of past struggles. Others may want to claim that this political issue is not a concern for philosophy. But it is worth noting the exclusion of women’s issues and perspectives from the philosophical tradition. Finally, this could be made concrete by discussing issues involving mothers, grandmothers, sisters, and the present generation.

2. What kinds of issues involving the inequality of women are most important for you? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about (or research on their

own—or with instructor help) facts and issues involving women’s inequality, including ongoing protests in Iran and other countries, and pay disparities, women’s athletics, and so on. Students should be encouraged to discuss the question of what liberation and equality mean in specific cases—and whether there are cultural or other factors involved. They may also want to discuss the kinds of discrimination or inequality involving gender that they have confronted.

3. Would you be willing to go to jail, as the protesters in Iran have, in protesting for women’s rights? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to research (on their own or with instructor help) the Iranian protests and the repercussions—as well as the prior backlash against women protesters in the developed world (e.g., in the suffrage movement of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The point here is to think about the degree to which women and their supporters should be protesting and struggling. It could also be interesting to generate a conversation about the effectiveness of certain kinds of protests. For example, is there something significant about a woman cutting her hair in public (as in Iran)? What might work in the United States in terms of pay gaps (say, a strike or other protest by the U.S. women’s soccer team)?

4. How do race, culture, religion, and sexuality impact our thinking about women’s issues? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about and do research on

cultural, religious, and other differences. This might also include research on how Black or Asian women are doing (in terms of pay or violence) in relation to white women—and men. We discuss intersectionality in the chapter and some other cultural issues such as violence against women and honor crimes. Students may already understand something about the importance of sexuality and gender identity, but may not realize how that connects to feminism (there is a further discussion in Chapter 16). Students should be reminded of the complexity of the problem, and the worry about ethnocentrism and eurocentrism that we discussed in previous chapters.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. What is feminism and how is it related to philosophical inquiries into sex and gender? Solution: Feminists are concerned with the liberation of women and establishing equality for women. One focal point of feminism is the critique of structures of male domination in social, political, and cultural life. This includes a critique of traditional concepts and norms involved in thinking about sex, sexuality, and gender. As feminism has developed, it has extended toward a critique of the gender binary, which means that it asks us to consider what it means to be a “woman.” Contemporary feminism tends to hold that gender concepts (such as femininity) are

socially constructed and cannot be reduced to some biological or physiological fact. 2. What are some limitations of traditional approaches to ethics, when viewed from the vantage point of feminism? Solution: Feminists point out that traditional philosophical theories of ethics (such as natural law, virtue ethics, Kantian deontology, and utilitarianism) have often neglected the concerns of women, while also tending to support traditional patriarchal notions of women that contributed to their subordination. Aristotle, for example, suggested that women were inferior to men. In addition, traditional approaches to moral theory tend to focus on norms like impartiality and universality, while neglecting the importance of care and relationship. 3. Identify and explain some supposed differences between masculine and feminine ethical perspectives, as articulated by Carol Gilligan’s work. Solution: Gilligan suggests that masculine ethical perspectives emphasize impartiality, neutrality, universality, justice, and other norms. On the other hand, a feminine ethical perspective emphasizes care, empathy, compassion, and relationships. In explanation, it may be that the norms of the masculine framework are norms of the public sphere, while feminine values are more typical of the private sphere. And this may in fact be the result of social roles and the traditional exclusion of women from the public sphere. 4. How is Carol Gilligan’s work to be understood in relation to the work of Lawrence Kohlberg or Freud?

Solution: Gilligan developed her theory out of a critical response to the work of Kohlberg and other male psychologists, including Freud. Freud, for example, had suggested that women tended to be morally inferior because they were more emotional and showed less of a “sense of justice.” Kohlberg’s account of moral development suggested that boys and men tended to be concerned with impartial rationality, rule following, and a disinterested or universal point of view. Gilligan’s research focused on the moral framework of girls, and she suggested that girls had a different moral focus, which was oriented toward caring relationships. While Kohlberg and Freud may have suggested that the feminine point of view was inferior or showed a lack of complete moral development, Gilligan suggested that women’s moral point of view was worthy of equal consideration and respect, as a “different voice.” 5. What are the basic features of the ethics of care? Solution: The ethics of care is focused on the kinds of moral responses that are generated within concrete relationships of care. This involves two parties: the carer and the cared-for. A paradigm example of this is the mother–child relationship. Rather than focusing morality on abstract rules and universal principles, care ethics suggests that we focus on moral responsiveness and the kind of responsibility that is generated within concrete relationships of care. That responsiveness includes emotional attachment and important moral feelings such as compassion, empathy, and love. Noddings and others emphasized the maternal relationship as a paradigm

example, which tended to suggest that care ethics was a uniquely feminine or female approach to ethics. But men can be caregivers, and different cultures evaluate care (and gender roles) in different ways. 6. What criticisms of care ethics have been articulated by feminists? Solution: While care ethics attempted to listen to the female “voice” and bring caring relationships and emotional connection to the fore, some feminists worried that this approach continued to rely

on stereotypes about women and the

supposed gender binary constructed by social roles. One significant concern is that a gendered approach to care ethics may end up suggesting that women are better suited for “caring professions” such as nursing or teaching, while also suggesting that women may not be well suited for other careers such as doctors or judges. 7. What is the primary focal point of the so-called first wave of feminism, and who are some of its key thinkers? Solution: First-wave feminism was focused on political rights and equality for women. It included the women’s suffrage movement, which aimed to get women the right to vote. Key thinkers in that movement include Mary Wollstonecraft, who wrote a book entitled

A Vindication of the Rights of Women. Other key thinkers

included Harriet Taylor Mill (the wife of John Stuart Mill) and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Cady Stanton helped to organize a movement for women’s equality in the United States that began with the Seneca Falls

Convention of 1848.

8. What is the significance of intersectionality for feminism, and how is it related to the

critical perspective provided by an author such as bell hooks? Solution: Intersectionality directs our attention to the complex network of identities and discrimination that make up a person’s life and experience. Contemporary feminists are interested in this complex account of diversity. But early feminism was often focused on the concerns of White women. The Black feminist author, bell hooks, provides a critical alternative that was critical of racism among White feminists. From hooks’ perspective, feminism ought to be oriented toward a general critique of all kinds of domination, while aiming to liberate all people from racism, sexism, classism, and other forms of oppression. 9. How do issues involving trans persons and the queer theory of Judith Butler connect to the concerns of feminism? Solution: In criticizing structures of patriarchal oppression, feminists call gender norms into question, including the so-called gender binary. This effort began with Simone de Beauvoir’s claim that one is not born but becomes a woman. This line of inquiry suggests that gender is a social construction and that difference between male and female is not a natural biological fact. This extends to include recognition of the fact that trans persons exist and that nonheterosexual forms of sexuality also exist. Judith Butler’s work has been influential in showing the complexity of sex, sexuality, and gender—and the ways in which gender norms are established and enforced within culture. This kind of critique could be called “queer theory,” which is an attempt to deconstruct traditional notions of sex, gender, and sexuality.

10. What are some of the concerns feminists might have about pornography, violence against women, and economic inequality? Solution: Feminists are interested in liberating women and promoting social, cultural, and political equality for women. One problem that must be confronted is economic inequality, including the gender pay gap. Feminists maintain that women should be compensated fairly and equally. Another tragic problem is violence against women, which includes sexual violence, rape, and harassment, as well as honor killing and other assaults on the lives and bodies of women (such as modesty laws). Feminists argue that this significant social and cultural problem needs remedying and that women need to be liberated from the oppression of violence against women. With regard to pornography, feminists have often been critical of pornography as part of a maledominant culture that objectifies women. But some feminists have also asked whether there could be pornography that empowers women. In general, the feminist focal point in applied ethics asks us to consider how women and girls are impacted by legal structures, social policies, and cultural practices.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 10: Health Care Ethics

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1.

How should society balance the concern for liberty with the desire to promote public health? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to do some research and thinking about both sides of the debate here from an abstract level and in connection with COVID-19. What were the public health restrictions—and risks? Other examples could be considered: seat belt laws, helmet laws, smoking bans, and so on. The point of asking the question this way is to focus on balance; assuming that there is a conflict, how can we balance competing values?

2. Should people be forced to get vaccinated in a pandemic or to wear a mask? Talking Points: Students may want to do a bit of preliminary research (either on their own or with instructor help) about the kinds of regulations that applied during COVID-19 pandemic, recognizing that the rules changed and evolved over time. For some, this will be clearly in their memories. But some may not have paid attention to the rules and restrictions. The question of force is worth pausing over. To what extent are the rules in voluntary experiences (such as travel or higher education) different from rules involved in less voluntary matters (such as K–12 education)? There are other examples of vaccination

that could be considered as well beyond COVID-19. It is worth considering what masks are supposed to do—and whether they might also be recommended in flu or cold season—as well as during outbreaks of diseases such as COVID-19.

3. Who should be in charge of public health: cities, states, or federal/international agencies? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about and do some research on the different levels of authority and control of public health. They may be able to find information on success/failure rates. The ethics question is about effectiveness and fairness. This connects to lots of other issues such as global poverty or different rules regulating abortion in different states. Is public health and disease prevention a regional concern or national or international? There is also a question worth considering about whether medical authorities are the most important decision-makers or some other group of experts (say, economists).

4. Do individuals have a personal obligation to take steps to prevent spreading disease? Talking Points: The point of this question is to get students to think about what they did and are willing to do on behalf of public health. Without prying into their private choices, a discussion could involve various choices about masking or vaccination. And this could expand beyond COVID-19 to include discussions of condom use to prevent STDs or the risks of secondhand smoke. A basic ethical question here is about individual responsibility, concern for others, and a more general utilitarian concern.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. Why does the study of bioethics tend to focus on case studies (sometimes called casuistry), and what does this mean for moral judgment?

Solution: Bioethics involves complex issues that depend on the details of the case. Case study analysis (casuistry) is a time-honored practice in medical ethics and other professional ethics fields. One difficulty of the case study approach is that it might merely be a way of exploring our intuitions without critically scrutinizing them. A more useful approach also brings in moral principles and explores who those principles apply to cases. 2. How many basic principles of bioethics are there? Compare and contrast different lists of principles (including the list provided in this chapter). Solution: In this chapter, we discussed seven principles: autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, distributive justice, human rights, health maximization, and care for the vulnerable. Other lists are simpler. The Belmont Report focused on autonomy, beneficence, and justice. To that list, Beauchamp and Childress add a fourth value: nonmaleficence. Simpler lists are useful as rules of thumb that are easy to remember and apply. But moral judgment also involves complexities that may require more expansive lists of value. 3. What is health? How are social and cultural factors connected to judgments about health? Solution: Health is typically viewed as an objective fact that can be measured. But health also includes normative judgments that are connected to cultural and social judgments, norms, and expectations. The World Health Organization defined health as a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being. But ideas about mental and social well-being are complex—as are ideas of what counts as complete physical wellbeing. Some examples discussed include issues related to epilepsy, sexuality, and gender. Body image and ideas about obesity and ideal body type were also discussed along with questions about eyesight including color-blindness and presbyopia (the natural and normal inability to see near objects that happens in middle age). A

significant concern is what counts as “normal function.”

4. What kinds of cultural and social factors were at play in thinking about the COVID-19 pandemic from a health-care and public health perspective? Solution: There was a need to balance concern for the vulnerable with concern for other social values. Some people with comorbidities were particularly vulnerable to the disease. One question is the degree to which public health policy should focus on protecting the vulnerable in comparison with promoting other social values including economic well-being, education, and mental health. 5. Explain how codes of ethics have evolved and are used in health care and research. Solution: One of the oldest codes is the Hippocratic oath. More recent codes and statements of principle have evolved—often in response to atrocities. This was the case with the development of the Nuremburg Code (which was a response to Nazi atrocities) and the Belmont Report (which was a response to the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments). Codes of ethics currently are used in professional health-care settings and in research facilities—providing guidance for practice. There are ethics review boards that approve research and provide advice in complex cases involving moral dilemmas. 6. Can a code of ethics or list of principles help us solve ethical dilemmas? Solution: Ethical dilemmas occur when there is a conflict between two values. As we discussed with regard to Kidder, a dilemma is a conflict that is understood as “right v. right” or “good v. good.” This is different from a temptation, where one of the choices is obviously wrong. A code of ethics or list or principles can help us understand the values that are in conflict. But there is an open question about how best to resolve a genuine dilemma (since by definition a dilemma is a basic conflict of values). 7. Imagine some cases in which benevolent paternalism comes into conflict with respect for autonomy. How would you resolve such a dilemma?

Solution: Benevolent paternalism occurs when we make a decision and take action in the best interest of a patient. Sometimes this occurs when a patient is incapacitated or incompetent. In such a case, there is lack of capacity to give informed consent. A public health example involved COVID-19 restrictions, which seemed to violate autonomy (e.g., a mask mandate). Another example involved restraining a delusional patient. In some cases, there is a fairly clear dilemma and conflict of values (perhaps in the COVID case). But in other cases, it seems fairly obvious that autonomy is lacking and benevolent paternalism can be justified (as in the case of restraining a delusional patient). One important point included in this discussion is to prevent paternalism from becoming authoritarian and resulting in atrocity. 8. How do you think we should respond to cases in which rationing is needed? What rule or criterion would you apply? Solution: Rationing involves making decisions about allocating health-care resources under conditions of scarcity. It could occur when there is an emergency and not enough hospital beds. This was a significant worry during the COVID-19 pandemic, and involved questions of “ventilator triage.” Different procedures were considered in the chapter. Some seem to involve luck: first in line, a lottery, and so on. This does not seem to take need into account. Other approaches may involve “social worth,” for example, focusing on those with more children or more important jobs. But most bioethicists caution against using social worth, since it can reinforce bias and discrimination. We also discussed the possibility of age cutoffs and the idea of fair innings. But a worry about that approach is that it can be ageist—and can connect to bias against people with disabilities. 9. Is there a right to health and health care? If so, how much and at what cost? If not, why not? Solution: The right to health care has been debated, including the question of whether it is a human right. Those who view health care as a human right focus on “positive rights” as

entitlements to basic goods. Critics of this focus on “negative rights” (as protections against interference) and argue that no one should be compelled to provide health care for others. The first idea is defended by Kai Nielsen, who argued that basic health care should be universal and free, where socially possible. The second idea is defended by John David Lewis, who argues that health care is not a right. In the middle, we discussed Norman Daniels, who argued that some “tiering” could be justified—an idea that focuses on a basic level of health care for all, while also allowing choice at higher tiers. 10. Explain why eugenics might be a problem if we focus only on health maximization. Solution: Eugenics is the process of trying to improve the gene pool. It might seem defensible from a public health standpoint as a reasonable part of a project of health maximization. But historically, eugenics was often biased against poor people, people of color, and people with disabilities. Sometimes it resulted in atrocities such as forced sterilization and even euthanasia. One question about health-care maximization is whether it is focused on eliminating disability by focusing negatively on those who are disabled or whether in a just and comprehensive scheme of public health, it is connected with a policy that supports and sustains those who are disabled.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 11: Abortion and Euthanasia

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. Do women have a fundamental right to choose to have an abortion? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about a number of issues as they get started: the question of rights, the idea of a right to privacy, the importance of choice/autonomy, and the issue of women’s rights and feminist concerns. The chapter will provide more details. But students could be encouraged to think about cases and examples including sex-selective abortion, abortion in the case of disability, in the case of rape, in case of life-threatening pregnancy, and so on. The idea of a “fundamental right” could be interrogated as well. What other rights are fundamental? And how does abortion law connect to other rights: religious liberty, equality, and so on. To claim that women have a right to abortion points in the direction of a “pro-choice” point of view as discussed in the chapter, as well as issues related to feminism discussed here as well. It might be worth encouraging students to discuss whether pro-choice is the same as “pro-abortion.”

What kinds of beings have a basic right to life? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to consider the very basis of a right to life. This will link to ontological and moral questions that are discussed in the chapter regarding both fetuses and adult humans with brain damage or other disabilities. One issue for discussion is when (during pregnancy or development after birth) human beings obtain the right to life and whether we can lose that right in some cases toward the end of life. Students should be encouraged to speculate about what gives us rights, who has rights, and how would we know? This could extend to a consideration of nonhuman animals (a topic discussed in Chapter 20).

Should abortion be legal or illegal? Talking Points: This question should prompt critical discussion of Roe v. Wade and Dobbs v. Jackson. These cases disagree about the legal question. This disagreement has prompted state bans and restrictions on abortion. Students could be encouraged to research local and state laws (with instructor support) in their own area or in areas they are familiar with. This in turn points to a question about whether something should be legal in one jurisdiction but not in another. The emerging legal frameworks across the states draw lines in different places involving various exceptions, gestational processes, and so on. These differences can be used to prompt moral questions about when and for what reasons abortion should be

legal or not. Instructors will likely want to note that there is a difference between the moral question and the legal question—and that pro-choice could include the right to choose, even if people would not make that choice for themselves.

4. How does your thinking about abortion connect to your thinking about end-of-life decisions and other issues involving privacy? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to aim toward some consistent and principled set of conclusions. Thinking about abortion should be consistent with thinking about euthanasia and assisted suicide. But students should be pressed to think about circumstances and cases that also open space for differences. The distinctions between types of euthanasia might be relevant to this discussion (active, passive, voluntary, involuntary, nonvoluntary). Students might want to figure those distinctions out—and then imagine how they might apply in the case of abortion. The question of privacy opens onto a number of other issues in sexual morality and other topics. Roe v. Wade had established a right to privacy. Dobbs called that into question. Students may want to consider what implications Dobbs has for privacy in marriage, sexuality, or even with regard to data collection.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS

1. Outline the difference between pro-choice and pro-life arguments regarding euthanasia and abortion. Solution: Pro-choice allows for abortion and euthanasia when consent is present. This would include voluntary euthanasia. But it would disallow abortion or euthanasia that is coerced. Pro-choice is not “pro-abortion,” meaning that it does not advocate abortion but only for the possibility of choosing it. Similar reasoning holds with regard to euthanasia. Autonomy is a key value for the pro-choice idea. Pro-life arguments are opposed to killing. Sometimes this is a broad “consistent ethic of life” that opposes euthanasia, suicide, war, the death penalty, and abortion. The pro-life side focuses on claims about the ontological and moral status of fetuses and brain-damaged adults, maintaining that all living humans have a right to life (even early embryos and brain-damaged adults). 2. Evaluate the importance of consent and privacy in thinking about these issues. Solution: The right to privacy was important in Roe v. Wade. It was removed from consideration in Dobbs. This key idea holds that we should be allowed to make our own decisions about important matters including birth and death. The idea is related to the value of autonomy and the importance of consent. But pro-life arguments are less concerned with privacy and more concerned with preventing decisions that are deemed to be immoral (such as abortion or euthanasia). The issues of consent and privacy may also show up in thinking about sexual morality and other topics. 3. Evaluate utilitarian arguments for and against abortion/euthanasia. Solution: Utilitarians are focused on creating outcomes that produce the greatest

happiness for the greatest number. This theory could be used to justify and permit abortion and euthanasia. Permitting choice might be an important matter that creates happiness for lots of people. And in some cases, it is possible to imagine that some kinds of abortions could produce happiness for many people—as in the case of fetuses with abnormalities or in the case of a mother’s health emergency during pregnancy. A utilitarian argument could be used to justify euthanasia— including even active euthanasia if it results in a painless death (cf. James Rachels). On the other hand, utilitarians may be worried about slippery slopes and negative outcomes from permissive policies regarding euthanasia and abortion. Furthermore, it depends how much a fetus or a brain-damaged adult matters in the utilitarian calculation. 4. Describe how Thomson uses the violinist analogy to make an argument about the moral permissibility of abortion. What kinds of cases might this apply to? Solution: Thomson’s violinist analogy is best used to help think about abortion in the case of rape. In the scenario, a person is hooked up against her will to another person and asked to support that person. If she disconnects, the other person will die. A crucial point here is that procedure is in violation of the person’s autonomy and consent. Thus, it is similar to abortion in the case of rape. But it could be extended to abortion in other cases where consent is lacking—as in failed birth control. Thomson’s argument is about a conflict of rights. Even if the fetus is a person, a woman would be justified in disconnecting herself. 5. Evaluate various criteria for personhood and how they apply to abortion and to euthanasia.

Solution: We discussed the importance of various stages in pregnancy for drawing a line for the permissibility of abortion: conception, when a heartbeat is present, when the brain develops, when quickening occurs, at the point of viability. We also discussed the importance of potentiality. With regard to the end of life, we also discussed issues concerning whole brain death and other criteria for death. And we considered Mary Anne Warren’s psychological criteria that focus on degrees of consciousness. Each of us will need to decide where to draw the line, whether at biological/genetic humanity or somewhere “higher”

up the chain of physiological and psychological functions

and capacities. We should also be aware of the importance of potentiality and how it might apply differently in discussions of abortion than in discussions of euthanasia at the end of life. 6. How important is potentiality for thinking about abortion—and euthanasia? Solution: As discussed in the previous section, potentiality is a key ontological question. With regard to abortion, it is fairly clear that ordinarily a fetus will develop into a human and actualize its “potentiality.” This is not necessarily true for fetuses with disabilities or diseases. Some argue that potentiality is a key idea and that if a fetus is a potential person, then it should not be killed (cf. Marquis). At the end of life, potentiality is less important, especially in cases of severe brain damage where there is no hope of return to normal function. 7. What is the difference between active and passive euthanasia? Is physician-assisted suicide more like active or passive euthanasia? How so? Solution: With active euthanasia, something is actively done that brings about death (e.g., a lethal injection). Passive euthanasia merely allows death to happen, by “natural causes,” as is sometimes said (e.g., pulling the plug on life support). In the United States, passive euthanasia is generally allowed (with consent), while active

euthanasia is not. Physician-assisted suicide is probably more like active euthanasia insofar as something is done (i.e., a drug is taken that ends life). But in a sense, the physician who prescribed the lethal dose did not do anything. The prescribing physician merely made the drug available, while the patient who self-administered the drug was the active agent in the act of suicide. 8. What kinds of arguments can be used for and against active and passive euthanasia? Solution: One question is whether either active or passive euthanasia causes pain and suffering. Assuming that consent is present (i.e., that it is “voluntary”), then the question is about alleviating pain and hastening death. Some authors (e.g., James Rachels) argue that active euthanasia can be more humane

since it ends

suffering quickly. But others are still not convinced that active euthanasia can be justified. Gay-Williams argues that is not, by noting that there may be a slippier slope and other problems. The argument in favor of passive euthanasia would be that there is nothing wrong with letting nature take its course, preferring that death should come from a disease or some other process rather than from one person actively killing another. 9. Explain how feminist and social justice concerns arise in thinking about abortion and euthanasia. Solution: Abortion is often viewed as a women’s rights issue: women’s right to choose is seen as a crucial part of other rights for women. This is also connected with the need for exceptions in the case of rape, which is obviously an unwanted pregnancy. Some feminists (cf. Manninen) are also concerned to be sensitive to the experience of women, which includes not being dismissive of the status of the fetus. Related to this and connected to the issue of euthanasia are topics such as the

impact of pregnancy, abortion, and end-of-life care on poor and

working-class

people, people of color, and people with disabilities. People with disabilities have routinely pushed back against the effort to legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide, claiming that euthanasia risks becoming eugenic and being turned against people with disabilities. 10. Do you think that the doctrine of double effect can be used to justify abortion and euthanasia? Explain why or why not in each case. Solution: The doctrine of double effect says that if you intend some good action while foreseeing that some bad action will also result, this could be justifiable. In the case of abortion, it might be applied by claiming that the intention is to help the mother, as in the case of an emergency abortion for a life-threatening pregnancy. In the case of euthanasia, it may come up with regard to “terminal sedation,” giving a drug to alleviate pain, while knowing that the drug could speed up death. To evaluate this idea, you would need to decide what matters most morally: consequences or intentions. Consequentialists generally do not focus on intention and so likely find the idea of the double effect unpersuasive. For the consequentialist, what matters is whether the outcome is good or bad, causes happiness or suffering. And non-consequentialists who are concerned with intent will likely be sympathetic to the idea, especially as a way to allow for emergency abortion and the possibility of terminal sedation.

Solution and Answer Guide Mackinnon/Fiala, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 12: Biotechnology

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1.

Is there a good reason to ban the use of gene editing on humans? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to do some research and thinking about gene editing and CRISP technology, including legal issues related to bans. They may also want to do some research on He Jiankui, including watching the video he made explaining his actions, “Designer Baby Is an Epithet”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qv1svMfaTWU. Students should also be encouraged to consider ethical problems, especially in the case of germ line interventions that can be inherited.

Is there a moral difference between using gene editing to eliminate genetic diseases and using it to create enhancements and “designer babies”? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to do some research and think about the idea of “designer babies” (including the fact that scientists tend to avoid

the term!). The difference here involves the question of beneficence as well as the distinction between therapy and enhancement. This is discussed throughout the chapter. Students can begin clarifying their own thinking about this distinction. 3.

Does it matter that this experiment and procedure were used on human embryos without their consent? Talking Points: This question is about “autonomy” and consent. (There are also questions about parental consent). Obviously, non-born humans cannot consent. But would parents or guardians have authority to decide for them? Or maybe this is a nonsensical question. The question is related to questions about abortion and infant euthanasia: who gets to decide in these cases? There is also a question about protecting the vulnerable: typically children are the focus of special protections in research. But does that make sense here?

Are you worried about the impact this technology might have on the gene pool and on future generations? Talking Points: This is about germ line interventions that could be inherited. Students may want to do some research about how this might occur. Here they may also begin thinking about the precautionary principle: how cautious should we be about unforeseen impacts on future generations? But also, if we eliminate diseases, it would be beneficial if these changes were passed on.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. What is the basic difference between a therapy and an enhancement? Explain by using an example. Solution: Therapy returns something to normal function, while enhancement takes it beyond normal function. An example of a therapy would be a cochlear implant that allows a deaf person to detect sounds. An example of an enhancement would be a bionic eye that allows a normally sighted person to have vision that exceeds the limits of ordinary human beings. 2. How do bioengineering and biotechnology provide opportunities for people with disabilities? How might these techniques point toward a posthuman future? Solution: Therapeutic biotechnologies can help disabled people, as in the case of cochlear implants or brain–computer interfaces that allow paralyzed people to operate robotic arms. Basically, these technologies help achieve normal function. But as the technologies become more widespread, they may change our humanity—for example, if reproductive technologies became widely used along with genetic screening or gene editing. 3. How does your thinking about animal ethics, the ethics of abortion, and even sexual ethics connect with your thinking about the ethics of biotechnologies? What concepts overlap among these issues? Solution: Reproductive technologies allow LGBTQ people to reproduce. Natural law

may not be in favor of that. But apart from natural law, this will be viewed as beneficial. IVF produces spare embryos, which can cause a concern related to abortion if those embryos are considered persons. The same concern applies in thinking about embryonic stem cell research. With regard to animals, there are questions about research ethics, as well as questions about whether animal “nature” could be transformed—or whether we ought to leave nature alone. 4. Summarize the arguments for and against cloning and other reproductive technologies based on the idea that it would be “playing God” and would undermine human dignity. Solution: The worry about “playing God” comes from a natural law perspective. The idea of human dignity can be found in natural law and also in Kantian deontology. Opponents of cloning and other reproductive technologies (bio-conservatives) argue that it is not natural for human life to originate through scientific intervention and that we may not be wise enough to use this technology without undermining human dignity. On the other hand, proponents of these technologies including transhumanists see them as having obvious therapeutic benefits. The transhumanists also emphasize autonomy and liberty when it comes to reproduction (and sexuality). 5. Summarize the idea that cloning and/or genetic engineering might pose a threat to the clone’s individuality and the right to an open future. Does this worry you? Solution: A clone would be a person genetically identical to the original. This might threaten the clone’s sense of self, since the clone would be a “copy.” The other problem is that a clone would be brought into the world with a purpose (as a copy),

which might mean that it “belongs” to the originator or that its destiny is fixed. Natural law theorists and other bio-conservatives reject cloning for these reasons. But others argue that these worries are not significant since the clone would not be an exact duplicate (gestational and environmental differences would mean that the clone would be unique and different from the original). 6. Evaluate the arguments regarding human cloning related to exploitation, confusion of families, and the “yuck” factor of the repugnance argument. Solution: Leon Kass claims that there is wisdom in repugnance, that is, that our experience of “yuck” can inform us that a moral line has been crossed. He suggests that cloning produces this experience—for example, because the clone’s “twin” would also be its father or mother. On the other hand, defenders of biotechnological innovation argue that new technologies often start out seeming weird, but we learn to appreciate them if they are beneficial. 7. Evaluate arguments for and against genetic screening and genetic engineering of offspring. Solution: Screening could be used to eliminate diseased embryos or to choose enhanced embryos. Genetic engineering uses CRISPR and other techniques to change the genetic code. Bio-conservatives argue that we should not tamper with nature in this way, also warning about unintended effects on individuals and on the germ line. Transhumanists are more in favor of these techniques. This might include Savulescu and Kahane’s idea about “procreative beneficence,” which holds that

screening or engineering offspring would be good for those who are created in this way. A further supportive argument comes from those who think it would be a good idea to eliminate disease from the germ line. 8. What are the ethical arguments pro and con with regard to the production and use of genetically modified plants and crops? Solution: One objection to GMOs is that there are unintended effects on human health and on the ecosystem. Another concern is the general critique of “playing God” with natural organisms. On the other hand, these technologies might help us produce plentiful and nutritious food, including adapting crops as climate change and drought threaten crop yields. 9. Discuss the worry about “velvet eugenics” and the idea of “procreative beneficence.” Solution: Savulescu and Kahane claim that parents have an obligation of “procreative beneficence,” which means we should select our offspring in a way that is optimal. Gardner-Thomson warns that this will end up with eugenic outcomes. Unlike old coercive eugenics, this will be velvet eugenics, that is, it will not be coerced, rather it will come from free choice and a spirit of benevolence. But the outcome will eliminate disabled people. Savulescu and Kahane affirm this outcome, since their goal is to produce optimal children. 10. What concerns might we have about biotechnologies from the standpoint of justice, fairness, and equality? Solution: Justice concerns will focus on distributions of these technologies. Typically

affluent people will be able to use these technologies. This might exacerbate social divides, as rich people engineer their children and use enhancement technologies to guarantee that they are successful. On the other hand, defenders of free markets argue that the price will come down as beneficial technologies become widespread. A related concern is that it might be more useful to focus on less exciting technologies such as eliminating malaria (a disease that afflicts poor people in the developing world) than on expensive and far-out technologies that cater to the choices of the rich.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon/Fiala, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 13: Equality and Discrimination

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. How concerned are you about racism, inequality, and social justice in the world today? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about (or research on their own—or with instructor help) facts and issues involving racial injustice, inequality, and proposals for social justice. Some details will be discussed in the chapter. But this question could be used to stimulate student thinking about these issues from their own lived experience. The George Floyd killing provides an example of police brutality and discrimination. But other cases could be researched and discussed. 2. What is the role of individual citizens—like Darnella Frazier—in responding to violations of civil rights and other inequalities? Talking Points: Darnella Frazier provides one example of the importance of engaged youth. But there are dangers and possible backlash. Students might be encouraged to follow up with research on Darnella Frazier. And they might be encouraged to consider whether they would have the courage to take a video or testify in court in a case such as this. Further discussion might focus on the difference between individual action in cases like this and the need for organized movements and systematic reform. 3. Should there be reparations for past discrimination or affirmative action for members of certain racial groups?

Talking Points: Reparations and affirmative action will be discussed in the chapter , but students could be encouraged to do some preliminary research and discussion of what affirmative action programs and reparations proposals look like. They may want to link this to reparations for victims of overt discrimination and police brutality such as lawsuits that hold police departments accountable. But students should think carefully about the difference between compensation in individual cases and the more general idea of reparations for social groups. This might also be a good place to consider the issue of intersectionality (to be discussed in the chapter) and whether there are different types of racism and discrimination that affect different people in different ways in different places. 4. Are there other ways you could imagine for society to address racism, discrimination, and inequality? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to use their imaginations to think of proposals to eliminate racism and discrimination. In considering this, students should be encouraged to think about the difference between structural and institutional responses and the psychological and moral responses of individuals. This might be a good place to consider the question of whether the goal should be to adopt a “color-blind” approach to this issue or whether it is better to be deliberately “anti-racist.” We discuss these differences in the chapter, and that could be foreshadowed here.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. Should differences in race, gender, or other identity categories ever be relevant to making decisions about qualified candidates for jobs or educational opportunities? Support your answer with reference to the principle of equality. Solution: The principle of equality states that similar things should be treated similarly, unless there is some justifiable reason for differential treatment. This question points to the question of whether discrimination can ever be justified. For

example, at one point it was thought that there were some jobs that were not appropriate for women—combat duty, to cite an example we discuss in the chapter. But is that justifiable? Are there relevant differences between men and women that could affect their ability to serve in combat? At the same time, this question also points toward the controversy about affirmative action. The question there is whether past discrimination is relevant in cases of affirmative action in which similarly situated people are treated differently as a remedy for past discrimination. 2. Evaluate the idea that race is a social construction. What implications follow from that idea in thinking about racism? Solution: The debate about the ontological status of race is ongoing. But most critical scholarship on race seems to agree that race is a social construction, which means that it is an idea that is created and supported by social institutions—and that involves generalizations about superficial physical features that do not indicate deeper biological differences. Of course, there are some biologically relevant differences among populations involving inherited genetic propensities for certain diseases—so noting these kinds of differences could be beneficial (and so not racist in a pernicious sense). But generalizations about racial groups have often been used to support racist social structures. If it is true that race is a social construct, it is possible to change social structures in ways that are not racist. Some might worry that in noticing racist institutions and structure, we may end up reaffirming racialist and racist ideas. But it may be that the best way to dismantle racism is to note that race is a social construction. 3. How does the idea of intersectionality affect conversations about race and racism? Solution: Intersectionality provides us with a lens that helps us see the complexity

of identities, including the fact that different communities experience race and racism in different ways. In the chapter, we discussed issues involving the complexity of the “Asian” racial category, for example. Asian (or Asian American) includes a broad range of ethnicities, cultures, and nationalities. Intersectionality helps us attend to that kind of difference. It also helps us to see that there are different kinds of discrimination and oppression. The concept was developed by feminist critical race theorists (e.g., Kimberlé Crenshaw) who were interested in highlighting the difference between the way that anti-Black racism is experienced by Black men and Black women. Other categories

may also need to be included in order to see the general complexity of

intersectionality: ability, religion, age, class, and so on. 4. Evaluate the ethics of racial profiling and hate crime legislation. Are these useful legal tools? Solution: Racial profiling could be justified on consequentialist grounds if it were effective at preventing and deterring crime—say by targeting members of certain populations that have a tendency to commit crimes. But critics

point out that this

is in fact a racist approach to crime fighting that treats all members of a certain racial group as having a tendency toward criminality. The critique of racial profiling is often articulated in moral terms that focus on human rights, dignity, and equality. But it could also be criticized from a consequentialist standpoint if racial profiling contributes to ongoing racial tension—as happens, for example, in the case of police brutality that appears to have racist elements. The category of hate crime has been created in an effort to respond to crimes that are accompanied by bias (or hate). Extra punishment for hate crimes can be justified from a utilitarian standpoint if it works to prevent and deter these kinds of crimes. But some critics may complain that the idea of hate crimes provides differential treatment for criminals who engaged in similar acts. Hate crime is a category that is not only focused on race: hate crimes can occur

in crimes that are motivated by religious hatred, gender bias, and so on. 5. What is “affirmative action,” and why does it have this name? Why might critics argue that it is reverse discrimination? And how might a defender of affirmative action reply? Solution: Affirmative action programs take “affirmative” or positive/proactive steps to eliminate and respond to past discrimination and racism. This can include racial preferences in hiring or college admissions, and possibly also quotas. Critics of affirmative action argue that it is reverse discrimination, by which they mean that in giving preference to a previously discriminated-against racial group, a new kind of discrimination is created—only this time it is directed at the racial group that was previously privileged. Defenders of affirmative action might reply by pointing out that affirmative action programs can be understood as a way of equalizing things— or even providing a kind of compensation for past discrimination. The defender might argue on consequentialist grounds that in the long run affirmative action programs might make society more equal. 6. Summarize the history of civil rights law, including recent affirmative action decisions. Have we made progress in actualizing the principle of equality in the law? Why or why not? Solution: civil rights law and affirmative action programs in the United States have evolved through a number of Supreme Court cases during the past fifty years or so. These cases have struggled to distinguish between very proactive programs—such as quotas—and other programs that seek to encourage diversity in some general way. Some say that society is better and more equal as a result of these programs. Critics of the programs argue that as we are becoming more equal and more “

color-blind,” these programs are no longer needed. The current court is in the process of reconsidering some of the previous case law. Proponents of continued affirmation action argue that racial disparities continue to exist and that society needs to continue taking proactive steps to provide opportunities for those who suffered from past discrimination. 7. Summarize arguments for and against reparations. Solution: Proposals for reparations aim to compensate victims of past discrimination for the harm they suffered. There have been a number of useful examples. The United States provided an apology and some compensation to victims of the Japanese internment of the 1940s. More recently, the government of Canada has offered compensation to Indigenous people who suffered harm in Canada’s residential schools. The argument in favor of these programs may be about justice (in a natural law, deontological, or non-consequentialist sense). That argument would claim that victims of past discrimination (or descendants of those victims) have a right to or deserve compensation. That compensation may include direct payments, grants, loans—and often a public apology. From a consequentialist standpoint, reparations programs can be justified as helping to make society more equal. Critics claim that it is difficult to determine who deserves reparations— especially for harms from the distant past such as in the case of slavery in the United States. Critics also claim that it is not fair to current taxpayers to be forced to support reparations for past harms that they did not cause.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 14: Economic Justice

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. Can the idea of forgiving some student loan debt be justified? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about (or research on their own—or with instructor help) facts and issues involving student loan forgiveness plans and policies. We discuss again at the end of the chapter, but students should be encouraged to consider the issue from their own perspective and experience. 2. What do you think about the two critiques of the Biden plan: from the NAACP and from Mitch McConnell? Talking Points: Make sure students understand both points: NAACP argued that it was insufficient; McConnell argued it was socialism. In the first case, it is worth thinking about racial disparities and racial wealth gap. In the second place, students should be encouraged to reflect on the meaning of socialism

—and the question

about whether student loan forgiveness is actually socialism. A key question is about “how much?”: how much loan forgiveness—if any—can be justified? This

could lead to further research about how much debt there is, how much college costs, and so on. 3. How important is a college education in economic terms, and is it worth the cost? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to research (on their own or with instructor help) the data on economic benefits of college education. This may also involve thinking about various options: junior college, state schools, and private colleges. Students should be encouraged to discuss their own experiences and hopes for economic opportunities. They should also be encouraged to think about the social, racial, and class-based issues and difference in opportunity associated with college admissions (which also discussed in Chapter 13). 4. Can you imagine any other solutions to the problem of economic inequality and the racial wealth gap? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about and do research on other proposals for remedies for economic and racial disparities. We discuss in the chapter a number of these: minimum wage laws, living wage, forgiveness for student loans (and other debt), private charity, public education, public health care, and so on. Students may have other suggestions. And they may be encouraged to find out how much these programs cost, and what their likely benefit might be.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1.

Consider the sorts of economic inequalities discussed in this chapter; are they

justifiable? Solution: Good answers will consider some of the data regarding inequality. But the point is to evaluate the data. Different theories will provide different sorts of evaluation. Students should be able to identify what socialists, libertarians, and liberals would say about these inequalities, as well as what natural law, utilitarian, and deontological theories might say. From the Chapter Summary: Libertarianism emphasizes leaving individuals alone to create and innovate and generate profit and wealth. Libertarianism is less concerned about equality than about respecting the rights of private property owners. Socialism is much more concerned with equality. There are varieties of socialism, but generally socialists believe that the state should intervene in the economy in order to eliminate inequalities. Modern liberalism is a hybrid theory that respects liberty while also seeking to moderate inequality. 2. What is the difference between a process view of distributive justice and an endstate view? Solution: Here is a solution, from the Chapter Summary: Procedural justice focuses on the fairness of processes that are employed in social systems and distributions of goods. If the procedures are fair (equitable or justice), inequalities of outcome are permitted, according to the idea of procedural difference. From this point of view, so long as there are equal opportunities, unequal outcomes may be acceptable. In opposition to this, theories of justice that are focused on “end states” are interested

in creating patterns of distributions, typically focused on substantive equality. When those patterns or ideal distributions become disrupted, the end-state view may encourage interventions in the economy and redistributions of wealth in order to create the ideal end state. 3. What is the meaning of equal opportunity? What criterion does James Fishkin use for judging whether it exists? What is Bernard Williams’s “starting-gate theory” of equal opportunity? Solution: Equal opportunity is not about substantive equality (or outcomes). Rather, it is focused on providing people with a fair and equitable starting point and access to opportunities. Fishkin suggests that when there is equal opportunity, you should not be able to predict at birth what the opportunities and outcomes would be for babies born in different racial groups, social classes, and so on. Williams’s “startinggate” idea is similar. He uses an imagined example of why competition between children of a warrior class will be at a disadvantage in competing against children who are not born in that warrior class. To equalize opportunity, the children of the warrior class may need extra training, weapons, or other compensating advantages. 4. Describe some problems raised by philosophers Frankfurt and Schaar regarding equal opportunity. Solution: Frankfurt suggests that inequality is not as important as “sufficiency”—the idea that each person has enough (i.e., that basic minimum needs are met). Schaar points out that there is a kind of natural lottery—and a “natural aristocracy” that

creates an unequal distribution of talent. This means that equal opportunity remains problematic—because those who have certain innate talents (or who are taller, faster, smarter, etc.) will win out in competition against those who lack such talents

5. What do libertarians think about liberty, equality, taxation, and the role of government—and about positive and negative rights? Solution: Libertarians (such as Nozick, Rand, and Machan) tend to emphasize liberty over equality. They suggest that the state should stay out of the economy as much as possible—and so defend a version of laissez-faire capitalism. They may even suggest that taxation is “forced labor,” as Nozick put it. Libertarians tend to focus on “negative rights,” which means keeping the government out of business and the private economy. They worry that positive rights demand too much governmental interference. 6. What do socialists tend to think about liberty, equality, taxation, and the role of government—and about positive and negative rights? Solution: Socialists focus on equality more than liberty. This is a focus on “positive rights.” Some versions of socialism (Marxist communism) want a complete state-run economy that produces substantive equality. Other versions of socialism may allow for more freedom in the market. But socialists tend to agree that taxation and wealth redistribution can be justified. Some socialist proposals might include a right to work, a right to health care, and even a universal basic income.

7. What is Rawls’s original position, and what role does it play in his derivation of principles of justice? Solution: The original position is Rawls’s imagined reconstruction of an ideal social contract situation—in which the contractors imagine principles and procedures of justice under the “veil of ignorance.” This imagined circumstance asks us to ignore our race, gender, class, age, and so on, so that we might imagine fair principles for all. Rawls derives two principles of justice from this situation: that there should be extensive liberty/opportunity, and that inequalities should help those on the bottom end of those inequalities. 8. What is Rawls’s “maximin” principle, and how is it related to his second principle of justice? Solution: The maximin principle holds that it is wise or rational to select an option that maximizes the best possible outcome among the worst alternatives. Rather than focusing on the best-case scenario, you imagine worst-case scenarios and select the option that results in the best of those worst possible outcomes. He uses this idea to argue that the ideal social contractors would want to set up a social system in which those at the bottom end up with the least worse possibility. This does not require substantive equality, according to Rawls. Rather, it requires that inequalities also benefit those at the bottom. 9. How does communitarianism differ from liberalism? Solution: Communitarianism claims that human beings are best understood not in

individualistic terms, but as existing in communities that involve caring relationships and reciprocity. The social contract idea of modern liberalism (i.e., Rawls) tends to think of human beings as being self-interested and concerned with maximin rationality. But communitarians suggest that human beings are also concerned about obligations and relationships within communities and traditions. 10.

Explain how loan forgiveness, minimum wage laws, and other proposals can be justified. Solution: Socialists tend to favor proposals that create equality and help the needy. To the extent that loan forgiveness, minimum wage laws, or proposals for universal basic income do that, they will support them. Modern liberals (in Rawls’s sense) may favor some of these proposals if they can be justified under the two principles of justice outlined by Rawls and so make sense from the standpoint of maximin rationality. Libertarian tend to oppose governmental interventions into the economy. We can also apply natural law theory—which may claim that the right to private property is not absolute and that we have obligations to care for the needy. Similar reasoning can be found in Kantian deontology, which provides an argument to justify taxation to help the unfortunate. And utilitarians tend to be sympathetic to social justice projects that are effective in eliminating poverty and contributing to the general welfare.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 15: Global Justice and Globalization

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. Do high-income countries have an obligation to help low-income countries? Talking Points: Students could be encouraged to do some research on poor and rich countries (there is some information in the chapter). The question of obligation opens a discussion of moral theory and connects to other questions of who owes what to whom. Students might be encouraged to discuss different moral theories, including a kind of self-interest theory that refuses to help others (i.e., Hardin’s theory as discussed in the chapter). Also at issue is what kind of aid to give. Is it a direct handout? Or is trading with poor countries a kind of aid? That could open the conversation to issues of ethical consumerism and fair trade practices. 2. How much should you (or your country) give? Talking Points: There are two levels of conversation here: about individual obligations and about nation-state obligations. Students could research how much in reality people and nations give as donations to the poor, and ask whether it is

sufficient. Singer makes an argument about giving up to the point of marginal utility—that could be introduced here. It is also worth considering whether near neighbors have special obligations or who “your country” should be helping? This is related to prior history of colonialism, as well. Do former colonizers have special obligations of aid to former colonies? 3. Do you want your tax dollars going to help strangers in foreign lands? Talking Points: This makes it concrete for students with regard to how their taxes are spent. The aid question could be juxtaposed with other tax priorities— education, domestic welfare projects, military, and so on. At what level of income and how much tax should be spent in this way? it is also worth discussing how those “foreign lands” might spend the money (and how to keep them accountable). 4. Is charity sufficient or do we need an account of global justice that requires aid? Talking Points: The point here is to consider whether charity is extra/supererogatory, or whether aid to those in extreme poverty is morally required (as Singer might suggest). It would be useful to encourage students to consider the nature of extreme poverty (i.e., “poverty that kills”). And it would be worth discussing the practical difference between optional charity and mandatory giving. But in the global justice conversation, who would enforce the obligation to give?

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. What is extreme poverty and how does it connect to the moral question of global justice? Solution: Extreme poverty is “poverty that kills,” which is currently defined as living on less than $2.15 per day. The basic concern of global justice points to the unfairness and inequity of a world in which billionaires and other affluent people live in luxury, while others die of starvation and the other afflictions of poverty. 2. What self-interested reasons can be given for doing something to remedy the situation of poor countries? Solution: Global inequalities produce instability, which can affect those living in more affluent countries. These inequalities can lead to immigrants struggling to cross borders and may also be a contributing cause of terrorism. The secretarygeneral of the United Nations warned that inequality and the suffering of the poor can breed anger and resentment. 3. Contrast Singer’s and Hardin’s views on how we ought to deal with poverty and famine. Solution: Singer extends utilitarian concern globally. He suggests that affluent people have a moral duty to help those who are starving and impoverished in other countries, which means that “charity” for him is obligatory. This utilitarian concern is not affected by proximity, which means that everyone who can help has an

obligation to do so. Hardin’s point of view focuses on the well-being of nation-states. He argues that nation-states are like lifeboats with limited carrying capacities, which means that they ought not take in immigrants or worry about helping people in other countries. Using Malthusian logic, Hardin warns that if affluent nations give resources to help the poor, the population of the poor will continue to grow, which leads to worse suffering in the long run. Hardin could be interpreted as applying a kind of utilitarianism, which leads to a quite different prescription than Singer offers. 4. What is justice and what role does it play in determining what ought to be done about global poverty? Solution: In this chapter, we discussed several versions of justice: a procedural notion of justice, justice as fairness, and end-state theories. An end-state theory might look at current distributions and claim that if there is egregious inequality, it ought to be remedied. Process-oriented ideas focus on the fairness of the procedures and rules that govern exchanges. If those procedures are (or were) unfair, they should be changed. This theory of justice could be used to support the idea that colonial exploitation of the past may need to be remedied. 5. Explain how the history of colonialism might be connected to current inequalities— and what should be done about that. Solution: The affluent nations of the world are primarily those who were former colonizing nations. And the poorest nations include former colonies. Some will

argue that even after colonialism formally ended with the liberation of colonies during the past couple of centuries, the inequalities and power differences that emerged from the former era continue to be reiterated. Some argue that reparations or compensation could be deserved, through which former colonizers would offer aid to former colonies. 6. What is meant by “decolonization” in the context of postcolonial theorizing? Solution: Postcolonial theories offer a broadly philosophical perspective on inequalities that exist across the globe. They argue for a need to think critically about values and identity in a postcolonial era. This theory points toward ongoing inequality, while also calling for Indigenous theories and identities to be reconceived. This could be linked to a critique of cultural imperialism, which is what happens when a dominant culture imposes itself on a local culture at that culture’s expense. The process of decolonization would include the project of listening to Indigenous voices. 7. Why is cultural relativism a concern when thinking about global justice? Solution: Cultural relativism is a concern because there are questions about the supposed universality of the values of modernity and the global political and economic system. Some argue that there is a clash of civilizations, with Asian values, for example, clashing with Western values. The question of concern in thinking about global justice is whether there is some universal theory of human rights or global justice that can be applied without reiterating cultural imperialism and the

prior structures of the colonial past. 8. Why might we think that we have an obligation to be concerned with the suffering of those in distant lands? Explain one criticism of this idea. Solution: Singer suggests that we have a duty to suffering others based on a fundamental concern to alleviate suffering. He says that proximity does not matter. Others may claim that there is a demand grounded in the natural law for a similar kind of concern. There may also be a self-interested concern to solve international problems such as immigration pressure. Critics may interpret self-interest differently and encourage strong borders and protectionism. Other critics may claim that charity is supererogatory and that there is no obligation to help the global poor. Finally, a different sort of critique argues that moral obligation is local and that we may have obligations to family, neighbors, or other citizens—but that those obligations do not extend to everyone. 9. Summarize the difference between globalization and global justice. Solution: Globalization is a historical process. It is facilitated by trade, transportation, and technology. This includes cultural interactions as well as economic and political relations. The question of global justice asks normative questions about the fact of globalization, wondering whether the resulting world is fair, just, or equitable. 10. What are some moral issues to consider with regard to immigration and global justice?

Solution: The push and pull of immigration involves issues related to economics and political stability. Refugees are pushed out of their homelands—by war, economic crises, and environmental disasters. Other immigrants are pulled by the hope for better opportunities. Immigration policies may be focused on closed borders and interested in keeping immigrants out (say, in Hardin’s “lifeboat” analogy). But others will argue that compassion and justice require a proactive approach to immigrants and refugees that deals with their present suffering, while also seeking to mitigate the push and pull factors by creating more equitable conditions across the globe.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 16: Sexual Morality

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. Is there anything wrong with pornography in general? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about some of the criticisms of pornography mentioned in the chapter opener (coercion, degradation of women, unhealthy sexuality). This could be used to open a general discussion of how sex and sexuality should be organized and controlled. It could be connected to a discussion of changing norms in our society and questions about technology, generational differences, social isolation, and so on. 2. Are you concerned about problems like sex trafficking, coercion, and images of violence and degradation in pornography? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to do some research on their own or with instructor guidance into the problem of sex trafficking (note the need for caution if doing research about pornography on the Internet). This could connect to a discussion of causality: for example, would viewing sexually violent imagery cause

actual sexual violence? There are also questions about what counts as “degradation” and how that connects to notions of human dignity and respect. Students could also reflect on the general problem of sexual violence and sexual harassment, and how that is connected to the growth of pornography. 3. Is the concept of “ethical pornography” a good or useful idea? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about what may count as ethical pornography. They should also consider whether this is a contradiction or oxymoron. This is connected to the words we use: is “pornography” always wrong or evil (would it change things if this was called “erotica”?). Students may want to connect this to questions about sexual education. How do young people get information about sex? And does it matter that porn is often one way that people are “educated” about sex (and what would that actually mean)? Students could also discuss the question of regulation versus prohibition, which will connect to the question of prostitution (Bentham v. Mill) that we discuss in the chapter. 4. Do you think there could in fact be “ethical porn”? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to reflect on the reality of there being such a thing. How would it be organized/regulated? And what would the punishment or prohibition be for nonethical porn? And what about the reality of exploitation and coercion, and the apparent availability of “extreme” pornography (and what would that mean)? This might connect, as well, to questions of sexual education. How could young people be educated in a way that encourages them to

avoid unethical porn? Or should this all be banned and prohibited (and not talked about)?

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS

1. What is the best approach to take with regard to sex: a hedonistic approach or an ascetic approach? Solution: Hedonism emphasizes pleasure, while asceticism counsels self-control and abstinence. Hedonism of the sort associated with Epicurus is not full-blown libertinism. Epicurus advised moderation in pursuit of pleasure. Asceticism aims toward some higher kind of good that transcends pleasure. In order to decide which is the best approach, a student would need to define these terms and then make an argument about the best approach to living a moral life. 2. What is “platonic friendship” or “platonic love,” and how is that idea related to other ideas about sex and love? Solution: Platonic friendship and platonic love are based on an ideal of nonsexual love. Plato thought that true love and true friendship were not based on sexual relations. Among his concerns was moving beyond a focus on pleasure and bodies toward something more spiritual. Plato’s view of sex, sexual desire, and attraction point beyond hedonism (and libertinism) toward an ideal that transcends sex and may also be a kind of asceticism.

3. What are some factual matters that would be relevant for consequentialist arguments regarding sexual behavior? Solution: The reality of sexually transmitted disease and pregnancy are important factual matters. It is also a matter of fact with regard to the efficacy of condoms and other forms of birth control to prevent disease and pregnancy. Consequentialists may also be interested in empirical questions about happiness, well-being, and coercion and how these are related to questions of sex addiction, sex work, and so on. Also relevant would be questions about sexual addiction and causal theories of sexual violence. 4. According to a Kantian type of morality, we ought to respect persons. What kinds of sexual actions would be morally objectionable from this standpoint? Solution: Kantian ethics would be opposed to rape and other forms of sex that are coercive, manipulative, and fail to respect persons. Kant extended this to a critique of homosexuality and masturbation, which he claimed were also degrading and below the dignity of human beings. If we are to employ a Kantian approach today, we may have to update his theory of sex, sexuality, and gender. Kant would also be opposed to prostitution and sex work, since it transforms sexual relations into a transaction that “uses” sex as a “means” for pleasure or money. 5. What are the two proper functions of sex from the natural law standpoint, and how does this apply to specific examples? Solution: The natural law theory maintains that sex ought to be reproductive and

loving: it ought to produce children and it ought to bring people together in loving relationship. Natural law thinkers such as John Finnis claim that homosexual relations are immoral from this standpoint, as is any nonmarital form of sex. This may also include the use of birth control, which impedes the reproductive function of sex. 6. What do you think about the debate between Carole Pateman and Jessica Flanigan regarding sex work? Solution: Pateman argues against sex work (what she calls “prostitution”) based on a feminist argument that prostitution makes women’s bodies available for purchase by men. She views this as a pernicious part of masculine sexuality (in a heterosexual context). Flanigan uses the term “sex work” (rather than “prostitution”) and argues that women (and men) should be free to use sex according to their own interests. She argues against coercive forms of sex work. But between freely consenting adults, Flanigan does not see a problem with it. Students would need to think about their opinions about feminist concerns and the importance of autonomy in evaluating this debate. 7. To what extent does the idea of “affirmative consent” help respond to the problem of sexual harassment and rape? Solution: Affirmative consent is the standard that requires “yes” (and merely not saying “no”). This is the current standard for sexual relations in universities and businesses. It is intended to indicate clear consent (and therefore respect autonomy). It aims to eliminate subtle forms of coercion and to prevent people from

taking advantage of drunk or incapacitated people. And it could be understood in connection with the general movement aiming to end sexual assault and harassment (as manifested in the recent “#MeToo” movement). 8. How do arguments about homosexuality and marriage equality connect to claims about other issues involving sexual morality, equality, and social justice in general? Solution: Society is more accepting of homosexuality, especially after key court cases such as Lawrence v. Texas (which overturned laws prohibiting “sodomy”) and Obergefell v. Hodges (which legalized same-sex marriage). Now that Obergefell has passed, it is preferable to speak of “marriage equality,” which indicates why this is a social justice issue—allowing for public recognition of people’s choices of sex/marriage partnerships. Critics (such as Antonin Scalia, in his dissent to Lawrence) are not supportive of the general move toward liberation and equality for LGBTQ+ people. And John Roberts in his dissent to Obergefell suggested that marriage equality opened a slippery slope to polygamous marriages. There is an open question about how far marriage equality and freedom of choice ought to extend, with natural law theorists arguing against these developments. On the other hand, authors like John Corvino emphasize respect for individual liberty and choice—and a concern for the happiness of LBGTQ+ people. And the Supreme Court ruled that the law ought to respect the choices of individuals with regard to marriage, without bias against their sexual orientation. 9. What kinds of ethical and social justice issues arise in thinking about trans people?

Solution: Trans people do not conform to the ordinary/traditional categories of gender. Often the focus is on trans men and trans women. But trans includes other concepts such as gender fluidity and the idea of a nonbinary gender identity. Some traditional/conservative people find this to be wrongheaded, insisting on a binary conception of gender—often coming to this point of view either from a religious or natural law framework. Feminists (such as J. K. Rowling) have also argued that the women’s rights movement is different from trans liberation and that women continue to need safe places, without the presence of trans women. Following this kind of argument, there has been legislation seeking to restrict trans people from participating in sports or using the bathrooms and locker rooms that fit their gender identity. Trans theorists such as Loren Cannon have argued that this is based on irrational fear, while maintaining that trans people deserve the same rights as cisgender people. 10. What kinds of argument are employed in discussions of whether sex work should be legal? Solution: Sex trafficking and other forms of coercion are significant concerns. So is the problem of disease. Some utilitarians (Bentham) argue that sex work would be safer if it were legal and regulated. But other utilitarians (Mill) suggest that sex work is degrading and should not be legal. In more recent decades, feminists have argued about the degree to which sex work (pornography and prostitution) contributes to misogyny and the degradation of women. Pateman argues that it is degrading and

should be banned. Flanigan claims that women should be free to sell themselves if that’s what they freely choose. In the chapter, we also discussed the question of whether pornography could be made in an ethical fashion that taught good sexual hygiene and was not coercive.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/ Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 17: Punishment and the Death Penalty

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. Should marijuana be legalized or decriminalized? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about (or research on their own, or with instructor help) the difference between legalization and decriminalization. They should be encouraged to consider arguments on all sides, including the issue of how drug criminalization contributes to incarceration rates (and possible racial disparities that result). 2. Should we be worried about high incarceration rates and racial disparities in incarceration? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about (or research on their own, or with instructor help) both current and historical incarceration rates and racial disparities (we provide some data and context in the chapter). The ethical question is whether this matters, which requires students to think about the

purpose and rationale of the prison system. 3. Are you in favor of criminal justice reform that reduces incarceration rates? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to consider past and current proposals for criminal justice and sentencing reform (including the reform of drug laws). Again, the ethics question is about the purpose and rationale of the prison system, and how thinking about that might lead one to support (or reject) concrete proposals for sentencing reform. 4. What kinds of penalties should be used to prevent drug and alcohol abuse, addiction, and driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol? Talking Points: The framing of this question assumes that there is a “penalty” involved. Students might be encouraged to research current penalties for DUI and other drug- and alcohol-related crimes and infractions. Note that we include alcohol here: students might be encouraged to think about past efforts at prohibition, as well as the problem of alcohol abuse (in addition to or in comparison with drug prohibition and abuse). It would be worth considering whether drug and alcohol addiction and abuse are best understood as medical concerns or as concerns of the criminal justice system.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. What essential characteristics of legal punishment distinguish it from other types of punishment?

Solution: Legal punishment involves a sanction, penalty, or punishment that is enforced by a legal and political structure. This is supposed to be administered by a system—the criminal justice system—that involves explicit laws, prescribed punishments, and procedures and policies for administering the law. This is different from punishment that occurs in families, which is more informal. And it shows us what is wrong with lynching and other extrajudicial acts of violence including revenge. 2. What is the significance of the idea of decarceration, and what is the goal of critics of mass incarceration? Solution: Decarceration is the policy or idea aiming at ending the system of mass incarceration. It may include a call to abolish prisons (cf. Angela Davis). A central issue here is whether it makes sense to have large numbers of people in prison or under court supervision. Proponents of decarceration argue that there is something perverse about a system of mass incarceration and that sentencing reform and other kinds of criminal justice reform ought to aim to reduce prison populations. 3. What is the difference between the mechanisms of deterrence and prevention? Given their meanings, does the death penalty prevent murders? Deter would-be killers? How? Solution: Prevention is about concrete steps that are taken to stop a criminal from committing a crime, such as locking up someone before they can commit a crime. Deterrence is more general and vague, aimed at deterring people from contemplating

crime. Utilitarians may support the death penalty as a deterrent (cf. Mill). However, there are disputes about the deterrent value of the death penalty, with most experts agreeing that the contemporary death penalty has very little if any deterrent value. One problem has to do with the psychology of would-be criminals, especially would-be murderers. It may be that would-be murderers are not afraid of dying, think they won’t get caught, or that they have some mental defect that prevents them from thinking rationally about the risk of punishment. 4. If legal punishment works as a deterrent for murder, how does it work? For whom would it work? How might the death penalty be constructed so it has a deterrent effect? Solution: It would likely work for rational would-be killers who are weighing the pros and cons of their actions. A rational would-be killer would consider the severity of the punishment, the likelihood of getting caught, and so on. A significant problem for the deterrent argument with regard to the contemporary death penalty is that a death sentence is very unlikely. For the death penalty to work as a deterrent it would need to be more certain and possibly more public—so that would-be killers are more likely to consider the possibility of being executed. 5. How do the retributivist arguments differ from the deterrence arguments with regard to the death penalty? Solution: Retributivist arguments focus on desert. They tend to come from a standpoint of natural law or deontology. The idea of lex talionis requires “eye for eye, life for life.” This is a clear justification of the death penalty. This approach is not necessarily

interested in deterrence or other outcomes of the death penalty (since it is a nonconsequentialist approach). 6. Explain the idea of restorative justice and the possibility of alternatives to incarceration. Solution: Restorative justice aims to repair harm, reconcile victims and offenders, and restore communities that are disrupted by crime. This can include alternatives to incarceration—such as community service—that actively work to rehabilitate criminals and help them to take responsibility and make amends. 7. What is the lex talionis view of punishment? How does it differ from the proportional view? Solution: The lex talionis idea of retributive justice sets up an equivalence: eye for eye, life for life. This is often understood as both a minimum (at least this much punishment) and a maximum (no more than this amount of punishment). A proportional interpretation of retributive justice attempts to deal with the problem that strict equivalences can seem harsh and impractical (how do we punish rape, for example, in the lex talionis view?). The proportional approach sets up some system of proportional responses to criminal acts, such as a number of years in prison or a fine as a punishment. 8. Discuss the arguments for and against the identification of retributivism with revenge. Solution: Retributivism is typically not understood as revenge. Revenge is an emotional

response to harm that can sometimes be excessive. Revenge is also personal. Retributivism is supposed to be impartial and not emotional, and so retributive justice is typically administered by courts or some disinterested party. But critics of retributivism may suggest that it is just another form of revenge, as society taking revenge on criminals. 9. Why is the notion of responsibility critical to the retributivist view of legal punishment? How does the insanity defense fit in here? Solution: Retributivism typically holds that criminals deserve to be punished (desert is a key idea in retributivism) because they are responsible for the acts they have committed. This idea of responsibility depends on some account of free will, which assumes that the criminal knew what they were doing was wrong and chose to do it anyway. The insanity defense can be used in response to this model by arguing that the accused criminal did not know what they were doing or that they were not otherwise free and responsible at the time the crime was committed. 10. What is the significance of racial disparities in thinking about the system of punishment? Solution: There are fairly obvious racial disparities in incarceration in the United States— and also in the death penalty. Some may argue that if members of certain racial groups commit more crimes, these disparities can be explained and justified. But most critics agree that the explanation also includes the problem of structural racism in the criminal justice system, which has to do with problems like racial profiling (cf.

Alexander). As Alexander explains, racial disparities help to create a system that disenfranchises and oppresses people, which she calls “the new Jim Crow.”

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/ Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 18: Peace, Violence, and War

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1.

What is the best moral response to wars such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about (or research on their own, or with instructor help) the causes of the war in Ukraine. Students should also be encouraged to consider other recent wars, even including a comparison with the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq during the war on terrorism (as discussed in what follows in this chapter). A key issue here is to think about “just causes” for war (as defined by just war theory). Also, students may want to consider whether the United States and others should supply weapons to Ukraine and related questions about other conflicts. This question can be used as a preliminary discussion of realist, pacifist, and just war thinking about war.

Did Russian commit war crimes (and what counts as a war crime)? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about (or research on their own, or with instructor help) the idea of war crimes and events on the ground in

Ukraine (and in other conflicts). The idea war crime is connected to just war theory and international law, as discussed in the chapter. 3.

How can war crimes be prosecuted and punished? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about (or research on their own, or with instructor help) about how war crimes are prosecuted and punished under international law (we do discuss this in the chapter that follows). There are also questions to be considered about responses to war crimes: does the existence of war crimes justify war in response, and how might these crimes be prevented? The issue of war crimes can be extended to thinking about a variety of other cases and examples, including the U.S.-led war on terrorism.

How can we prevent future wars? Talking Points: This question asks students to use their imagination about constructing a more peaceful future. What would it look like and how likely is it that we could create a more peaceful world? There is a connection here to pacifism, which offers some idealistic notions about a world beyond war. But just war theory is also concerned with this question (sometimes connected to the jus post bellum idea of creating a just and lasting peace after war. FYI: This is not discussed in the present chapter). And realists are also interested in this question, although they may suggest a structure of deterrence and balance of power as part of the solution.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1.

Why is the just war theory considered a middle path between realism and pacifism? Solution: Realists think moral judgment does not apply in war, while pacifists think that war cannot be justified. Just war theory is often situated in the middle. Unlike pacifism, just war theory accepts that some wars can be justified. But unlike realism, just war theory imposes moral constraints on warfare.

What arguments can be made in defense of pacifism? Solution: Some religious pacifists argue against war on the basis of claims about love (in Christianity) or ahimsa (in Gandhian and South Asian traditions). Others argue that war is not effective (consequentialist) or on deontological grounds that war is simply wrong or evil. Related claims can be made about the effectiveness of nonviolence or the imperative to act nonviolently.

What kinds of nonviolent strategies might be employed in social protest movements? Solution: The Gandhi–King–Lawson movement includes strategies of nonviolence familiar from the American Civil Rights Movement and the Indian liberation movement. This includes strikes, embargoes, and boycotts. It may also include civil disobedience. In Gandhi’s philosophy this is known as satyagraha, which can mean “truth force” or “love force.”

Why might someone suggest that war can be used in pursuit of peace or justice? Solution: The just war theory makes this kind of argument. Grotius said it in his

writing. The idea is that injustice must be responded to with war if necessary, and that threats to the peace must be prevented and combatted. The idea also points to the goal of war, which ought to be peace or justice. 5.

List and explain the basic principles of jus ad bellum and jus in bello. Apply these principles to a recent war. Solution: Jus ad bellum includes just cause, legitimate authority, proportionality, right intention, and last resort. Jus in bello includes proportionality, discrimination, and a ban on intrinsically evil means. This can be applied to recent examples in various ways. In the Ukraine war, for example, just war theory will tend to hold, as Michael Walzer explained in the passage quoted in the text, that Ukraine has a just cause to fight against Russian aggression. Walzer also suggests that Russia had failed to discriminate between combatants and noncombatants. Other examples are discussed throughout the text and can be imagined from some research about recent conflicts.

How might just war principles be applied to issues such as targeted assassination and war crimes? Solution: Just war theory may be reluctant to affirm targeted assassination, since it seems to spread violence far from the battlefield. But the use of drones and other limited kinds of attacks (e.g., by special forces) might be justified as more proportional and discriminate than an invasion or some other kind of attack (such as aerial bombardment). Just war theory also helps to explain the idea of war crimes. One type of crime, aggression, is a crime against the peace, and it provides a classic example of

a just cause for war. Within war there are also war crimes involving the use of illegal weapons, torture, rape, and deliberate killing of noncombatants. These crimes typically violate principles of jus in bello, including the principle of discrimination and the ban on actions that are “evil in themselves” (mala in se). 7.

Can terrorism or torture be justified? On what grounds? What would pacifists, just war theorists, and realists each say? Solution: Terrorism and torture are typically prohibited by just war theory. Terrorism deliberately attacks noncombatants, and so violates the principle of discrimination. Torture is often included among those actions that are evil in themselves. Pacifists would obviously reject both torture and terrorism as unjustifiable violence. Realists may be more sympathetic to torture and to terrorism if these activities work. This shows that those who support terrorism and torture will often appeal to consequentialist reasoning.

How does the principle of double effect apply in just war thinking? Solution: The principle of double effect is used to allow for or explain away “collateral damage” that occurs when noncombatants are killed as an unintended (accidental) secondary effect of a legitimate war aim. For example, if a bomb is aimed at a legitimate enemy target but some noncombatants wander into targeted area, this could be justified by claiming that the original target was justifiable and that the noncombatants killed were killed accidentally or unintentionally. Pacifists typically reject this kind of moral justification.

What counts as a “war crime” or a “crime against humanity”? And what is the problem of victor’s justice? Solution: War crimes are actions that violate basic principles of jus in bello. They include abuse of prisoners, torture, the use of rape, and indiscriminate killing. Crimes against humanity involve actions taken in war that include genocide, ethnic cleansing, and other criminal activities such as slavery, sexual abuse and exploitation, and so on. The problem of victor’s justice indicates the fact that the victors often accuse those they have defeated of war crimes and crimes against humanity. This indicates a onesided and biased application of the idea. Realists may use this as an argument about the need for victory. The problem can be resolved by supporting unbiased international institutions that prosecute war crimes.

10. How might the concepts of this chapter be used to evaluate some current issues involving peace, nonviolent protest, and violence: for example, social justice protests, school shootings, structural violence, or domestic violence? Solution: Advocates of nonviolence such as James Lawson, Mohandas K. Gandhi, and Martin Luther King, Jr. argued that social protest ought to be nonviolent. Gandhi called his idea of nonviolent protest satyagraha (truth force or love force). The advocates of nonviolence argue that this is morally superior and that it can be effective. There are deep problems involving violence that go beyond a discussion of war. School shootings and other acts of “domestic terrorism” are one of these problems. The concepts of this chapter would condemn this kind of violence. Pacifists reject all

violence, while just war theory holds that random (indiscriminate) killing is evil. Structural violence is a related problem, which reminds us that there is a difference between direct/overt violence and other kinds of violence that are less overt or direct. This might include structures that perpetuate and support domestic violence. Pacifists help to articulate a vision of positive peace that might move us beyond structural violence.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala, Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 19: Environmental Ethics

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1.

Do present generations have a duty to reduce carbon emissions for the benefit of future generations? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about (or research on their own, or with instructor help) the meaning of carbon emissions and how this relates to climate change. But the primary focus of this question is the moral question of a duty to future generations. Is there such a duty? How is it related to other duties (say to unborn fetuses)? In introducing topics to be considered in this chapter, students should be encouraged to think about the source of moral concern about climate change (and how concern for future generations connects to the topic of “environmental justice” and is related to “anthropocentric” concerns).

Are you concerned about the damage that a changing climate might inflict on

nonhuman nature, including the risk of mass extinctions? Talking Points: Unlike the previous question, which asks about an anthropocentric concern for future generations of human beings, this questions is about non-anthropocentric concerns. Students should be encouraged to think about (or research on their own, or with instructor help) how climate change will affect nonhuman species. But the focus here is on a moral question of whether these nonhuman impacts matter. 3.

What kinds of things should people (including yourself) do to prevent and mitigate the risk of climate change? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to think about personal steps that could be taken to limit climate change (students could research on their own, or with instructor help), including driving less, consuming fewer plastics, eating lower on the food chain, using less heating and cooling, etc. Students should be encouraged to think about trade-offs between shortterm self-interest and long-term well-being in a way that connects back to the chapter on egoism (Chapter 4) and that connects to the “tragedy of the commons” as discussed toward the end of the present chapter.

Is individual action enough or do we also need a systematic and structural approach to climate change?-And what kinds of ethical ideas might help to support structural change at the international level? Talking Points: Climate change is a global, structural problem. Students

should be encouraged to reflect on the difficulty of creating and enforcing international agreements about climate change (which is discussed in the present chapter). They should be encouraged to do some research on their own—or with instructor help—regarding international proposals regarding carbon-dioxide levels, sustainable development, and how such mechanisms might work. The ethical question is about moral frameworks that might help us make sense of this. This should involve the concepts and distinctions discussed in the present chapter: anthropocentrism, environmental justice, ecocentrism, and so on.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. What is the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value? Give an example of each. Solution: Things with intrinsic value have value in themselves, apart from their usefulness (for us); instrumental values are values understood in relation to human usages (and so are usually understood in relation to anthropocentrism). “Ecosystem services” is an idea connected to instrumental value—and to anthropocentrism. Intrinsic value is typically non-anthropocentric. When a tree is viewed as wood and pulp, this is instrumental; when a tree is seen as having value in itself apart from these human uses, this is intrinsic value.

2. What is anthropocentrism? How is it different from ecocentrism? Solution: Anthropocentrism literally means “human centered.” It is concerned with the impact of environmental issues on human interests. Pollution, for example, can be understood as an anthropocentric problem insofar as it has negative impacts on human health. Ecocentrism is focused on non-anthropocentric orientation that considers the impact of environmental issues on nature and natural objects considered in themselves (and apart from human interests). Pollution, from the standpoint of ecocentrism, is a problem that has adverse impacts on nonhuman things: fish, animals, plants, ecosystems, and so on. 3. How do cost–benefit analyses function in environmental arguments? Give an example of an environmental problem today and how cost–benefit analysis could be used to analyze it. Solution: Cost–benefit analysis tends to be useful from within an anthropocentric point of view. With regard to pollution, there are “benefits” from pollution understood in relation to the goods and services that human beings enjoy but that cause pollution. For example, in the production of automobiles and in their use (burning fossil fuels), pollution is produced. But the environmental costs of automobiles must be balanced in terms of the benefit produced by the automobile. 4. Explain how the concept of environmental justice can be used to provide a critical analysis of the impact of pollution. Solution: Environmental justice focuses on social impacts of environmental issues,

typically beginning from the fact of oppression and inequality. The impact of pollution typically lands with more weight on those who are marginalized and disenfranchised, that is, poor people, people of color, and people in the developing world. At the same time, the affluent consumers who enjoy the benefits of industrial production typically do not suffer from the adverse impact of pollution to the same extent as poor people do. This appears to be unfair—or unjust. 5. What is Aldo Leopold’s basic principle for determining what is right and wrong in environmental matters? Solution: Leopold’s “land ethic” focuses on the integrity of the land (and also on soils, watersheds, ecosystems, etc.). His idea is holistic. He suggests that things are right when they help to support the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community; things are wrong when they undermine these goods. 6. Analyze the critical perspective of Indigenous people and controversies about racism in the conservation movement. Solution: Indigenous peoples are often viewed as having an ecocentric worldview that is focused on respect for “Mother Earth.” Winona LaDuke was cited as a proponent of that point of view. Indigenous approaches do not see “wilderness” as devoid of people (unlike some versions of deep ecology). The early conservation movement tended to focus on wild nature that had been emptied of native peoples. We cited Muir and Audubon as having racist ideas. The contemporary environmental movement is critically revisiting these earlier voices.

7. What is deep ecology? According to this view, what are the root causes of our environmental problems? Solution: Deep ecology is an ecocentric (and non-anthropocentric) idea. It tends to be critical of prevailing Western, capitalist worldviews, including our tendency to view human beings as separate from nature. Deep ecology offers a different approach to the world, one focused on a holistic understanding of the human place within nature. The cause of current problems is located in religions, political systems, economies, and philosophical ideas that celebrate atomic individualism, profit-taking, and domination of nature. 8. Explain how ecofeminism could be used to analyze a problem such as the adverse impacts of pollution on poor people. Solution: Ecofeminists argue that there is a connection between human domination of nature and male domination of females. They also often extend their critical perspective to include the history of colonialism and the exploitation of the poor and people of color, claiming that environmental problems are caused by this kind of social inequality. The problems of environmental injustice, when viewed from the standpoint of ecofeminism, are understood as in connection with the general problem of domination, inequality, and oppression. 9. What is the problem of the tragedy of the commons, and how is it connected to capitalism and the idea of property rights? Solution: The tragedy of the commons occurs when self-interested people pursue

their own self-interest without restraint and without concern for the common good. This problem seems to appear in laissez-faire versions of capitalism, which focus only on the right of property owners to do what they want with their property. The problem is that if each property owner develops their resources (and creates pollution) without regard for common resources, each will end up with worse outcomes than if there were regulations or cooperation with regard to “the commons.” 10. How are conflicts in environmental ethics connected to questions of global justice? Solution: Pollution and exploitation of the environment have contributed to the domination of the developed world at the expense of the developing world. There are remaining conflicts in thinking about global justice and economic development. Developing countries want to be able to exploit their resources, but this comes into conflict with the emerging need to restrain growth. This is an issue that Guha touches on, which involves the domination of the environmental ethics discourse by voices from the developed world. Garrett Hardin also touches on this with his “lifeboat” metaphor that sees the world as involved in competition for survival. A global concern for environmental justice would offer a critique of the lifeboat metaphor by emphasizing the needs of people in the developing world.

Solution and Answer Guide Fiala/Mackinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, Chapter 20: Animal Ethics and Beyond

WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. Is hunting or “free-range” meat preferable to the meat produced by factory farming? Why? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to make an argument, rather than merely expressing an opinion. To do so, they may want to engage in some preliminary research (either on their own or with instructor help) regarding “factory farming,” “free-range” meat, and hunting. Their argument should be based in some larger ethical and/or metaphysical theory—that’s essential to the “why” question. For example, students might think that animals don’t have souls and so are not worthy of moral consideration; or students may agree with a kind of nonanthropocentric utilitarianism. The instructor might note (as we explain in the chapter) that “factory farming” can be viewed as a pejorative term that loads the question (but we use it here because it will probably be familiar to students).

2. What ethical rules and regulations ought to govern hunting and animal agriculture? Talking Points: Students may want to do a bit of preliminary research (either on their own or with instructor help) about the kinds of regulations that do apply. (FYI: We discuss some of this in the chapter.) If they are vegetarians, they should be encouraged to think about the question of whether these regulations are still needed in a world in which there are hunters and meat eaters, or whether they really think that hunting and meat eating should be abolished. Among the issues that students might want to think about are hunting/fishing licensing and kill/catch limits; the need for healthy and safe food; the problem of overpopulation of animals; and issues regarding pollution and waste from animal agriculture. 3. Are the vegans and vegetarians right that it would be better to eat less meat or to stop eating meat entirely? Talking Points: Students should be encouraged to do some preliminary research (either on their own or with instructor help) about the varieties of vegetarianism (pescatarian, lacto-ovo vegetarian, etc.) and about the kinds of commitments found in veganism. If students are vegan/vegetarian, they should be encouraged to think about the question of whether this should be commanded/legislated for others or whether it is merely an individual choice (also, whether it is supererogatory). The meat-eating students should be encouraged to make reasonable arguments against vegan/vegetarianism, meaning they should try to understand the veg. argument and then explain which ideas/premises are flawed.

4. What kinds of animals is it acceptable to hunt, to farm, and to eat? Talking Points:: Here students should be encouraged to think broadly about the range of animals (from snails and crickets to chimpanzees and elephants). One issue that may arise here has to do with cultural differences about what people will and won’t eat. They should be encouraged to ask whether these cultural differences point to any deeper moral claims. At some point, it might be worth mentioning that human beings are animals and ask the question of how cannibalism factors into their thinking. Finally, it might be worth pointing to the last section of the present chapter, where we consider extraterrestrial life. Would it be OK to eat an E.T.? Would it be OK for the E.T. to eat us? That should prompt some fun discussion, but make sure that there are basic principles under discussion and not merely a fun excursion into science fiction.

REVIEW EXERCISES SOLUTIONS 1. In your view, is it acceptable to hunt animals? If yes, then which animals: bears, wolves, elephants, or whales? Does the method matter? Is trapping or aerial hunting acceptable? Justify your answers using concepts from this chapter. Solution: Students should make a distinction with regard to both the matter (hunting/eating meat) and the method (how it occurs) that is grounded in some theory or set of criteria that explains which animals can be hunted and how the hunting ought to proceed. Some of the concepts to be employed include

anthropocentrism vs. non-anthropocentrism, animal welfare vs. animal rights, and some claims about the importance of sentience, pain/pleasure, intelligence, and so on. 2. What counts as cruelty to animals? What’s wrong with cruelty to animals? Solution: Good answers should provide a clear definition of “cruelty” and might also include some consideration of how this occurs and with regard to which kinds of animals. There is a continuum here: from the treatment of animals in labs and on farms to dog fighting, rodeos, and neglect of family pets. A good answer should include some discussion of Kant’s concern that when people are cruel to animals, they may end up being cruel to other humans. Students may also want to include some details about anti-cruelty legislation (we have some of this in the chapter, but there may be rules/regulations that are local or specific to certain circumstances not mentioned in the text, say rodeos or bullfighting). 3. What do you think about the fact that certain cultures practice hunting and fishing? Does cultural heritage matter in thinking about hunting whales, dolphins, and other animals? Solution: In the chapter we discussed the example of the Makah tribe and its quest to resume whale hunting, which is opposed by the Sea Shepherd organization. Cultural claims about hunting and fishing are anthropocentric. To focus on cultural heritage is to focus on human concerns/interests. But an organization like Sea Shepherd may have a more non-anthropocentric point of view. Good answers to

this question will explore the idea of culture as an anthropocentric concern that may be at odds with a non-anthropocentric concern for nonhuman animals. 4. List some anthropocentric reasons for protecting individual animals and/or endangered animal species. Solution: Good answers should include some of the following: human interest in healthy animals for eating; human concern for the well-being of domesticated/companion animals (e.g., seeing-eye dogs that help human beings); animals as human property (and profit). With regard to endangered species, this might have some connection with more general environmental concerns (i.e., the health of an ecosystem is good for human beings). There may also be an anthropocentric concern in profiting from endangered species, say through ecotourism or high-cost hunting expeditions that bring revenue to game parks. 5. Do animals have interests, feel pleasure, and experience pain? Are these interests, pains, and pleasures worth “equal consideration”? Is it “speciesist” to ignore or downplay animal experience? Solution: This question points to an analysis based on concepts associated with Peter Singer. Students should define the relevant concepts including “equal consideration” (which is NOT the same as substantive equality) and “speciesism” (an unjustified preference for members of your own species). Students should also affirm some claim about the topic—that is, they should declare whether they think animals have interests or feel pleasure/pain, and what evidence they have for

thinking so. It is also worth noting that this approach tends to be a utilitarian one, and that equal consideration may still allow for some limited usages of animals as an outcome of a non-anthropocentric utilitarian calculation. 6. What is the meaning of the term rights? Does it make sense to apply this term to animals? Why or why not? Solution: Student should provide some definition of “rights” connected to concepts discussed, such as the idea that individual animals are “subjects of life” (cf. Regan). They should also consider some of the following: whether a being needs to “claim” or understand its rights in order to have them; whether reciprocity is needed; and whether rights are definitive trump cards that prevent harm, or whether there can be trade-offs of rights. Given a student’s definition of rights, they then need to show that some animals have these rights. This might include some distinctions among animals: maybe elephants have rights (as discussed in the chapter) but snails do not. Those distinctions should be grounded in some definition of rights and in some account of the animal in question. 7. Evaluate moral arguments in defense of vegetarianism. Are these arguments persuasive? Solution: Moral arguments in defense of vegetarianism should be distinguished from health reasons for vegetarianism. Good answers will also distinguish among types of vegetarianism (especially veganism). This should also probably include some account of the “abolition v. reform” question. It may also include some

discussion of the question of the kind of normative force of the vegetarian argument: does it require that all people stop eating meat or is it a supererogatory duty? 8. Do animal species have moral standing of some sort, or is the value of an animal found in its individual life? And how might that question guide our thinking about hunting and endangered species? Solution: This points to questions about the preservation of endangered species and about harvesting animals for the well-being of the herd. Animal rights advocates tend to focus on the rights of individual animals, which is related to the individual animal’s experience, capacities, dignity, and worth. But species also have a kind of value. Good answers will recognize this issue. Thus we might have an obligation to save the last member of an endangered species, both because the animal has value as an individual and because the animal is a representative of the species. Some argument is needed to sort that out. With regard to hunting, the question is whether some animals can be killed (sacrificed, culled, harvested . . . the language includes some moral evaluation) in order to control the population of the herd/species. 9. What reasons do supporters give for using nonhuman animals in experimental research? What objections to this practice do their opponents raise? Be sure your answer makes reference to issues such as the extent and purpose of pain. Solution: Good answers should include some specificity regarding the kinds of

goods to be obtained from animal research, as well as the risk of pain and suffering for the animals involved A good answer from an anthropocentric perspective may make an argument similar to that of Bonnie Steinbock, who claims there is nothing wrong with preferring members of your own species. A different answer, associated with Peter Singer, will claim that that idea is “speciesist.” Good answers may also reflect on the “reform v. abolish” problem. On the side of the reformists is the concept we’ve described here as “the three R’s”: reduce, replace, and refine. Abolitionists will find that reformist idea to be inadequate10. escribe and defend your thinking about the general value of nonhuman beings—including nonhuman animals and even extraterrestrial life and sentient computers. What are your basic criteria for thinking that a being is a “moral patient”? Solution: Good answers will provide some account of the criteria for being an object of moral concern (= a moral patient). Whatever the criteria that are argued for, the student should then apply to animals, extraterrestrials, and AI. Some of this will be hypothetical, for example, with regard to E.T. and AI. But with regard to nonhuman terrestrial animals, students should be able to state some definitive conclusions. Those conclusions should rest on both an account of the criteria for being a moral patient and some detail about the specific capacities of particular animals. Students may also be encouraged to extend this to think about fetuses, brain-dead humans, and other so-called “marginal cases.”

Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Perspective of the Chapter ..................................................... 3 Supplements ....................................................................................... 3 Chapter Objectives .................................................................................. 4 Key Terms .......................................................................................... 4 What's New in This Chapter ..................................................................... 4 Chapter Outline ...................................................................................... 4 Additional Discussion Questions ............................................................... 6 Additional Activities and Assignments ........................................................ 7 Additional Resources ............................................................................. 9 Internet and Media Resources ........................................................... 9 Appendix ................................................................................................... 10 Generic Rubrics .................................................................................. 10 Standard Writing Rubric ......................................................................... 10 Standard Discussion Rubric ..................................................................... 11

Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces some key ethics concepts, beginning with the differences between normative ethics and metaethics and between normative and descriptive ethics. Normative ethics posits what is good or just, whereas metaethics asks questions about the sources of our norms. Descriptive claims focus on facts rather than values. The author moves onto the naturalistic fallacy which suggests you cannot simply go from an "is" to an "ought". It is not moral to go from a descriptive claim to an ethical claim. The chapter reviews the naturalistic explanation of sociobiology, a discipline which describes ethics in naturalistic terms. Intuitionism, emotivism, objectivism, and subjectivism are also discussed as metaethical theories The chapter defines and distinguishes intrinsic and instrumental value. The chapter briefly covers sound and valid arguments; fallacies are weak arguments. Finally, the chapter covers consequentialism and nonconsequentialism. Consequentialism focuses on producing good outcomes; non consequentialism is concerned with motives and intention. Associated Readings Reading 1-1: Ethical Judgments and Matters of Fact / David Hume Reading 1-2: Emotivism and Ethics / C. L. Stevenson Reading 1-3: Good, Yellow, and the Naturalistic Fallacy / G. E. Moore Reading 1-4: The Social Conquest of Earth / E. O. Wilson Reading 1-5: Ethics, Mores, and Race / Naomi Zack [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

MindTap Educator Guide o A detailed list of the activities and assets in your MindTap course. PowerPoints

Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 1.1

Explain the difference between normative ethics and metaethics.

1.2

Explain the difference between normative and descriptive claims.

1.3

Decide whether naturalistic explanations of ethics commit the naturalistic fallacy.

1.4

Define key terms: intuitionism, emotivism, objectivism, and subjectivism.

1.5

Differentiate between instrumental and intrinsic values.

1.6

Explain sound and valid arguments as well as some fallacies of reasoning.

1.7

Evaluate consequentialist and nonconsequentialist approaches to ethics.

[return to top]

Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

KEY TERMS Ad hominem: A phrase meaning “to the person”; ad hominem arguments are (usually) fallacious arguments that attack a person rather than the person’s idea or logical reasoning. Aesthetics: The study of beauty and taste. Begging the question: A fallacious argument in which the conclusion is assumed in the premises (also called a circular argument). Care Ethics: Ethical theory that emphasizes nurturing relationships, while downplaying autonomy and individualism (associated with Noddings). Circular argument: A fallacious argument that assumes what it seeks to prove (also called begging the question). Consequentialist: Normative theories that focus on the consequences of actions; examples include egoism, altruism, utilitarianism (versus non-consequentialism). Deontological: Normative theory that morality ought to be focused on duties and adherence to rules and imperatives (associated with Kant). Descriptive claims: Propositions that state true or false claims about facts in the world. Egoism: Normative or ethical egoism claims that we ought to pursue our own selfinterest; descriptive egoism (also called psychological egoism) maintains that as a matter of fact we can pursue only our own self-interest (versus altruism). Emotivism: Metaethical idea that ethical propositions express emotional states (associated with Stevenson). Epistemology: Theory of knowledge. Feminism: Intellectual commitment and a political movement that seeks justice for women and the end of sexism in all forms. Hume’s law: The claim (derived from David Hume’s thinking) that it is illegitimate to derive an “ought” from an “is”; see also naturalistic fallacy. Intuitionism: Metaethical idea that ethical truths are objective and irreducible and can be known by faculty of intuition (associated with Moore). Metaethics: Study of moral concepts and the logic of ethical language.

Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

Metaphysics The study of ultimate reality including the meaning and purpose of things. Moral realism: The idea that there are ethical facts and that moral judgments can be said to be true or false; see also objectivism. Natural law: A theory of law that is grounded in claims about nature; natural law ethics is a normative theory that holds that reason can discover objective ethical norms by examining natural human functions (associated with Aquinas). Naturalistic fallacy: argument that inappropriately derives normative claims from descriptive claims (associated with Moore); see also Hume’s law. Nonconsequentialist: Normative theories that do not focus on consequences of actions but instead on intentions, rules, or principles; examples include deontology, divine command, and natural law (versus consequentialism). Normative ethics: Study of prescriptive accounts of how we ought to behave. Normative judgments: Evaluative or prescriptive claims about what is good, evil, just, and the like. Objectivist: Metaethical idea that ethical propositions refer to objective facts (versus subjectivism); see also moral realism. Premises: The reasons given in an argument that provide support for the argument’s conclusion. Relativism: A variety of claims that deny the objectivity of values, including: descriptive relativism, individual relativism (or subjectivism), metaethical relativism, and social or cultural relativism. Social contract theory: The idea that social norms and political agreement are derived from a mutually beneficial contract to which the parties would consent (associated with Hobbes, Locke, and Rawls). Sociobiology: A field of study that applies evolutionary and comparative biology to understanding social phenomena, including ethical behaviors. Sound argument: A valid argument with true premises. Subjectivism: Metaethical idea that ethical propositions refer to subjective dispositions or values (versus objectivism); see also individual relativism, descriptive relativism, metaethical relativism.

Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

Teleological: Adjective used to describe ideas and theories that are focused on goals, purposes, or outcomes (related to consequentialism). Utilitarianism: Normative theory that we ought to concern ourselves with the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people (associated with Bentham and Mill). Virtue ethics: Normative theory that maintains that the focus of morality is habits, dispositions, and character traits (associated with Aristotle).

[return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

II.

Introduction — Icebreaker (Slides 4–5) A. Discussion of where students learned their ethics (e.g., family, school church friends, etc.), and why we ought to study ethics. Normative Ethics and Metaethics (Slides 6–7) A. Introduction of normative ethics and metaethics and the difference between the two. B. Major Normative Theories i. Utilitarianism We should promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number. ii. Kantian deontology Moral duty should be focused on universal rules that are not concerned with consequences. iii. Natural law Moral laws are found in nature and discernible by reason.

Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

iv.

III.

IV.

VI.

VII.

Virtue ethics Moral theory that focuses on character traits and good habits. Ethical and Other Types of Evaluation (Slide 8) A. Normative claims B. Descriptive claims Sociobiology and the Naturalistic Fallacy (Slides 9–11) A. David Hume's law B. G. E. Moore A. Natural Law Ethics i. Naturalistic fallacy B. Sociobiology i. Natural selection ii. Altruism Intuitionism, Emotivism, Subjectivism, Objectivism (Slides 12–16) A. Intuitionism i. G. E. Moore ii. W. D. Ross B. Emotivism i. Subjective ii. Hume, Smith, Kass C. Objectivism i. Moral realism ii. Values and objective reality D. Subjectivism Instrumental and Intrinsic Goods (Slide 17) A. Useful goods B. Goods that have value in themselves Ethical Reasoning and Arguments (Slides 18–24) A. Premises B. Conclusion C. Sound and valid arguments i. Sound argument ii. Valid argument D. Fallacies of reasoning i. Begging the question ii. Ad hominem E. Class Activity: Cannabis i. Discussion about how we might use laws about alcohol to determine the best case for cannabis law. Connect students'

Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

VIII.

IX.

ideas to a larger discussion about how arguments from analogy can be very effective if the cases being considered are similar in relevant ways. F. Ethical Theory i. Ethical theory ii. Judgments G. Elements of an Act i. Motive ==> Act ==> Consequence Types of Ethical Theory (Slides 25–26) A. Consequentialist versus nonconsequentialist Theories i. Consequences versus motives ii. Teleology versus deontology B. Critical Theory of ethics i. Amia Srinivasan ii. Naomi Zack Class Activity: Can Ethics Be Taught? (Slide 27) A. Discussion about whether or not ethics can be taught and why some colleges might require ethics.

[return to top]

Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

students can talk about the philosophers who have espoused emotivism as a valid moral process. 3. Do you think that an action ought to be judged morally in terms of its motive, its consequences, the action itself, or some combination of these? Explain your answer. Talking Points: Students should be able to identify the elements of an act. Students should also be able to connect moral theories to the elements of an act, i.e., consequentialism is connected to consequences. They should be able to begin to talk about their own moral views in terms of moral theories and the model of an act. [return to top]

Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. Examined Life is a 2008 Canadian documentary film about philosophers engaging in discussions of philosophical ethics and reflecting upon the nature of such engagement. The film features eight influential modern philosophers walking around New York and other metropolises, discussing the practical application of their ideas in modern culture. As you watch the film, it quickly becomes clear how much the participants value a person’s ability and willingness to question what they observe in the world around them. That is, Examined Life is an excellent example of people engaging in philosophical ethics because the people interviewed exemplify the critical disposition that is essential to philosophical inquiry. This type of inquiry will help you come to a better understanding of your own values and the values of others. The philosophers featured are Cornel West, Avital Ronell, Peter Singer, Kwame Anthony Appiah, Martha Nussbaum, Michael Hardt, Slavoj Žižek, and Judith Butler, who is accompanied by disability activist Sunaura Taylor. • • • • • • • • • • •

1:53 Cornel West 3:47 Avital Ronell 11:42 Peter Singer 21:32 Kwame Anthony Appiah 26:22 Martha Nussbaum 34:23 Cornel West 41:40 Michael Hardt 51:27 Slavoj Žižek 1:01:52 Sunaura Taylor and Judith Butler 1:16:15 Cornel West 1:21:58 End Credits

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES •

Good: Intrinsic vs. Instrumental. Thinking about Stuff (2021), 2 minutes 13 seconds.

Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

• •

Consequentialism: Ethics Defined. McCombs School of Business (2019), 1 minute 48 seconds. Ethical Dilemma: Would You Lie? TED-Ed, by Sarah Stroud, 4 minutes 1 second.

[return to top]

Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

APPENDIX GENERIC RUBRICS Providing students with rubrics helps them understand expectations and components of assignments. Rubrics help students become more aware of their learning process and progress, and they improve students’ work through timely and detailed feedback. Customize these rubric templates as you wish. The writing rubric indicates 40 points, and the discussion rubric indicates 30 points.

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Meets Requirements The assignment clearly and comprehensively addresses all questions in the assignment. 15 points The assignment presents ideas in a clear manner and with strong organizational structure. The assignment includes an appropriate introduction, content, and conclusion. Coverage of facts, arguments, and conclusions is logically related and consistent. 10 points

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Needs Improvement The assignment partially addresses some or all questions in the assignment. 8 points The assignment presents ideas in a mostly clear manner and with a mostly strong organizational structure. The assignment includes an appropriate introduction, content, and conclusion. Coverage of facts, arguments, and conclusions is mostly logically related and consistent. 7 points The assignment is based upon adequate academic literature but does not include peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 3 points The assignment follows some of the required citation guidelines. 3 points The assignment has three to five grammatical and spelling errors. 3 points

Incomplete The assignment does not address the questions in the assignment. 0 points The assignment does not present ideas in a clear manner and with strong organizational structure. The assignment includes an introduction, content, and conclusion, but coverage of facts, arguments, and conclusions is not logically related and consistent. 0 points The assignment is not based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature and does not include peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 0 points The assignment does not follow the required citation guidelines. 0 points The assignment is incomplete or unintelligible. 0 points

Chapter 01: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Meets Requirements Submits or participates in discussion by the posted deadlines. Follows all assignment instructions for initial post and responses. 5 points Comments stay on task. Comments add value to discussion topic. Comments motivate other students to respond. 20 points Maintains appropriate language. Offers criticism in a constructive manner. Provides both positive and negative feedback. 5 points

Needs Improvement Does not participate or submit discussion by the posted deadlines. Does not follow instructions for initial post and responses. 3 points Comments may not stay on task. Comments may not add value to discussion topic. Comments may not motivate other students to respond. 10 points Does not always maintain appropriate language. Offers criticism in an offensive manner. Provides only negative feedback. 3 points

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 02: Religion and Global Ethics

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 02: Religion and Global Ethics

TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Perspective of the Chapter ........................................................ 2 Supplements ......................................................................................... 2 Chapter Objectives .................................................................................. 3 Key Terms ............................................................................................. 3 What's New in This Chapter ........................................................................ 5 Chapter Outline ...................................................................................... 5 Additional Discussion Questions .............................................................. 6 Additional Activities and Assignments ....................................................... 8 Additional Resources ................................................................................ 9 Internet and Media Resources ................................................................ 9 Appendix ................................................................................................... 10 Generic Rubrics .................................................................................. 10 Standard Writing Rubric ......................................................................... 10 Standard Discussion Rubric ..................................................................... 11

Chapter 02: Religion and Global Ethics

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to the broad diversity of religious perspectives. The chapter explores the possibility of a pluralistic convergence around a common morality. Organizations like the Parliament of the World’s Religions attempt to find a common ground. The chapter evaluates the divine command theory of ethics, and explores its basis for morality, which is God’s command. The Golden Rule seems to be a focal point for the effort to develop a global ethic, since most religions have some version of it. The chapter also investigates the problem of evil, which is the question of why an omniscient and omnipotent God can allow evil. The answer to this question is free will, but free will raises problems, such as within the deterministic view of natural science. The chapter examines the distinction and tension between secularism and religiosity. For instance, some religious people feel that secularism is wrong and finding common ground is not important. Some critics of secularism claim that secularism was created by Europeans and only makes sense from a European/Christian worldview. This is called Eurocentrism. Associated Readings Reading 2-1: Euthyphro / Plato Reading 2-2: Letter to a Christian Nation / Sam Harris0 Reading 2-3: Religion and Truth / Mohandas K. Gandhi Reading 2-4: This Troubled World / Eleanor Roosevelt [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

Chapter 02: Religion and Global Ethics

•

Solution and Answer Guide o Discussion guide and talking points for discussion and review questions posed in the chapter. Test Bank o Test Bank content, offered in Blackboard, Moodle, Desire2Learn, and Canvas formats, contains learning objective–specific multiple-choice and essay questions for each chapter. You can import the test bank into your LMS to edit and manage questions and to create tests. Transition Guide o A chapter-by-chapter list that highlights content changes and updates in the new edition of the textbook and courseware design. Standard Writing Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ written work, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations. Standard Discussion Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ discussion contributions, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations.

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 2.1

Describe the challenge of developing a global ethical perspective in a world that is religiously diverse.

2.2

Explain how the idea of universal human rights is linked to secularism, cosmopolitanism, and the European Enlightenment.

2.3

Evaluate the divine command theory of ethics.

2.4

Explain the idea of the Golden Rule.

2.5

Articulate how the problem of evil and free will create challenges for religious ethics.

2.6

Differentiate between secular/humanistic and religious approaches to ethics.

Chapter 02: Religion and Global Ethics

2.7

Explain the critique of modern secular values using the concept of Eurocentrism.

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Ahimsa: Term meaning nonviolence; associated with South Asian traditions such as Hinduism and Buddhism. Civil disobedience: Breaking a law in a civil manner that retains fidelity to the system of justice and punishment as an accepts act of protest. Divine command: Theory idea that ethical norms are ultimately based upon the authoritative decrees of God. Enlightenment: Period of fertile development of Western culture and philosophy, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Eurocentrism: Attitude or practice of interpreting the world from a perspective that focuses primarily on European interests, values, and history. Fundamentalism: Idea that truth is grounded in religious texts, traditions, and prophets. Rule: Idea that one ought to love one’s neighbor as oneself or do unto others as we would have Golden them do unto us. Liberal: A practitioner of liberalism, a political theory that emphasizes a combination of concern for liberty and concern for social justice and distributive justice (associated with Rawls) (versus libertarianism and socialism). Libertarian: A practitioner of libertarianism, a political theory about both the importance of liberty in human life and the limited role of government (associated with Rand) (versus liberalism and socialism) Original sin: Christian idea that human beings inherit a tendency to do evil from the original sin of Adam and Eve. Paradox of toleration: Problem of whether one should tolerate those who are intolerant or who reject the idea of toleration. Problem of evil: Argument against the existence of God that claims that a good God would not permit evil but since evil exists, God must not exist (versus theodicy). relativism

Chapter 02: Religion and Global Ethics

Secular ethics: Approach to ethics that locates ethical norms in nonreligious principles acceptable to people from a variety of religions (versus divine command theory); see also humanism. Secularization: Movement away from religious culture and toward a nonreligious public sphere; see also modernization. Theodicy: Theoretical explanation of why a good God would permit evil; response to the problem of evil. Toleration: Attitude of forbearance or permissiveness for attitudes or behaviors that are disapproved; an open and nonjudgmental attitude. [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

Chapter 02: Religion and Global Ethics

C. Socrates V. Class Activity A. A. Martin Luther King, Jr. organized a protest against segregation in public transportation. It was a nonviolent protest. Discuss civil disobedience and how King used it to change Jim Crow segregation laws. VI. Ethics, Religion, and Divine Command Theory A. Divine command theory B. Euthyphro C. Dostoevsky VII. Pluralism and the Golden Rule A. Common core B. Religious pluralism VIII. The Problem of Evil and Free Will A. Problem of evil i. Buddhists ii. Christians B. Free will i. Explanation of evil IX. Secular Ethics and Toleration A. Secularism B. Modernization C. Class activity i. Do you think that the religions of the world can come to a consensus about any shared values? Explain your answer. D. Paradox of toleration E. Fundamentalism F. Eurocentrism X. Class Activity: Case Study A. A. In 2006, the Seattle-Tacoma airport removed several holiday (Christmas) trees from the airport because other religions were not represented. Do you think the airport did the right thing by removing the holiday trees? What do you think they should have done? XI. Review

[return to top]

Chapter 02: Religion and Global Ethics

ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION QUESTIONS Regardless of whether your class is taught in-person or virtually, you can assign these questions several ways: in a discussion forum in your LMS; as content for creating in-class polls using online polling tools or the MindTap mobile application; as whole-class discussions in person; or as a partner or group activity in class. 1. Kant thought that history would develop in a cosmopolitan direction. Do you think he was correct? Given the cultural and religious differences across the world, do you think his vision is possible? Talking Points: Students should be able first to define cosmopolitanism as a global worldview. Students should also be able to give examples of religious diversity and express whether these diverse views are commensurable. Students can also connect cosmopolitanism with the search for a common morality and with religious pluralism. Students can talk about what morality might be common, such as the Golden Rule. 2. Do you believe that there are limits to toleration? Should we tolerate those who are intolerant of the very idea of toleration? Talking Points: Students should be able to define tolerance. They should also be able to explain the paradox of toleration and make an assertion about whether intolerance is acceptable. Students should be able to defend their position on the paradox of toleration. 3. Martin Luther King Jr. learned about nonviolent resistance from Mohandas Gandhi, who advocated ahimsa, or nonviolence. Do you think that nonviolent civil disobedience is morally justified? How would you argue for or against nonviolent civil disobedience? Talking Points: Students should first be able to define civil disobedience. Students ought then to be able to assert a position for or against civil disobedience and defend it using reason and evidence. They can use King Jr. as an example or examples of civil disobedience in current affairs.

Chapter 02: Religion and Global Ethics

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES AND ASSIGNMENTS The following are activities and assignments developed by but not included in the text, PPTs, or courseware – they are for you to use if you wish. 1. Questions for Further Thought: These open response writing prompts can be used as in-class reflections or as assessment activities. a. Define value pluralism and connect it to religious pluralism, or the idea that there is common ground among the world's cultural and religious traditions. b. Explain the difference between religious ethics and secular ethics. c. Describe a libertarian view of religious ethics and how it connects to the paradox of toleration. d. Critics argue that secularism is a Eurocentric concept. Explain what this means. e. Explain divine command theory. 2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10–25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films, TV episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. The Farewell (2018). (Viewing time 100 minutes, plus 20–25 minutes discussion) Chinese-born, U.S.-raised Billi discovers her grandmother, Nai Nai, is suffering a terminal illness, but that her family has decided not to tell Nai Nai about her terminal diagnosis. Billi's Chinese family instead stages a fake wedding as a ruse to gather the family for one presumably final time with Nai Nai before she passes away. The struggle is between the individualistic, rights-driven ethos of America and the family-driven, duty-driven values of China. Billi battles her own demons as she tries to reconcile the two different cultures. The Farewell is a delightful opportunity to explore the cultural differences between China and America in a medical context. It is difficult at moments to say which worldview on medical information is the right one, or the

Chapter 02: Religion and Global Ethics

wrong one. The film gives students an opportunity to think critically about both their own cultural views as well as the cultural views of others. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES • •

•

The role of faith and belief in modern Africa (2017), Ndidi Nwuneli. Nwuneli discusses the role of religion and ethics in African culture. Global ethic vs. national interest (2009). Then UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown discusses his vision for a global ethics and the problems associated with realizing that vision. Peter Singer, Religion and Ethics. Peter Singer discusses the relationship between religion and ethics. Through discussion of Euthyphro Singer argues that religion must be separated from ethics.

[return to top]

Chapter 02: Religion and Global Ethics

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 02: Religion and Global Ethics

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 03: Ethical Relativism

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 03: Ethical Relativism

Chapter 03: Ethical Relativism

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to descriptive ethical relativism, which reflects the fact of cultural diversity, and metaethical relativism, which declares, normatively, that there are no universal values. Students are acquainted with the difference between subjectivism and objectivism in a moral context. Also covered are the moral views of nihilism, skepticism, and moral realism. Some critics favor relativism because they are skeptical that there are objective values; they also wish to be tolerant of non-Eurocentric values. Some critics argue against relativism because it is self-contradictory to claim it is true that there is no truth. Students will be able to define tolerance as a value and distinguish it from relativism, which argues there are no objective values, and would therefore exclude tolerance. Value pluralism is the idea that it is not possible to reduce moral judgments to a singular, absolute claim about what is good. Sometimes value pluralism resembles relativism. Philosophers such as Martha Nussbaum and W. D. Ross believe that there is a plurality of values that many people share. Associated Readings Reading 3-1: Values and Imperatives / Alain Locke Reading 3-2: Who’s to Judge? / Louis Pojman Reading 3-3: Relativism and Its Benefits / John Lachs Reading 3-4: On Relativism / Anita Superson [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

Chapter 03: Ethical Relativism

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 3.1

Describe the difference between descriptive relativism and metaethical relativism.

3.2

Evaluate key concepts such as objectivism, subjectivism, nihilism, skepticism, and moral realism.

3.3

Evaluate the arguments in favor of relativism.

3.4

Evaluate the arguments against relativism.

3.5

Differentiate between relativism and a commitment to tolerance.

3.6

Evaluate value pluralism.

3.7

Defend your own ideas about relativism and how it is related to ethical judgment.

[return to top]

Chapter 03: Ethical Relativism

KEY TERMS Absolutism: Metaethical idea that there are eternal and unchanging values and rules (versus relativism). Cultural competence: The ability or capacity to understand and respond to cultural differences. Cultural relativism: A descriptive claim about the fact that values differ depending on cultural context. Descriptive ethical relativism: The factual or descriptive claim that there are different ideas about values. Epistemological: Related to the theory of knowledge. Ethnocentrism: The tendency to judge or understand things from a biased perspective grounded in one’s own culture. Individual relativism (subjectivism}: The Idea that ethical claims are relative to an individual’s values and perspectives. Metaethical relativism: Metaethical claim that there are no objective or nonrelative values that could mediate disputes about ethics. moral pluralism Moral realism: Idea that there are ethical facts and that moral judgments can be said to be true or false; see also objectivism. nihilism Objectivism: Metaethical idea that ethical propositions refer to objective facts (versus subjectivism); see also moral realism. perspectivism Pluralism The claim that there is more than one value or good. prima facie Skepticism: Questioning and doubting attitude. Straw man argument: fallacious argument that describes an opponent’s position in such a way as to easily dismiss it. [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

Chapter 03: Ethical Relativism

CHAPTER OUTLINE The following outline organizes activities (including any existing discussion questions in PowerPoints or other supplements) and assessments by chapter (and therefore by topic), so that you can see how all the content relates to the topics covered in the text. I. Class Activity--Alcohol Use A. Some people believe that consumption of alcohol is wrong, whereas others do not. Alcohol is highly regulated, and people under 21 cannot purchase alcoholic beverages. What do you think of the ethical status of alcohol and alcohol consumption? Is it right or wrong, or only right in certain circumstances? Is it right for you? Are the laws correct in your opinion? II. Descriptive versus Metaethical Ethical Relativism A. Ethical relativism B. Descriptive ethical relativism C. Metaethical relativism D. Objectivism III. Individual versus Cultural Relativism A. Cultural relativism B. Skepticism C. Nihilism D. Perspectivism E. Weak Relativism F. Pluralism G. Pragmatism IV. Reasons Supporting Ethical Relativism A. Diversity of views B. Ethnocentrism C. Cultural competence D. Skepticism V. Are These Reasons Convincing? A. Factual disagreements VI. Tolerance, Open-Mindedness, Cultural Competence A. Moral uncertainty and relativism B. Situational differences and relativism C. Class activity i. The moral imperative that stealing is always wrong no matter what is an absolutist position. Do you take an absolutist position on stealing? Do you think stealing is absolutely wrong all the time? Or do you think there are exceptions? If so, what are those exceptions?

Chapter 03: Ethical Relativism

D. Is relativism self-contradictory? E. Moral realism VII. Moral Pluralism A. A. Martha Nussbaum B. B. W. D. Ross VIII. Class Activity A. A. One of Ross’s prima facie duties, or duties we must do, is self-improvement. Do you think that improving yourself is a moral duty? Is self-improvement something you do just for yourself? Discuss and present your answers to the class. [return to top]

Chapter 03: Ethical Relativism

3. If there is an objective good do you think it is likely to be unitary or plural? For example, is it likely that all morality promotes one good, such as happiness? Or is it likely that there are many irreducible moral values, such as happiness, autonomy, privacy, fidelity, and so forth? If you think there is only one good, what is it? If the good is plural, what would you include in your list? Explain. Talking Points: This question will challenge students on multiple levels. They will need to be able to understand objectivism to begin with this answer. They will also need to distinguish between singularity and plurality. They can assert a thesis about what the good is and defend it using evidence. They will need to identify the good as they see it.

[return to top]

Chapter 03: Ethical Relativism

the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. Dead Man Walking (1995). (Viewing time 122 minutes, plus 20–25 minutes discussion) Based on the book by Sister Helen Prejean, Dead Man Walking follows Sister Helen as she ministers to a death row inmate who brutally raped and murdered two teenagers. Loosely based on true events, the film chronicles the crisis of faith that Sister Helen faces as she moves through the last days and weeks of Matthew Poncelet's life on death row. Dead Man Walking illustrates that even in deeply codified religious traditions, such as Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular (Sister Helen is a Catholic nun), disagreement and tension can easily bubble up about matters of doctrine. In this case, the Christian doctrine in question is the Old Testament maxim to mete justice by an eye for an eye. Also of interest is the New Testament mandate to love thy neighbor as thyself. Students will be able to discuss these different interpretations of doctrine and evaluate the difficulty of achieving religious harmony. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES • • •

Metaethics, Crash Course Philosophy, 9:33 minutes. This is a brief, efficient introduction to metaethics, cultural relativism, and moral realism. Relativism: Is it Wrong to judge Other Cultures? BBC Ideas. 2:57 minutes. A quick, engaging introduction to cultural relativism. How do we determine the value of a life? TED Talks, 5:46 minutes. An ethical dilemma that will get students thinking about how valuable human and nonhuman lives are, and whether one is more valuable than the other.

Chapter 03: Ethical Relativism

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 03: Ethical Relativism

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 04: Egoism, Altruism, and the Social Contract

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 04: Egoism, Altruism, and the Social Contract

TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Perspective of the Chapter .............................................................. 1 Supplements ......................................................................................... 2 Chapter Objectives .................................................................................. 3 Key Terms ............................................................................................. 3 What's New in This Chapter ........................................................................ 5 Chapter Outline ...................................................................................... 5 Additional Discussion Questions .............................................................. 6 Additional Activities and Assignments ....................................................... 8 Additional Resources ................................................................................ 9 Internet and Media Resources ........................................................... 9 Appendix ................................................................................................... 10 Generic Rubrics ................................................................................... 10 Standard Writing Rubric .......................................................................... 10 Standard Discussion Rubric ...................................................................... 11

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to descriptive egoism and ethical egoism and the difference between them. Descriptive egoism gives an account of human egoism. Ethical egoism claims that it is good to be concerned first with ourselves. In contrast to egoism, altruism, empathy, compassion, and love are introduced and defined. Critics of altruism argue that altruism requires self-sacrifice. Proponents of altruism say that reciprocal altruism grows out of enlightened self-interest, which is the impulse to cooperate to get what you want. Students will become familiar with the Prisoner’s Dilemma, a paradigm thought experiment used to illustrate the benefits of reciprocal altruism. Students will become acquainted with the social contract and the idea that rational self-interest can lead us to agree to obey a common system of

Chapter 04: Egoism, Altruism, and the Social Contract

law. Students will be introduced to laissez-faire capitalism as a system that depends on self-interest in order to grow and produce good outcomes. Students will confront the problem of impartiality and how it is incompatible with egoism. Feminists argue that impartiality is a patriarchal value and could be augmented or replaced with the value of care. Associated Readings Reading 4-1: The Ring of Gyges / Plato Reading 4-2: Self-Love / Thomas Hobbes Reading 4-3: Altruism in Nature / Steven Pinker Reading 4-4 Egoism, Altruism, and Care /| Virginia Held [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

•

MindTap Educator Guide o A detailed list of the activities and assets in your MindTap course. PowerPoints o Ready-to-use and customizable visual presentations for each chapter that include interactive activities and prompts to generate class discussion, promote comprehension and foster student engagement. Solution and Answer Guide o Discussion guide and talking points for discussion and review questions posed in the chapter. Test Bank o Test Bank content, offered in Blackboard, Moodle, Desire2Learn, and Canvas formats, contains learning objective–specific multiple-choice and essay questions for each chapter. You can import the test bank into your LMS to edit and manage questions and to create tests. Transition Guide o A chapter-by-chapter list that highlights content changes and updates in the new edition of the textbook and courseware design.

Chapter 04: Egoism, Altruism, and the Social Contract

•

Standard Writing Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ written work, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations. Standard Discussion Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ discussion contributions, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations.

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 4.1

Describe differences between descriptive (or psychological) egoism and ethical egoism.

4.2

Define key terms: altruism, empathy,compassion, love.

4.3

Explain criticisms of altruism and theimportance of reciprocal altruism.

4.4

Explain the challenge posed by the prisoner’s dilemma.

4.5

Describe how the social contract provides asolution to problems of egoism.

4.6

Discuss how egoism is connected to laissez-faire capitalism and economics.

4.7

Evaluate the conflict among impartiality, egoism, and care.

4.8

Defend your own ideas about egoism, altruism, and the social contract.

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Care ethics: Ethical theory that emphasizes nurturing relationships, while downplaying autonomy and individualism (associated with Noddings). Compassion: Literally “suffering with” another, compassion is a descriptive egoism emotion (or virtue) that is oriented toward alleviating the suffering of others. Empathy: The ability or capacity to understand the feelings of another.

Chapter 04: Egoism, Altruism, and the Social Contract

Ethical egoism: Normative or ethical egoism claims that we ought to pursue our own self-interest; descriptive egoism (also called psychological egoism) maintains that as a matter of fact we can pursue only our own self-interest (versus altruism). Laissez-faire capitalism: Form of economic and social organization that love emphasizes leaving the market alone to regulate itself. Nepotism: Showing favoritism toward one’s relatives. Paradox of hedonism: Problem for hedonism: when pursuing pleasure directly, we fail to obtain it, but pleasure occurs when we do not directly pursue it. Prisoner’s dilemma: Problem for rational self-interest and social contract: selfinterested parties who do not trust one another will be unable to cooperate and thus will end up with less than optimal outcomes. Psychological egoism: See Ethical egoism. Reciprocal altruism: idea that altruistic behavior is traded with others in a mutually beneficial exchange. Weakness of will: problem in moral psychology: we sometimes will things that we know are not in our own self-interest or are unable to do things we know are good (also called akrasia). [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

Chapter 04: Egoism, Altruism, and the Social Contract

C. Ethical egoism D. Descriptive egoism II. Empathy, Compassion, and Love A. Nepotism B. Class activity i. Nepotism occurs when people favor their own relations above all others. At work, for instance, nepotism occurs when a person hires a family member instead of a qualified candidate. Do you think we should favor our family members before everyone else? How do you view your spheres of connection? Does family come first then others? Do you think this is right or wrong? III. The Debate about Egoism and Altruism A. Ethical egoism B. Reciprocal altruism C. Psychological egoism D. Class activity i. Why do you think people sometimes do not act in their own best interests? For instance, some people drink too much alcohol. People commit suicide, which seems like the ultimate failure of self-interest. Discuss why you think people sometimes act without thinking of their own best interests. E. Is psychological egoism true? IV. The Prisoner's Dilemma A. Class activity i. For this activity, break into groups of two. Each group should play the prisoner’s dilemma game five times. Each time, write down on a piece of paper either “T” for “testify” or “S” for silence. Write down who goes to jail and who goes free for each round. V. The Social Contract A. Contractarianism B. Thomas Hobbes VI. Connections with Economic Theory A. Adam Smith B. Laissez-faire capitalism VII. Impartiality, Egoism, and Care A. Impartiality B. Egoism C. Care ethics D. Virginia Held E. Why be moral?

Chapter 04: Egoism, Altruism, and the Social Contract

VIII. Class Activity A. 1. Do you think that you can be moral and be an egoist too? Is egoism moral? Is it possible to morally be concerned with only yourself and your close relatives? Consider this question and explain your answer. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION QUESTIONS Regardless of whether your class is taught in person or virtually, you can assign these questions several ways: in a discussion forum in your LMS; as content for creating inclass polls using online polling tools or the MindTap mobile application; as wholeclass discussions in person; or as a partner or group activity in class. 1. Do you think that universal ethical egoism is inconsistent or incoherent? Explain your answer. Talking Points: Students will have to first define universal ethical egoism to respond to this question. After identifying that universal ethical egoism means everyone should seek their own best interests, students can evaluate whether they think it is possible for everyone to be interested in themselves without somehow hurting others. 2. Can a selfish person be a moral person? Can a self-interested person be a moral person? Explain the difference, if there is any, between being selfish and being self-interested? Talking Points: Students should be able to distinguish between selfishness and self-interest, principally with respect to the difference between long term and short-term interests. Having done this, students can then defend a thesis about whether one can be moral when they are selfish or self-interested. 3. Is being moral always in a person's best interest? Why or why not? Talking Points: Students will need to assert a thesis about whether morality is in our best interest, and then be able to defend it using evidence. Students might first address what exactly is our "best interest" and how we determine it. They

Chapter 04: Egoism, Altruism, and the Social Contract

might argue that morality is in our best interest because of reciprocal altruism, or the fact that others may do the same for us. They may also discuss that morality is in our best interest until it isn't, when it conflicts with morality. Students may evaluate these arguments.

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES AND ASSIGNMENTS The following are activities and assignments developed by but not included in the text, PPTs, or courseware – they are for you to use if you wish. 1. Questions for Further Thought: These open response writing prompts can be used as in-class reflections or as assessment activities. a. Ayn Rand argues that altruism is pernicious, causing people to sacrifice themselves in a death wish. What is your opinion of altruism? Do you think it is a good thing or a bad thing? Why? b. What do you think of reciprocal altruism? Does the fact that it is an egoist idea take away from its moral value? Explain your answer. c. Define laissez-faire capitalism. Do you think capitalism allows or encourages people to be moral? Explain your answer. 2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10–25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films, TV episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. The Social Network (2010). (Viewing time 120 minutes, plus 20–25 minutes discussion) This film chronicles the beginning of Facebook, when in 2003 Mark Zuckerberg developed the program originally as a Harvard dating app. The film chronicles the early machinations in the evolution of Facebook. The Social Network tells the story of Mark Zuckerberg's rise to the billionaire club. Like any get-rich-quick story, this one too tells the tale of an egoist reaching for whatever he can get his hands on. Zuckerberg is sued because the plaintiffs alleged that Zuckerberg stole their idea for a

Chapter 04: Egoism, Altruism, and the Social Contract

networking app. This film is an opportunity to discuss self-interest and its possible outcomes. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES •

• •

Why some people are more altruistic than others, TED Talks. This film explores altruism by looking at people both with psychopathy and people who are altruistic to determine what areas of the brain are activated during altruism, and what is missing from the psychopathic brain. There are neuroscientific markers for altruistic behavior. The why and how of effective altruism, TED Talks. Renowned philosopher Peter Singer discusses his philosophy and program of effective altruism. How to let altruism be your guide, TED Talks. Matthieu Ricard makes an argument for altruism. Ricard grounds his discussion in global and environmental concerns, so this video goes well with the chapter on global and environmental justice.

Chapter 04: Egoism, Altruism, and the Social Contract

APPENDIX Generic Rubrics Providing students with rubrics helps them understand expectations and components of assignments. Rubrics help students become more aware of their learning process and progress, and they improve students’ work through timely and detailed feedback. Customize these rubric templates as you wish. The writing rubric indicates 40 points, and the discussion rubric indicates 30 points.

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 04: Egoism, Altruism, and the Social Contract

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 05: Utilitarianism

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 05: Utilitarianism

Chapter 05: Utilitarianism

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to utilitarianism by first drawing a comparison between it and egoism. Both are kinds of consequentialism; egoism focuses on outcomes for individuals, and utilitarianism focuses on outcomes for the greater good. Students will become acquainted with the work of John Stuart Mill, who argued for the principle of utility. Mill distinguished between higher pleasures and lower ones. Hedonists too are focused on pleasure and distinguish higher and lower pleasures. Students will become acquainted with Bentham’s four measures of happiness: intensity, duration, likelihood, and fruitfulness. Students will work with the well-known trolley problem in order to see the moral dilemma in calculating happiness. Act utilitarianism asks whether a particular act maximizes happiness. Rule utilitarianism establishes rules from maximizing happiness in past cases to determine future acts. Students will be able to distinguish utilitarianism as a consequentialist theory and understand that it takes consequences very seriously. Associated Readings Reading 5-1: Utilitarianism / John Stuart Mill [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

•

Chapter 05: Utilitarianism

•

and essay questions for each chapter. You can import the test bank into your LMS to edit and manage questions and to create tests. Transition Guide o A chapter-by-chapter list that highlights content changes and updates in the new edition of the textbook and courseware design. Standard Writing Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ written work, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations. Standard Discussion Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ discussion contributions, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations.

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 5.1

Explain the differences between utilitarianism and egoism as kinds of consequentialism.

5.2

Provide an overview of John Stuart Mill’s defense of utilitarianism.

5.3

Articulate ways that utilitarianism is related to hedonism and Epicureanism.

5.4

Identify key components of the utilitarian assessment of pleasure: intensity, duration, fruitfulness, and likelihood.

5.5

Describe the trolley problem and how it exemplifies the challenge of utilitarianism.

5.6

Explain the difference between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism.

5.7

Defend your own thesis regarding the value of utilitarianism.

Chapter 05: Utilitarianism

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Act utilitarianism: Utilitarian theory that focuses on judging whether individual acts create the greatest happiness for the greatest number (compare: rule utilitarianism). Greatest happiness principle: Utilitarian idea that we ought to work to achieve the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people; see also principle of utility. Hedonism: Theory that holds that pleasure is the highest good; as a normative theory tells us we ought to pursue pleasure. Instrumental value/goods: things that are useful or good as tools or as means toward some other good (versus intrinsic goods). Intrinsic value/goods: Things that have value in themselves and not merely as tools or means (versus instrumental goods. Principle of utility: Utilitarian idea that what matters is the pleasure produced by an action, especially the pleasure produced for the greatest number of people; see also greatest happiness principle. Rule utilitarianism: Utilitarian theory that focuses on postulating general rules that will tend to produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number (versus act utilitarianism). [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

Chapter 05: Utilitarianism

I. Weighing Consequences A. Utilitarianism i. Cost-benefit analysis ii. Pleasure and pain iii. Peter Singer iv. Totality II. Historical Background A. Jeremy Bentham B. John Stuart Mill C. Mill's views on race and women D. The principle of utility III. Class Activity A. Should we prevent others from harming themselves? For instance, officials in San Francisco, California are placing a net on the Golden Gate Bridge to prevent jumpers from committing suicide. Do you think we should work to prevent people from harming themselves at this scale? Explain your answer. IV. Pleasure and Happiness A. Hedonism B. Epicureanism C. Bentham D. Instrumental and intrinsic goods V. Calculating the Greatest Amount of Happiness A. Pleasure minus pain = net happiness B. Class Activity i. Discuss why Act B is the better act to a utilitarian: Act A makes me happy and two other people happy. Act B makes me unhappy but five other people happy. C. Bentham's Happiness Elements D. Quantity versus Quality E. Evaluating Utilitarianism VI. Class Activity i. A vigilante, which is someone who takes the law into their own hands, sets about to pursue a serial rapist. The vigilante eventually catches and kills the serial rapist. There has been no arrest, no charge, no trial, no conviction, and no sentence. However, a serial rapist is now dead and will hurt no more people. Do you think that the end, a dead rapist, justifies the fact that the vigilante broke the law in order to achieve this end? VII. The Trolley Problem VIII. Act and Rule Utilitarianism

Chapter 05: Utilitarianism

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION QUESTIONS Regardless of whether your class is taught in person or virtually, you can assign these questions several ways: in a discussion forum in your LMS; as content for creating inclass polls using online polling tools several or the MindTap mobile application; as whole-class discussions in person; or as a partner or group activity in class. 1. Are you convinced by the utilitarian argument that happiness is the only intrinsic good because it is the only thing that we desire for its own sake? Does the argument meet the standards of a good argument that are given in Chapter 1 of your text? Explain. Talking Points: Students should be able to demonstrate an understanding of an intrinsic good. They can then argue for whether happiness is the only intrinsic good. Then, students can be reminded of sound and valid arguments from Chapter 1. Students can identify the premises and the conclusion of the argument and decide if the conclusion follows from the premises and if the premises are true. 2. Mill claims it's better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a pig satisfied. What do you think of this argument? Do you think there is a qualitative difference between sensual and intellectual pleasures? Would you prefer to be a satisfied pig or a dissatisfied Socrates? Why? Explain your answer. Talking Points: Students should be able to talk about Mill's distinction between higher pleasures and "animal" pleasures. They can assert a thesis about what pleasures they think are more valuable, if any. Students can apply Mill's axiom to themselves and come up with reasons why they would prefer to be one or the other. 3. The study by Bartels and Pizarro, cited in your text, found that proponents of utilitarian solutions had higher measures of psychopathy and feelings of meaninglessness. What do you think of these findings? Does utilitarianism automatically invoke a cold lack of emotion? Explain.

Chapter 05: Utilitarianism

Talking Points: Students can begin by talking about the trolley problem and the way the problem is set up to cause us to have to overcome harming someone else. Students can make assertions about whether utilitarianism is cold and calculating and why.

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES AND ASSIGNMENTS The following are activities and assignments developed by but not included in the text, PPTs, or courseware – they are for you to use if you wish. 1. Questions for Further Thought: These open response writing prompts can be used as in-class reflections or as assessment activities. a. Mill argues that some pleasures such as intellectual pleasures are better than "lower" pleasures such as food and sex. Do you think that there are differences between pleasures? Are some pleasures or happinesses better than others? Why or why not? b. Explain the following phrase: "The end never justifies the means." Give an example. c. Define and describe intrinsic goods and instrumental goods. Then discuss whether you think education is an instrumental good or an intrinsic good. 2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10–25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films, TV episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. Awake (2021). (Viewing time 96 minutes, plus 20–25 minutes discussion) Awake is a science fiction thriller. A global catastrophe causes the human race to be unable to sleep. Officials race desperately to try to determine the cause of and the cure for this strange disease or affliction. A woman realizes her daughter can sleep and may be the only

Chapter 05: Utilitarianism

hope for solving this mystery and saving the world. Jill must decide whether to sacrifice her daughter for the sake of the whole. Awake is an opportunity to discuss the conflict between self-interest and nepotism and utilitarian maximization of happiness. Students can debate whether Jill is obligated to save humanity or whether a moral argument can be made for protecting her own child. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES •

•

You can only save one: who do you choose? (Viewing time 4:15 minutes) TED Talks ethical dilemma that modernizes the trolley problem. From the description: “You are the captain of an interstellar cargo transport headed to port when you receive two distress calls. The first is from a labor ship, whose passengers are running out of oxygen. The other from a luxury space cruiser which has lost a thruster, sending them careening into danger. With only enough time to save one ship, which should you choose?” Would you sacrifice one person to save five? (Viewing time 4:36 minutes) TED Talks ethical dilemma that addresses the trolley problem in its traditional form. Utilitarianism by Ethics Defined, McCombs School of Business (Viewing time 1:46 minutes) This video is a quick and useful introduction to utilitarianism and its problems.

Chapter 05: Utilitarianism

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 05: Utilitarianism

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 06: Deontological Ethics

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 06: Deontological Ethics

TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Perspective of the Chapter .............................................................. 1 Supplements ......................................................................................... 2 Chapter Objectives .................................................................................. 3 Key Terms ............................................................................................. 3 What's New in This Chapter ........................................................................ 5 Chapter Outline ...................................................................................... 5 Additional Discussion Questions .............................................................. 6 Additional Activities and Assignments ....................................................... 8 Additional Resources ................................................................................ 9 Internet and Media Resources .................................................................. 9 Appendix ................................................................................................... 10 Generic Rubrics ..................................................................................... 10 Standard Writing Rubric ........................................................................... 10 Standard Discussion Rubric ........................................................................ 11

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to deontological ethics, or the study of duty. The chapter contrasts deontology and utilitarianism. Deontology is a nonconsequentialist philosophy. Kantian deontology focuses on the universality of the moral law and our duty to respect persons. Stoicism focuses on performing duty within the natural order of things. Divine command ethics is based on a duty to obey God’s commands. W. D. Ross provides an account of duties when they conflict. Students will learn about hypothetical and categorical imperatives; for Kant, the categorical imperative is

the moral law. Students will become acquainted with the first and second versions of the categorical imperative. The first is to act only on those maxims that can be universalized, and the second is to never treat humans as a means to an end. Kant argues it is wrong to make a lying promise; this rule meets both versions of the categorical imperative. Kant’s view could be used to make an argument against slavery, but Kant himself favored slavery and was a racist. Students will become acquainted with perfect and imperfect duties. Perfect duties are necessary and absolute; imperfect duties are less absolute and more flexible. Associated Readings Reading 6-1: Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals / Immanuel Kant Reading 6-2: “Black Radical Kantianism” / Charles W. Mills [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

•

A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ written work, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations. Standard Discussion Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ discussion contributions, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations. o

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 6.1

Explain how deontology is a nonconsequentialist approach to ethics.

6.2

Describe different deontological approaches to ethics.

6.3

Explain the difference between hypothetical and categorical imperatives.

6.4

Describe two formulations of the categorical imperative.

6.5

Apply Kantian reasoning to a variety of cases in the real world.

6.6

Evaluate the difference between perfect and imperfect duties.

6.7

Defend your own thesis with regard to the value of deontological ethics.

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Categorical imperative: Kantian idea about the universal form of the moral law, which is not based on hypothetical or conditional interests; Kant’s emotion (or virtue) that is oriented toward alleviating the suffering of others. Hypothetical imperative: Kantian idea of a conditional rule that governs prudential behaviors and skilled activities aimed at procuring or producing some conditional good (versus categorical imperative). Imperfect duties: Kantian idea about duties of virtue that are admirable and praiseworthy but not always necessary (as opposed to perfect/necessary duties).

Kingdom of ends: Kantian ideal of rational, moral society in which persons are respected as ends in themselves. Perfect duties: Kantian idea about duties of justice that we Stoicism: Theory of ancient Stoic philosophers, which holds that obedience to natural law and duty is essential (despite pain). [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

V. The Categorical Imperative A. First formulation B. Second formulation VI. Evaluating Kant's Moral Theory A. Moral obligation B. Application C. Class activity i. How do you know that you are not using someone for your own goals or ends? Are you always sure of your motivations? Is it ever okay to use a person for any reason? D. Duty E. Moral equality and impartiality F. Kant's views on race and women VII. Perfect and Imperfect Duties A. Perfect duties B. Imperfect duties C. Class activity i. Discuss whether you think a doctor should be compassionate when delivering care to patients. Do you think compassion—feeling compassionate and acting compassionately—is a perfect or an imperfect duty for doctors? D. Variations on Kant and deontology i. W. D. Ross ii. John Rawls [return to top]

Students should be able to identify the components of an act—motive, act, and consequences. They should be able to talk about how deontology focuses on motive, and utilitarianism focuses on consequences. They can then assert theses about whether motives or intentions matter morally, or whether consequences matter more than motives. 2. Do you think that moral obligation is categorical in the way that Kant means by this term? That is, if something is moral, it is universally moral. Do you think there are ever exceptions to moral rules? Why or why not? Talking Points: Students should be able to talk about universalizability as part of the categorical imperative. They should be able to identify the two forms of the categorical imperative discussed in this chapter. By discussing exceptions, they can assert theses about whether universalizability is a moral requirement. 3. Do you think that charity is a perfect or an imperfect duty? Define perfect and imperfect duties and explain your answer. Talking Points: Students should be able to define perfect and imperfect duties as Kant described them. Students should then be able to apply the concept to the notion of charity to make an assertion. Students may discuss supererogatory duties to illustrate their answer.

[return to top]

c. The Stoics argue that we can only control internal things like our will and our intentions. We should not struggle against external circumstances. Explain what this means to you and give an example of what it might mean. 2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10–25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films, TV episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. Passengers (2016) Viewing time 116 minutes plus 20 minutes discussion. Jim Preston wakes up from a cryogenic sleep on a journey to a new colony on a distant world. The trip is intended to take 80 years, but Jim has woken up early, and alone. There are 4,999 other ship occupants currently asleep on their way to their new home. Jim must decide whether to wake up (the prettiest) one of the ship's sleeping inhabitants. If he does, he dooms her to life alone with him on the interstellar ship for their entire lives. Passengers makes the moral dilemma crystalline clear: should Jim wake someone up, interrupting their trip to their new life and dooming them to a life on board a sterile ship, in order to intervene on his own loneliness? What would Jim's duty be in this limit case? Students can debate Jim's moral responsibility and what exactly he is responsible for. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES • • •

How do we determine the value of a life? TED Talks, 5:46. This video illustrates the dilemma of valuing the lives of animals. Deontology/Ethics Defined, McCombs School of Business, 1:56. This is a quick illustrative video that introduces deontology. Philosophy: Immanuel Kant, The School of Life, 8:12. This video is a slightly longer look at Kant himself as well as his philosophy. Good introduction.

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 07: Natural Law and Human Rights

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 07: Natural Law and Human Rights

Chapter 07: Natural Law and Human Rights

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to natural law theory and its connection to human rights and international law. Natural law presupposes there is a law common to all humans to which we may appeal in moral matters. This chapter reviews the contributions of Cicero, Aquinas, and Locke to natural law theory. Cicero encouraged us to “follow nature,” meaning that natural law is eternal rather than changing laws and governments. Aquinas attempted to bring faith and reason together and thought that reason could help us to discern the moral law found in God-created nature. Locke inspired the idea of the social contract, which for him was grounded in the natural rights of the governed. Jefferson and others used natural rights arguments. Students will be introduced to the teleology of natural law. The universe is structured according to aims and ends, and reason can discern these aims and ends. The chapter connects natural law to natural rights by pointing out that rights are selfevident as a natural endowment. Human rights advocates develop their ideas out of this approach. Relativists tend to deny that there is any human essence. Natural offers a response to relativism. Associated Readings Reading 7-1: On Natural Law / Thomas Aquinas Reading 7-2: Second Treatise of Civil Government / John Locke [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

•

Chapter 07: Natural Law and Human Rights

•

Test Bank o Test Bank content, offered in Blackboard, Moodle, Desire2Learn, and Canvas formats, contains learning objective–specific multiple-choice and essay questions for each chapter. You can import the test bank into your LMS to edit and manage questions and to create tests. Transition Guide o A chapter-by-chapter list that highlights content changes and updates in the new edition of the textbook and courseware design. Standard Writing Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ written work, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations. Standard Discussion Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ discussion contributions, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations.

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 7.1

Explain how natural law theory is related to thelaw of peoples and norms of international law.

7.2

Identify the contributions to natural law theory made by key thinkers such as Cicero,Thomas Aquinas, and John Locke.

7.3

Explain the importance of teleology for thinking about natural law.

7.4

Describe how natural law theory is related to the idea of natural rights and the idea of human rights.

7.5

Clarify how natural law arguments are grounded in claims about the essence of human nature that resist relativism.

7.6

Defend your own thesis with regard to the value of natural law theory and the idea of human rights.

[return to top]

Chapter 07: Natural Law and Human Rights

KEY TERMS Natural law theory: A theory of law that is grounded in claims about nature; natural law ethics is a normative theory that holds that reason can discover objective ethical norms by examining natural human functions (associated with Aquinas). Teleological: Teleological adjective used to describe ideas and theories that are focused on goals, purposes, or outcomes (related to consequentialism). [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

Chapter 07: Natural Law and Human Rights

A. Watch Abigail Marsh’s TED Talk on altruism called “Why Some People Are More Altruistic Than Others.” In it, Marsh explains briefly that psychopaths do not have the brainwaves to process fear in other people’s faces. This is a neurological reality for psychopaths. Does this reality therefore mean that psychopaths are not morally responsible for their actions? Discuss the implications of Marsh’s argument. V. Natural Rights and Human Rights A. Evaluating natural rights and human rights B. Class activity i. Consider the inalienable rights that U.S. citizens are afforded, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. What rights, if any, are we entitled to from our country? Discuss your answers and be sure to say why you think what you think. C. Positive versus negative rights D. Slavery and gender and natural law and natural rights E. Class Activity i. How can we tell our American stories now that some unpleasant truths have emerged about some of our most revered figures? How, for instance, can we tell the story of Thomas Jefferson, recognizing now that he was the owner of over 600 slaves? Is there an ethical approach to history that we can take? F. Slavery and Gender i. Francisco Vitoria ii. Lysander Spooner iii. Mary Wollstonecraft G. Class activity i. A lot of information recently has called into question many dearly held stories about American history; for instance, Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. Are natural rights really obvious? Are we entitled rights, if we have disagreed so intently about them in the past? Or are there rights that we are entitled to, whether people disagree or not? VI. Is There A Human Nature? A. Class activity i. Do we humans have a fundamental nature, some thing or things that we all share? What if any are those things in common? Discuss what you think constitutes human nature. Share your ideas with the class. [return to top]

Chapter 07: Natural Law and Human Rights

ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION QUESTIONS Regardless of whether your class is taught in-person or virtually, you can assign these questions several ways: in a discussion forum in your LMS; as content for creating in-class polls using online polling tools or the MindTap mobile application; as whole-class discussions in person; or as a partner or group activity in class. 1. Do you think that the essential characteristics of humanness can be specified? Discuss your answer. Talking Points: Students should be able to attempt a list of characteristics that seem to be shared by all humans. They can then discuss whether those characteristics are enough to be described as natural to all of us. Students will likely be able to find exceptions to many assertions about what is uniquely human. 2. Does a theory of civil disobedience necessarily depend on there being a natural law? Talking Points: Students should be able to define natural law and give examples of different approaches to natural law, i.e., Cicero, Aristotle, Locke, Grotius. Then they should be able to define civil disobedience and assess whether it is morally defensible, first of all, and whether it needs an account of natural law to be defensible second of all. 3. Do you think that "nature" provides any basis for knowing what we ought to do? How might you explain this basis without committing the "naturalistic fallacy?" Talking Points: Students should define the naturalistic fallacy, that just because something is the case doesn't mean it ought to be the case. They should be able to discuss what nature is and whether it can guide moral behavior. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES AND ASSIGNMENTS The following are activities and assignments developed by but not included in the text, PPTs, or courseware – they are for you to use if you wish.

Chapter 07: Natural Law and Human Rights

1. Questions for Further Thought: These open response writing prompts can be used as in-class reflections or as assessment activities. a. Do you think that moral law is higher than the laws of society? Is there a moral law which we should obey, no matter what the laws of society say? Explain your answer. b. Hugo Grotius was a Dutch jurist who theorized that there is a common law among nations which is valid even in times of war. Do you think there are common laws among nations? Explain your answer. c. Natural law theory contains the idea that the way things are in nature are the way they ought to be. Do you think this is true or false? Can the way things are by nature provide the basis for knowing how they ought to be? Explain your answer and give an example. 2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10-25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films, tv episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. Judas and the Black Messiah. (2021) 126 minutes plus 20 minutes discussion. This film is based on true events in late 1960s Chicago. Black Panther Fred Hampton is targeted by Hoover's FBI; FBI Agent Mitchell sends informant Bill O'Neill into the Panther organization to spy on Hampton and provide information on his and the Panthers' activities. This film is a historical introduction to this important period in American history. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X are in the background of the film, giving students an opportunity to visualize the impact these men had. The film addresses the issue of violent protest and civil disobedience in a very immediate way. Students can discuss natural law theory and its connection to civil disobedience using examples from the film to illustrate their point. Bill O'Neill is a troubled character, facing a terrible moral dilemma of his own small design. Students can analyze his choices and behavior and discuss other theories such as utilitarianism and deontology. [return to top]

Chapter 07: Natural Law and Human Rights

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES • •

•

Philosophy: Thomas Aquinas, The School of Life, 6:14. This short video introduces Thomas Aquinas along with the basics of his philosophy. John Locke – English Philosopher and Physician/Mini Bio/Biography, Biography, 2:42. This video is a quick introduction to John Locke and a little about his philosophy. What are the universal human rights? – Benedetta Berti, TED-Ed, 4:46. This video reviews the history of human rights as well as define some parameters.

Chapter 07: Natural Law and Human Rights

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 07: Natural Law and Human Rights

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 08: Virtue Ethics

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 08: Virtue Ethics

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to virtue ethics and the differences between it and the philosophies we’ve studied thus far, including utilitarianism and deontology. Virtue ethics focuses on character traits, habits, and dispositions rather than on intentions or outcomes. Virtue ethics is interested in how character traits are connected to ends and purposes. Specifically, the purpose for humans is to flourish. Students will be introduced to different traditions of virtue ethics. The ancient Greeks emphasized wisdom, justice, temperance, and courage. The Confucian tradition emphasized courtesy, benevolence, and respect for others. Virtues can be applied in different ways—for instance, can a villain be courageous? Virtues must fit inside a view of human flourishing. The chapter covers the Aristotelian mean of virtue ethics. The virtue is to be found in the middle between two extremes or vices. Aristotle focuses on two types of virtues: moral and intellectual virtues. The chapter discusses eudaimonia, which is the Greek term for flourishing, fulfillment, or excellence. Humans achieve eudaimonia when they develop virtues. The chapter discusses Aristotle’s failure to recognize that his ideas of women and enslaved people was wrongheaded from a universal account of human rights. Associated Readings Reading 8-1: The Nicomachean Ethics / Aristotle Reading 8-2: After Virtue / | Alasdair MacIntyre Reading 8-3: Burdened Virtues / Lisa Tessman [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

•

Discussion guide and talking points for discussion and review questions posed in the chapter. Test Bank o Test Bank content, offered in Blackboard, Moodle, Desire2Learn, and Canvas formats, contains learning objective–specific multiple-choice and essay questions for each chapter. You can import the test bank into your LMS to edit and manage questions and to create tests. Transition Guide o A chapter-by-chapter list that highlights content changes and updates in the new edition of the textbook and courseware design. Standard Writing Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ written work, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations. Standard Discussion Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ discussion contributions, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations. o

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 8.1

Explain how virtue ethics differs from other approaches to ethics.

8.2

Describe some key virtues and apply them to concrete situations.

8.3

Explain how the idea of the golden mean functions in virtue ethics.

8.4

Explain how virtues are connected to an account of the functions or purposes of human life.

8.5

Analyze the idea of eudaimonia and what it means within Aristotle’s theory of virtue.

8.6

Evaluate Aristotle’s moral philosophy in comparison with other virtue theories.

8.7

Defend your own thesis with regard to the value of virtue ethics.

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Cardinal virtues: Primary virtues; the four cardinal virtues in the ancient Greek tradition are justice, wisdom, moderation, and courage. Eudaimonia: Greek term for human flourishing and happiness that is more than simply pleasure; associated with Aristotle and virtue ethics. Golden mean: Idea associated with virtue ethics that virtue is found in the middle between excess and deficiency. [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

best doctor they can be? Would a virtuous doctor perform the various kinds of euthanasia? Why or why not? G. Aristotle i. Eudaimonia ii. Summum bonum iii. Intellectual and moral virtue III. Virtue as a Mean A. Average B. Golden mean C. Cardinal virtue IV. Nature, Human Nature, and the Human Good A. Aristotle B. Teleology C. Eudaimonia V. Eudaimonia and the Highest Good A. Prefix "eu-" B. Rationality C. Intellectual virtues D. Aristotle on Slavery and Gender Hierarchy i. Natural hierarchies ii. Polis versus private iii. "Natural slaves" iv. Lisa Tessman VI. Cross-Cultural and Contemporary Virtue Ethics A. Confucianism B. Hinduism C. Buddhism D. Christianity E. Evaluating Virtue Ethics i. Phillippa Foot ii. Utilitarianism iii. Kant VII. Class Activity A. In small groups, discuss whether virtue ethics is a part of your ethical worldview. Do you value certain traits? Do you try to emulate people you admire? Explain what virtues if any are most important to you. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION QUESTIONS Regardless of whether your class is taught in person or virtually, you can assign these questions several ways: in a discussion forum in your LMS; as content for creating inclass polls using online polling tools or the MindTap mobile application; as wholeclass discussions in person; or as a partner or group activity in class. 1. How do we know what traits ought to be considered virtues and what vices? Talking Points: Students should be able to talk about how virtues are developed in order that humans will achieve their ultimate goal or purpose. Human purpose is to flourish or to be fulfilled. Virtues can be evaluated based on the circumstances or role in which humans find themselves. Students should be able to distinguish flourishing and assert that virtues must be directed toward flourishing. Students may also talk about Aristotle's mean or average model which identifies the virtuous action as the middle action or the moderate action. 2. Aristotle says that virtue is a mean between two extremes. How would one decide just where that middle is between too much and too little of some trait? Talking Points: Students can discuss various examples of virtues and vices such as courage and foolhardiness, and so forth. Students should be able to arrive at the conclusion that rationality should lead one to the right understanding of virtues. Also students should be able to point to flourishing as a guiding factor in determining the mean between extremes. 3. Can you think of an example in which a person ends up worse off for behaving virtuously? Is this a reason to not behave virtuously? Is there another way that we should understand virtue? Discuss your answer. The book gives the example of Pat Tillman, an NFL star who enlisted in the Army Rangers in the middle of his football career. He was killed by friendly fire at the age of 27. Students can talk about this example or an example that they generate.

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES AND ASSIGNMENTS The following are activities and assignments developed by but not included in the text, PPTs, or courseware – they are for you to use if you wish. 1. Questions for Further Thought: These open response writing prompts can be used as in-class reflections or as assessment activities. a. The chapter asserts that Pat Tillman is a model for virtue. He is the NFL football star who quit his career to join the army rangers. He was killed in a friendly fire incident. Do you believe Tillman is an example of virtue, and if so, which virtues and why? If not, why not? b. According to Aristotle, there are two types of virtues: intellectual and moral. Explain what each of these types of morals are, and give an example of each. c. In the Greek tradition, the four cardinal virtues were wisdom, temperance, justice, and courage. What four virtues are cardinal for you? What traits of character do you strive for? Explain why. 2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10–25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films, TV episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. Ad Astra (2019) 123 minutes plus 20 minutes for discussion. Astronaut Roy McBride is selected for a mission to discover what happened to his missing father and his expedition to Neptune. Roy McBride practices and demonstrates Stoicism in every scene. He reads Marcus Aurelius. He monitors his vitals for reactions regularly. This film gives students an opportunity to see Stoicism and its love of virtue in action. Students will get an opportunity to discuss the virtues that Roy illustrates and what he perhaps fails to do. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES • •

•

Virtue Ethics/Ethics Defined, McCombs School of Business, 1:42. This short video is a great introduction to virtue ethics. Aristotle and Virtue Theory: Crash Course Philosophy #38, CrashCourse, 9:21. This is a longer introduction to Aristotle’s theory of virtue. This video would make a good homework assignment. Who was Confucius? – Bryan W. Van Norden, TED-Ed, 4:29. This video introduces to the historical figure of Confucius. It also addresses his philosophical thought.

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 09: Feminist Thought and the Ethics of Care

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 09: Feminist Thought and the Ethics of Care

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to the multiple concerns of feminism. Feminism critiques normative theories because they marginalize women and ignore their concerns. Feminism also directs attention to concerns such as violence against women. Feminists argue that traditional values such as impartiality and universality are associated with patriarchal systems of thought. In the 20th century Lawrence Kohlberg presented the “masculine” point of view, whereas Carol Gilligan asserted that young girls do indeed reason differently about morals than young boys. Gilligan thus opened the door to begin talking about values other than impartiality, objectivity, and universality. This view has developed into the ethics of care. Some feminists argue for ethics of care to be an alternative to traditional “masculine” moral theories; other feminists argue this still reinforces traditional notions of masculinity and femininity. The chapter covers the historical “waves” of feminism. The first wave is in the 19th and early 20th centuries. The second wave develops in the second half of the 20th century after WWII. The third wave is the wave we are currently in, where there is a broad gender critique. The chapter introduces the concept of intersectionality—the complexities of sex, gender, sex, and sexuality intersect with other identities but especially race, class, and ethnicity. Associated Readings Reading 9-1: Ain’t I A Woman? / bell hooks Reading 9-2: Caring / Nel Noddings Reading 9-3: The Need for More Than Justice / Annette Baier Reading 9-4: What Is Feminist Ethics? / Hilde Lindemann [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

MindTap Educator Guide o A detailed list of the activities and assets in your MindTap course. PowerPoints

Ready-to-use and customizable visual presentations for each chapter that include interactive activities and prompts to generate class discussion, promote comprehension and foster student engagement. Solution and Answer Guide o Discussion guide and talking points for discussion and review questions posed in the chapter. Test Bank o Test Bank content, offered in Blackboard, Moodle, Desire2Learn, and Canvas formats, contains learning objective–specific multiple-choice and essay questions for each chapter. You can import the test bank into your LMS to edit and manage questions and to create tests. Transition Guide o A chapter-by-chapter list that highlights content changes and updates in the new edition of the textbook and courseware design. Standard Writing Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ written work, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations. Standard Discussion Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ discussion contributions, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations. o

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 9.1

Describe the importance of feminist thought for ethical inquiry.

9.2

Explain feminist criticisms of traditional views about ethics and moral development.

9.3

Evaluate the ethics of care.

9.4

Distinguish between the several versions or “waves” of feminism.

9.5

Analyze feminist critiques of gender, race,and other intersectional identities.

9.6

Explain the problem of violence against women.

9.7

Defend your own ideas about the importance of feminist ethics and the ethics of care

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Female genital mutilation: Removal of parts of the female genitals (includes a variety of procedures); also called female circumcision. Feminism: Intellectual commitment and a political movement that seeks justice for women and the end of sexism in all forms. Feminist ethics: A critical theory of ethics that rejects male-dominant ideas, can include “feminine” ethics emphasizing community and caregiving (associated with Noddings). [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

C. Ethical Perspectives D. Nel Noddings E. Class Activity i. The philosophers we have been studying argue that there is a feminine morality and a masculine morality. What do you think of this distinction? Do you think gender informs moral decision making? Why or why not? F. Sources of Feminine Morality i. Psychosexual ii. Biological iii. Sociocultural III. The Ethics of Care A. Catharine MacKinnon B. Michael Slote IV. Feminist thought A. First wave B. Second wave V. The Third Wave A. Intersectionality B. bell hooks C. Judith Butler D. Feminist ethics E. Evaluation of Feminist Thought and Ethics of Care VI. Violence Against Women and Other Issues VII. Class activity A. A lot of the violence that is perpetrated against women is perpetrated by men. Do you think we should refer to this fact when we talk about violence against women? Would it make sense to talk about violence by men? Why or why not? [return to top]

female, is the morally "right" one? Does rightness depend on gender? Consider whether the male and female moral perspectives could complement one another. Talking points: Students can assert a thesis about whether they think gender plays a role in moral reasoning. They may take this argument in several directions, so the instructor should be prepared to address a diversity of viewpoints on the subject. Students can also propose a blend of the two moral perspectives of some type. 2. Do you believe that there are some good traits or virtues that are more typical of females and others of males? If so, is this learned behavior or is it natural to each sex? Explain why you think so. Talking points: Students can talk about natural law theory with respect to biological sex. They can also argue that there are differences between virtues of men and virtues of women but still say that the two different moral approaches can be practiced by everyone. 3. Do you find Caroline Whitbeck's biological explanation of the male-female difference in morality to be persuasive? Why or why not? What issues might there be with this explanation? Talking points: Students should first be able to identify Whitbeck's argument and articulate it. Whitbeck argues that because of reproduction women experience certain feelings of dependency and contingency. They do not have full control of their bodies. Students can assert theses about whether caring is more natural to women.

[return to top]

embrace an ethics of care? Why or why not? Do you think care ethics can become free of the association with traditional femininity? c. How might gender fluidity help to change our understanding of "masculine" and "feminine" virtues? 2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10–25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films, TV episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. She Said (2022) 129 minutes plus 20 minutes discussion time. This film tells the story of the two New York Times reporters who broke the Harvey Weinstein abuse scandal. This film is an excellent look at the history of harassment in Hollywood. The Weinstein scandal occasioned the #MeToo movement, which students can discuss. The chapter covers violence against women; this film offers a look into some of the heroines who have changed the world for the better. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES •

•

Alternative Paradigms: Care Ethics and Feminine Ethics, UvA ComScience Microlectures, 5:25. This video gives a useful introduction to care ethics; it is a good supplement for students. Episode #168…Introduction to an Ethics of Care, Philosophize This!, 42:34. This podcast is useful in depth introduction for the instructor and ambitious students. The meaning of life according to Simone de Beauvoir, TED Talks, 4:51. The video introduces the historical figure and the development of her philosophy. The video discusses The Second Sex, which is mentioned in the textbook and is key in the second wave of feminism.

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 10: Health Care Ethics

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 10: Health Care Ethics

Chapter 10: Health Care Ethics

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to the study of bioethics. Bioethics is the application of ethical judgments to topics involving life, including health care ethics, animal ethics, and end of life issues. A method of approaching bioethics is the casestudy method, or casuistry. Traditional theories are also applied in bioethics, including consequentialism, deontology, human rights theory, natural law, and care ethics. The chapter engages the philosophically complex subject of health and offers some definitions. The World Health Organization defines health as complete physical, mental, and social well-being. Basic principles of bioethics appear in codes such as the Hippocratic Oath and the Nuremberg Code. Ordinarily the basic principles of health care ethics usually include autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, and utilitarian or distributive concerns. The chapter also adds the principles of respect for human rights, health maximization, and care for the vulnerable. Advance directives express autonomy. Paternalism occurs when someone acts on our behalf. The chapter distinguishes between therapies and enhancements when considering the principle of beneficence. Cosmetic surgery is an enhancement and brings beneficence into question. Non-maleficence can be applied to the opioid epidemic, which has caused significant harm. The benefits of opioids should be weighed against the harms. Justice in health care involves social justice and health equity. There are currently many inequities in the current health care system that involved different health outcomes based on race, gender, economics, and so on. Rationing scarce medical resources poses questions about fairness and equity. Associated Readings Reading 10-1: Paternalism and Partial Autonomy / Onora O’Neill Reading 10-2: Equitable Personal Healthiness / Anita Silvers Reading 10-3: Ageism and Fair Innings / John Harris Reading 10-4: The Right to Health Care / Kai Nielsen Reading 10-5: No Right to Health Care / John David Lewis Reading 10-6: How Equal Must Our Rights to Health Care Be? / Norman Daniels Reading 10-7: Vulnerability and Bioethics / Wendy Rogers [return to top]

Chapter 10: Health Care Ethics

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 10.1

Describe basic topics and methods of studying bioethics.

10.2

Discuss the philosophical complexity of “health.”

Chapter 10: Health Care Ethics

10.3

Describe how basic principles of bioethics show up in codes and institutions.

10.4

Explain how autonomy applies in thinking about advance directives and paternalism.

10.5

Explain how beneficence might be applied in evaluating cosmetic surgery.

10.6

Evaluate the opioid epidemic using theconcept of non-maleficence.

10.7

Apply the concept of justice to the problem of rationing health care.

10.8

Defend a thesis about the right to health care.

10.9

Critically evaluate ethical issues involved in the COVID-19 pandemic.

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Bioethics: The application of ethical reasoning to topics involving life and living things. Eugenics: Goal of producing genetically superior offspring, either through genetic screening or through more forceful interventions including forced sterilization. health equity Paternalism: The idea that a state or some other authority ought to behave as a “father” who establishes rules that limit an individual’s liberty out of concern for that person’s overall good. Quarantine: A restriction on human interaction based on worries about contagion.

[return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

Chapter 10: Health Care Ethics

CHAPTER OUTLINE I. Introduction A. Bioethics B. Casuistry C. Consequentialism D. Nonconsequentialism E. Virtue ethics II. Defining Health A. A. Class Activity i. Health is difficult to define mainly because it is difficult to define illness and disease. For instance, is color blindness a disease? Is myopia a disability? Jonathan Metzl argues that health is an ideological position. An ideological position is holding a fixed set of ideas, regardless whether they prove to be right or wrong. What do you think he means by that? III. Basic Principles and Codes of Bioethics A. The Hippocratic oath B. The Belmont Report C. Helsinki Declaration D. The Nuremberg Code E. The Tuskegee experiment F. List of principles G. Dilemma versus temptation IV. Autonomy: Informed Consent, Advance Directives, and Paternalism A. Henrietta Lacks B. Informed consent C. Paternalism V. Beneficence and Cosmetic Surgery A. Beneficence B. Therapy versus enhancement VI. Class Activity A. We have talked about cosmetic surgery and what the difference is between therapy and enhancement. Now connect this idea to the principle of beneficence. In what way is cosmetic surgery beneficial? Does cosmetic surgery meet the definition of beneficence? Why or why not? VII. Non-maleficence and the Opioid Epidemic A. Primum non nocere B. Precautionary principle VIII. Justice, Equity, and Rationing A. Health equity

Chapter 10: Health Care Ethics

B. CDC C. Statistics D. Anita Silvers E. Distributive justice F. Fair -innings G. John David Lewis IX. Human Rights and the Right to Health Care A. Kai Nielsen X. Health Maximization, Care for the Vulnerable, and Pandemic Restrictions A. Public health B. Quality of life C. Eugenics D. Health maximization i. Wendy Rogers ii. Rawls's Difference Principle iii. Martha Nussbaum

[return to top]

Chapter 10: Health Care Ethics

2. In defining health, we must also think about illness and disease and what constitutes them. Is color blindness a disease? Do you think nearsightedness or myopia is a disability? People normally become presbyopic, or farsighted, in their forties and fifties; do you think farsightedness is a disease? Define disability and explain your answer. Talking Points: Students should be able to distinguish between illness and disease to some extent, even as the subject continues to be murky. Students should be able to make the connection between defining disease and defining health, and articulate the complexities of this connection. 3. Paternalism in health care ethics is the idea that those with relevant knowledge and experience are better positioned to make decisions than the less informed person (the patient). Do you think that doctors are better positioned than their patients to make health care decisions for the patient? Why or why not? Is there ever a time a doctor should make medical decisions for a patient? Explain your answer. Talking Points: Students can discuss the role of autonomy in the patient/doctor relationship and define what it looks like. Students can evaluate paternalism for its costs and benefits and assert a thesis about its role in health care ethics.

[return to top]

Chapter 10: Health Care Ethics

c. The goal of equity can leave us with problems. For example, is an 80year-old who is suffering from cognitive decline entitled to the same care in an emergency as an otherwise healthy 30-year-old? Why or why not? In a situation of scarce resources and staffing, which patient would you assist first? Explain your answer. 2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10–25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films, TV episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. My Sister's Keeper (2009) 110 minutes plus 20 minutes discussion time. This film explores the subject of genetic design. Anna Fitzgerald is a donor baby; she was conceived in order to provide donor material to her very ill sister, Kate, who has leukemia. At 11 years of age, Anna begins rebelling against this fate, and sues her parents for medical emancipation. The film tells the story of Kate's illness and Anna's bid for freedom. This film sets up many ethical problems very clearly and distinctly. Kate and Anna's mother, Sara Fitzgerald, is committed to saving her daughter at any cost--including Anna. Benefits and costs can be weighed throughout the film and students can practice using consequentialism. Sara treats Anna as a means to an end, and so the deontological viewpoint can be explored in depth. Even the comparatively minor role of the doctor in this case can be explored as an example of virtue ethics in practice. This is a film to know in the practice of health care ethics.

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES

Chapter 10: Health Care Ethics

• • •

World Health Organization Constitution, WHO. This site presents the WHO Constitution in all of its versions. What is Health?, Just Videos, 2015. This video is a quick, simple introduction to a definition of health and what health includes. Why your doctor should care about social justice, TED Talks, 2015, 13:40. Physician Mary Bassett talks about structural racism and health care, activism, and the role of doctors in social justice.

Chapter 10: Health Care Ethics

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 10: Health Care Ethics

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 11: Abortion and Euthanasia

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 11: Abortion and Euthanasia

TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Perspective of the Chapter ........................................................ 2 Supplements ......................................................................................... 2 Chapter Objectives .................................................................................. 3 Key Terms ............................................................................................. 3 What's New in This Chapter ........................................................................ 5 Chapter Outline ...................................................................................... 5 Additional Discussion Questions .............................................................. 6 Additional Activities and Assignments ....................................................... 8 Additional Resources ................................................................................ 9 Internet and Media Resources ........................................................... 9 Appendix ................................................................................................... 10 Generic Rubrics ................................................................................... 10 Standard Writing Rubric .......................................................................... 10 Standard Discussion Rubric ...................................................................... 11

Chapter 11: Abortion and Euthanasia

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to issues related to both the beginning and end of life. The chapter focuses first on explaining the conflict between pro-choice and prolife viewpoints. Pro-life arguments typically depend on an ontological claim about the fetus. Pro-choice is focused on autonomy and consent. Not all pro-life arguments depend on the ontological claim. Utilitarians will argue for maximizing happiness for all involved in the abortion decision. Different stages of development are considered in order to determine when a fetus attains moral status. The chapter divides issues of euthanasia into two broad categories: issues involving consent, and the issue of active versus passive euthanasia. Utilitarians will focus on the outcomes of euthanasia. Deontologists may be concerned with the motives of agents. The chapter situates abortion as a feminist concern. Both abortion and euthanasia are connected to concerns about vulnerable populations. Disability activists worry about both abortion and euthanasia being eugenic in nature. The chapter evaluates the role of privacy in the recent Dobbs decision. The decision maintained that the Constitution does not explicitly state a right to privacy; the Roe decision had clarified that there is a right to privacy in the penumbra of the Constitution. The chapter covers the doctrine of double effect, which states that an unintended bad consequence may be morally permissible. The double effect doctrine can be used to justify euthanasia or abortion. Associated Readings Reading 11-1: A Defense of Abortion / Judith Jarvis Thomson Reading 11-2: On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion / Mary Anne Warren Reading 11-3: The Value of Choice and the Choice to Value / Bertha Alvarez Manninen Reading 11-4: Why Abortion is Immoral / Don Marquis Reading 11-5: The Wrongfulness of Euthanasia / J. Gay – Williams Reading 11-6: Active and Passive Euthanasia / James Rachels Reading 11-7: The Philosopher’s Brief / Ronald Dworkin, Thomas Nagel, Robert Nozick, John Rawls, Judith Jarvis Thomson, and T. M. Scanlon Reading 11-8: U.S. Supreme Court Decision June 24, 2002 / Dobbs v. Jackson [return to top]

Chapter 11: Abortion and Euthanasia

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 11.1 Explain the conflict between pro-life and pro-choice points of view. 11.2 Evaluate moral and ontological issues involved in thinking about abortion.

Chapter 11: Abortion and Euthanasia

11.3 Evaluate the application of moral theories to different kinds of euthanasia. 11.4 Explain social justice and feminist concerns that arise in thinking about abortion and euthanasia. 11.5 Summarize the legal dispute in the United States about the right to privacy. 11.6 Analyze how double effect reasoning might apply in thinking about euthanasia and abortion. 11.7 Defend a thesis about abortion and euthanasia.

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Double effect: The principle or doctrine of double effect is the idea in deontological ethics that holds that if the intention behind an action is morally appropriate, unintended (but foreseen and accidental) negative effects may be permissible. Ontology: theory of being or beings; an account of what exists or about the sort of being a thing is. Palliative sedation: Sedation employed to provide pain management at the end of life (related to terminal sedation). persistent vegetative state (PVS). Sentience: The ability to feel, perceive, and be conscious of the world, used in discussions of animal welfare and abortion in considering the moral status of animals and fetuses. Sex-selective abortion: Abortion performed for the purpose of selecting the gender of the baby. Terminal sedation: Use of sedatives in palliative care that aims to reduce suffering at the end of life but may also contribute to death and be considered as part of euthanasia. Whole brain death: Legal criterion for death focused not on respiration and heartbeat but on the presence of brain activity. [return to top]

Chapter 11: Abortion and Euthanasia

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

CHAPTER OUTLINE I. Class Activity: Abortion (Slide 4) A. Watch the TED Talk video. Aspen Baker talks about what she calls “pro-voice,” as a way of opening a safe space for conversation about abortion. Pro-voice is about listening and storytelling. Give examples of how you have practiced listening skills when someone said something that you disagreed with. II. Introduction (Slides 5–9) A. Pro-choice B. Pro-life C. Ontology D. Euthanasia E. Ronald Dworkin and Philosopher's Brief III. Moral Approaches to Abortion (Slides 10–16) A. Utilitarianism B. Rights based approach 1. Judith Jarvis Thomson C. The ontological and moral status of the fetus 1. 6 stages of development Conception Heartbeat Quickening Viability Potentiality D. Class activity: advance directives 1. Watch the TED Talk video. This is a heavy subject—death and dying—so please be aware of a trigger possibility. Dr. Saul discusses advance directives, which we discuss in this chapter. Have you or anyone in your family ever had a conversation about what you would like to happen if you can’t speak for yourself? If

Chapter 11: Abortion and Euthanasia

not, what do you think about having that conversation with a family member or close friend? How would you go about it? IV. Moral Approaches to Euthanasia (Slides 17–21) A. Types of euthanasia 1. Passive 2. Active 3. Voluntary 4. Involuntary 5. Nonvoluntary 6. Physician-assisted suicide A. Utilitarian approaches to euthanasia B. Nonconsequentialist considerations regarding euthanasia C. Criteria for death 1. Terry Schiavo 2. Jahi McMath V. Current Issues (Slides 22–28) A. Feminism B. Dobbs C. Bertha Alvarez Manninen D. Social Justice Concerns with Euthanasia and Abortion 1. Peter Singer 2. Harriet McBryde Johnson 3. Tom Shakespeare VI. Abortion and the Legal Right to Privacy (Slides 29–32) A. Autonomy B. Roe v. Wade C. Dobbs decision D. Class activity: Dobbs 1. The Dobbs decision made clear that the court believes there is no explicit legal right to privacy.Is there a moral right to privacy? Explain the difference between a legal right and a moral right. Do you believe that you (and everyone else) is entitled to a certain measure of privacy? If so, how much? E. Libertarian approach F. Utilitarian approach G. Originalism VII. Palliative Sedation, Emergency Abortion, and Double Effect Reasoning (Slide 33)

Chapter 11: Abortion and Euthanasia

A. Palliative sedation B. Doctrine of double effect [return to top]

[return to top]

Chapter 11: Abortion and Euthanasia

ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES AND ASSIGNMENTS The following are activities and assignments developed by but not included in the text, PPTs, or courseware – they are for you to use if you wish. 1. Questions for Further Thought: These open response writing prompts can be used as in-class reflections or as assessment activities. a. What kinds of questions should we ask about abortion if we take a consequentialist, utilitarian approach to it? Present a consequentialist argument for or against abortion. b. What kinds of questions should we ask about euthanasia from a deontological perspective? What might a deontologist say about euthanasia? c. What do you think we ought to call it when a person takes lethal medication to end their life? Have they "committed suicide," or have they "died with dignity," or received "aid in dying"? Explain your answer. 2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10–25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films,TV episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. Me Before You (2016) 116 minutes plus discussion time. This film tells the story of Will Traynor, who is fully paralyzed after a traffic accident. Lou Clark is hired to take care of Will; they develop a relationship. After some time, Will reveals that his plan is to die with dignity after giving his parents six months of living. Lou must reckon with this decision as she tries to convince him not to commit suicide. This film foregrounds the issues of dying with dignity very neatly. Students can discuss Lou's drive to "save" Will in terms of the ethical theories the book covers. Students can discuss whether they believe the right thing happens in the end. Because the film is a romance, students can also discuss the role of love in the narrative of dying.

[return to top]

Chapter 11: Abortion and Euthanasia

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES •

•

Prepare for a good end of life, TED Talks, Judy MacDonald Johnston, 2013. This video is 5 minutes and 49 seconds long. It talks about how to plan for a good end of life. If shown to students a trigger warning may be advisable for themes of death. The video helps viewers to begin thinking about death as something over which we have a very small sphere of control. Let’s talk about dying, TED Talks, Peter Saul. Saul is an emergency doctor who asks us to think about the end of our lives and to question the modern model of slow, intubated death in hospital. A trigger warning may be advisable if shown to students. A better way to talk about abortion, TED Talks, Aspen Baker, 2015. Aspen Baker makes the case for being neither “pro-life” nor “pro-choice” but rather “pro-voice”; listening and storytelling can play a huge role in discussing difficult topics.

[return to top]

Chapter 11: Abortion and Euthanasia

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 11: Abortion and Euthanasia

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 12: Biotechnology and Bioengineering

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 12: Biotechnology and Bioengineering

TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Perspective of the Chapter ........................................................ 2 Supplements ......................................................................................... 2 Chapter Objectives ............................................................... Key Terms ......................................................................................... 4 What's New in This Chapter ........................................................................ 5 Chapter Outline ...................................................................................... 5 Additional Discussion Questions .............................................................. 7 Additional Activities and Assignments ....................................................... 8 Additional Resources ................................................................................ 9 Internet and Media Resources ........................................................... 9 Appendix ........................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Generic Rubrics ................................................................................... 10 Standard Writing Rubric .......................................................................... 10 Standard Discussion Rubric ...................................................................... 11

Chapter 12: Biotechnology and Bioengineering

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to biotechnology and bioengineering. The chapter begins by distinguishing between a therapy and an enhancement. Therapies return people to normal function, while enhancements go beyond normal function. Some moral approaches only approve of therapeutic technologies, while others may be open to the idea of enhancement. Bio-conservatives tend to oppose enhancement; transhumanists tend to embrace it. Bio-conservatives focus on nonconsequentialist concerns such as respect for dignity and avoiding “playing God” and changing nature (recall the natural law tradition). Transhumanists are focused on consequentialism, in that they believe biotechnology can produce good outcomes for people. Transhumanists will not be opposed to enhancements that increase performance so long as there is consent and benefit. Bioconservatives are cautious about performance-enhancing drugs, because they challenge notions of fairness and justice in competition and who has access to the technology. The chapter reviews ethical controversies around reproductive technologies. Natural law tradition warns against these technologies, suggesting that it is “unnatural.” The chapter then evaluates stem cell research, cloning, and genetic engineering. Bio-conservatives oppose these technologies on the grounds of natural law tradition, but there could be therapeutic, as opposed to enhancing, uses of these technologies. The chapter introduces the “precautionary principle,” which holds we ought to avoid risks and harms when exploring new technologies. The chapter evaluates genetically modified organisms (GMOs) on the grounds of the natural law tradition and the transhumanist view. Associated Readings Reading 12-1: Transhumanist Declaration / Various Authors Reading 12-2: Ageless Bodies, Happy Souls / Leon R. Kass Reading 12-3: In Defense of Posthuman Dignity / Nick Bostrom Reading 12-4: CRISPR and Velvet Eugenics / Rosemarie Garland-Thomson [return to top]

Chapter 12: Biotechnology and Bioengineering

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 12.1

Explain how the difference between atherapy and an enhancement can be used to assess different examples of biotechnology and bioengineering.

Chapter 12: Biotechnology and Bioengineering

12.2

Describe the conflict between bio-conservatism and transhumanism.

12.3

Critically evaluate ethical problems involving performance-enhancing drugs.

12.4

Describe ethical controversies involved in reproductive technologies.

12.5

Evaluate stem cell research, cloning, and genetic engineering in humans.

12.6

Analyze controversies regarding genetically modified organisms.

12.7

Defend a thesis about biotechnology and bioengineering.

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Bio-conservatism: The idea that we should not be “playing God” with regard to biotechnologies, sometimes based upon repugnance toward new technologies (associated with Kass). Bioengineering: Projects aiming to develop mechanical supplements for biological systems, which can be used for therapy or enhancement. Biotechnology: Interventions and manipulations of biological systems and organisms through the use of technological means including genetic engineering, cloning, the use of drugs, surgeries, and so on. Enhancement: An intervention that goes beyond natural/normal function and creates superior performance; employed in discussions of biotechnology (versus therapy). Eugenics: The goal of producing genetically superior offspring, either through genetic screening or through more forceful interventions including forced sterilization. Genetically modified organisms: Plants or animals that have been genetically altered by scientists in an effort to improve the stock and increase yield. Precautionary principle: An idea used in environmental ethics and in thinking about biotechnology that emphasizes avoiding risk when considering innovations. Reproductive cloning: A cloning procedure that aims to develop an individual organism as a substitute for ordinary reproduction (versus therapeutic cloning).

Chapter 12: Biotechnology and Bioengineering

Therapeutic cloning: A cloning procedure that is used to grow stem cells or tissues that could be used for organ donation or regenerative medicine (versus reproductive cloning). Therapy: An intervention employed to return something to natural/normal function; employed in discussions of biotechnology (versus enhancement). Transhumanism: A movement that aims to improve human abilities, extend human life span, and increase cognitive capacity; sometimes referred to as post-humanism (associated with Bostrom). [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

CHAPTER OUTLINE I. Class Activity: Chimeras (Slide 4) A. Chimeras are organisms that contain two sets of DNA from different species. Watch the video, then comment on the practice of inserting human cells into the cells of other species. What are your thoughts about this? Does this bother you? Are you interested to see what emerges from these experiments? Consider and explain your answer. https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/949120 II. Introduction (Slide 5) A. Biotechnology B. Bioengineering C. Therapy D. Enhancement III. Moral Approaches to Biotechnology (Slides 6–12) A. Precautionary Principle B. Bio-conservatism C. Transhumanism D. Eugenics E. Susan B. Levin

Chapter 12: Biotechnology and Bioengineering

F. Julian Savulescu and Gary Kahane G. Rosemarie Garland-Thomson H. Francis Fukuyama I. Nick Bostrom J. Leon Kass K. Current Issues IV. Athletic and Cognitive Enhancement (Slide 13) A. Enhancements i. Steroids ii. Artificial limbs iii. Cognitive enhancements iv. Transcranial direct-current stimulation V. Class Activity: Oscar Pistorius (Slide 14) A. Watch the following video about Oscar Pistorius. Then discuss whether you believe he had an unfair advantage or not. Explain your answer. https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS799US799&q=oscar+pist orius+biography&tbm=vid&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiUmJmytpH_AhVVkGoFHV0X C8QQ0pQJegQIDhAB&biw=2560&bih=1297&dpr=1#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:66f512 48,vid:lSGBwUEcM6c VI. Reproductive Technologies (Slide 15) A. In vitro fertilization B. Surrogacy VII. Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Technology (Slides 16–22) A. Stem Cell Technology i. Multipotent ii. Pluripotent B. Leon Kass C. Chimeras D. Therapeutic Cloning E. Reproductive Cloning F. Class Activity: Genetic Choices i. Watch the video. If you were in the position that O’Neill describes, of being able to genetically correct your unborn baby, would you do it? Why or why not? Be thoughtful about your answer. https://www.ted.com/talks/alastair_o_neill_when_genetic_cho ice_becomes_personal

Chapter 12: Biotechnology and Bioengineering

G. Genetic Engineering, Genetic Screening, and Gene Therapy H. Preimplantation Genetic Screening I. Human Genome Project VIII. Genetically Modified Plants and Animals (Slides 23–26) A. GMOs B. Arguments for GMOs C. Arguments against GMOs D. Applications of Moral Theory

[return to top]

Chapter 12: Biotechnology and Bioengineering

3. A Maryland couple, both born deaf, wanted to have a sperm donor with hereditary deafness so they could increase the likelihood of having a deaf infant. Assert a thesis regarding this case using one of the theories we have discussed: natural law, virtue ethics, deontology, utilitarianism, or care. Talking Points: Students will need to be able to discuss what counts as healthy and what counts as illness. They will need to evaluate the case using a theory that we have discussed. Students should be able to characterize a theory and then apply it to this case. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES AND ASSIGNMENTS The following are activities and assignments developed by but not included in the text, PPTs, or courseware – they are for you to use if you wish. 1. Questions for Further Thought: These open response writing prompts can be used as in-class reflections or as assessment activities. a. Explain the difference between a therapy and an enhancement, and give examples of each. b. Explain how the precautionary principle is related to non-maleficence. c. Do you think of yourself as more as bio-conservative or more as a transhumanist? Define each of these perspectives then explain why you are more one than the other, or neither. 2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10–25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films, TV episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. The Island (2005) 136 minutes plus discussion time. The Island is a story where people order clones to live in an isolated facility in order to provide spare body parts for the originals' medical care. Lincoln Six Echo begins to question his existence when his friend is selected to go to The Island. He and his friend escape the sterile compound where they are kept to explore who they are and why they exist.

Chapter 12: Biotechnology and Bioengineering

This film foregrounds issues of identity that arise as the result of this advanced medical care being provided to the rich and privileged. The biotechnological advances raise the issue of what it means to be fully human. The film gives students an opportunity to answer this difficult question. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES •

• •

Can we create new senses for humans? TED Talks, David Eagleman, 2015. 20:34. This video describes a sensory vest that Eagleman developed to talk about how we might obtain new sensory experiences. Eagleman also has a podcast on the same subject. Biohacking – you can do it, too TED Talks, Ellen Jorgensen, 2012. 9:52. Jorgensen argues for an equitably accessible biotechnology. My DNA vending machine TED Talks, Gabe Barcia-Colombo, 2015. 4:43. BarciaColombo uses art to question how we use DNA technology.

[return to top]

Chapter 12: Biotechnology and Bioengineering

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 12: Biotechnology and Bioengineering

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 13: Equality and Discrimination

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 13: Equality and Discrimination

TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Perspective of the Chapter ........................................................ 2 Supplements ......................................................................................... 2 Chapter Objectives .................................................................................. 3 Key Terms ............................................................................................. 3 What's New in This Chapter ........................................................................ 5 Chapter Outline ...................................................................................... 5 Additional Discussion Questions .............................................................. 6 Additional Activities and Assignments ....................................................... 8 Additional Resources ................................................................................ 9 Internet and Media Resources ................................................................ 9 Appendix ................................................................................................... 10 Generic Rubrics ................................................................................... 10 Standard Writing Rubric .......................................................................... 10 Standard Discussion Rubric ...................................................................... 11

Chapter 13: Equality and Discrimination

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to the principle of equality, which states that we ought to treat people equally, that it is not fair to treat people differently unless there is some valid reason for the different treatment. The principle of equality is a basic principle of justice, related to Aristotle’s idea that similar things ought to be treated in similar ways. Social justice is focused on applying the principle of equality to social issues such as racism and other forms of oppression. Critical philosophy of race considers the ontological status of race (whether it exists) while also ethically analyzing racism. Most scholars agree that race is a social construction but still figures prominently as a system of oppression. Racism, sexism, and other forms of oppression intersect in particular ways to oppress people. Intersectionality is the concept that reminds us to consider the complex and intersecting identities of people. Affirmative action programs are instituted to remedy past discrimination and racially disparate outcomes, which means there may be differential treatment based on race. Critics argue affirmative action is reverse discrimination. Proponents argue that some positive steps need to be taken to remedy past discrimination. Reparations are supported or criticized in the same way. Other concerns about inequality include police brutality and racial profiling. Associated Readings Reading 13-1: Five Faces of Oppression / IRIS Marion Young Reading 13-2 Racisms | Kwame Anthony Appiah Reading 13-3: How to be an Anti-Racist / Ibram X. Kendi Reading 13-4: White Privilege, Black Rights / Naomi Zack [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

MindTap Educator Guide o A detailed list of the activities and assets in your MindTap course. PowerPoints

Chapter 13: Equality and Discrimination

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 13.1

Describe the principle of equality andapply it to the concerns of social justice.

13.2

Explain concepts found in critical philosophical accounts of race and racism.

13.3

Apply the concept of intersectionality to discussions of inequality.

13.4

Evaluate arguments in defense of affirmative action and reparations.

13.5

Defend a thesis about the ethics of racial profiling, affirmative action, and reparations.

[return to top]

Chapter 13: Equality and Discrimination

KEY TERMS Institutional racism: See structural racism. Intersectionality: An approach to social philosophy that emphasizes how various form of identity, discrimination, and oppression intersect in different ways in diverse cases. Principle of equality idea that we should treat equal things in equal ways and that we ought to treat different things in unequal ways. Racism unjust use of racial or ethnic categories to classify individuals and distribute social benefits and harms. Structural racism idea that social structures are constituted in ways that create disparate racial outcomes (also called institutional racism). [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

CHAPTER OUTLINE I. The Principle of Equality (Slides 3–4) A. Non-bias B. Proportionality and equity C. Social benefits and harms D. Proof and reality of difference E. Relevant differences F. Identity and individuality II. Racism and Unjustified Discrimination (Slides 5–13) A. Class Activity: Just Discrimination i. Discuss how combatants exercise just discrimination when confronting civilians. How is this discrimination just? Explain your answer. B. Race, racialism, and critical philosophies of race C. Critical race theory

Chapter 13: Equality and Discrimination

D. 1619 Project E. 1776 Project F. Class activity: wokeness i. Define “wokeness” as it is currently used in culture. What exactly does “wokeness” mean? Where did this word come from? Discuss the history and definition of the word “wokeness.” G. Race as social construct H. W.E.B. Du Bois I. Kwame Appiah J. Lucius Outlaw Jr. K. Structural racism L. Implicit bias III. Intersectionality and Other Forms of Discrimination (Slides 14–18) A. Intersectionality B. Kimberle Crenshaw C. Police brutality and black lives matter i. Profiling ii. Civil rights iii. Jim Crow laws iv. Homer Plessy v. Brown v. Board vi. Hate crimes D. Class Activity: Matthew Shepard i. Matthew Shepard’s mother, Judy Shepard, chose to forgive the killers of her son Matthew, who was murdered by two men motivated by hate. Discuss the act of forgiveness, and how you would feel if your son was killed for hate. Would you be able to forgive? What is the advantage, if any, of forgiveness? Explain your answers. IV. Affirmative Action and Reparations (Slides 19–23) A. Preferences B. Goals C. Quotas D. Hopwood v. Texas E. Fisher v. the University of Texas at Austin F. Reparations G. Consequentialist considerations H. Nonconsequentialist considerations

Chapter 13: Equality and Discrimination

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION QUESTIONS Regardless of whether your class is taught in person or virtually, you can assign these questions several ways: in a discussion forum in your LMS; as content for creating inclass polls using online polling tools or the MindTap mobile application; as wholeclass discussions in person; or as a partner or group activity in class. 1. The chapter addresses the issue of representations of Asian Americans on television and film, which are stereotyping and often unflattering. It is worth asking what kinds of stereotypes we see in the medica about racial groups and what kind of impact those stereotypes have on society. How does what you are seeing in the media reinforce racism? Talking points: Students can give examples of stereotypes in the media from television shows and films, and on social media. Students can discuss how these stereotypes work to spread racism and reinforce already existing systems of oppression. 2. Consider a New Jersey highway patrolman who pulls over a Black driver in a Nissan Pathfinder because the police have intelligence that Jamaican drug rings favor this car as a means for their marijuana trade in the Northeast. Is this an example of unjust discrimination or is it a reasonable procedure? Why or why not? Talking Points: Students can clarify their understanding of profiling versus racial profiling. They can analyze the case using the principle of equality to determine if anything unjust has occurred. 3. Explain the concept of intersectionality and give an example. Talking Points: Students can demonstrate their understanding of the concept of intersectionality. The concept applies both to identities and to systems of oppression. They can turn to numerous examples in the text or in films or videos to demonstrate their understanding of intersectionality.

Chapter 13: Equality and Discrimination

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES AND ASSIGNMENTS The following are activities and assignments developed by but not included in the text, PPTs, or courseware – they are for you to use if you wish. 1. Questions for Further Thought: These open response writing prompts can be used as in-class reflections or as assessment activities. a. Define stereotype. What is a stereotype? Is there any truth to a stereotype? Are stereotypes ever helpful? Are they harmful? Why? b. Define structural or institutional racism and give an example of it. c. Critics of affirmative action policies suggest that preferences for some mean denial of benefits to others. Because of that critics have labeled it as reverse discrimination. What is reverse discrimination and do you think it plays a role in affirmative action? Why or why not? 2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10–25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films, TV episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. Hidden Figures (2016) 127 minutes plus discussion time. This film tells the true story of three women scientists at NASA who were mathematics geniuses but who suffered the humiliation and alienation of racial prejudice in the institution at the time. The film makes a great historical introduction of the period and its prejudices; at the same time, the film presents numerous examples of inequity based on nothing other than racial differences. b. The film will provide numerous examples of unequal treatment for students to analyze and discuss. Students can discuss the principle of equality in detail. [return to top]

Chapter 13: Equality and Discrimination

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES •

•

What if mental health workers responded to emergency calls? TED Talks, Leslie Herod—Colorado State Representative, 9:35. Rep. Herod answers this question by reviewing a program in Eugene Oregon called CAHOOTS, where mental health professionals respond to 911 calls. This video presents a viable alternative to racial profiling and addresses the skill gap for police officers. How we can make racism a solvable problem – and improve policing TED Talks, Dr. Phillip Atiba Goff, 2019, 12:04. A slightly longer video that looks at race and policing. Dr. Goff suggests we are defining racism wrong. If we define racism as behaviors rather than feelings, then we will be able to measure it. Then, we can begin to make changes. How racial bias works – and how to disrupt it TED Talks, Jennifer L. Eberhardt, 2020, 14:08. Eberhardt examines unconscious bias and how it forms; they analyze the link that bias creates between blackness and crime. She suggests how to create points of friction to actively interrupt this process.

[return to top]

Chapter 13: Equality and Discrimination

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 13: Equality and Discrimination

Standard Discussion Rubric Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 14: Economic Justice

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 14: Economic Justice

Chapter 14: Economic Justice

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to economic justice from utilitarian, natural law, and deontological points of view. The natural law tradition encourages creating a just distribution of social goods in an ordered society in which people are able to live decent lives. Utilitarian theories are critical of distributions of economic goods that produce poverty and unhappiness. Deontological ethics is concerned with helping people in need. The chapter presents procedural and end-state ideas about justice. Procedural justice focuses on the fairness of processes in distributions of goods. End-state justice focuses on substantive equality as an outcome. The chapter defines and distinguishes libertarianism, socialism, and modern liberalism. Libertarianism emphasizes leaving individuals alone. Socialism is concerned with equality. Modern liberalism is a hybrid theory that respects liberty while moderating inequality. The chapter introduces Rawls’s theory of justice and the communitarian critique of his theory. The chapter looks at various proposals for addressing economic inequality, including charity, taxation, reparations, minimum wages, living wages, education, health care, and loan forgiveness. Associated Readings Reading 14-1: Justice as Fairness / John Rawls Reading 14-2: Distributive Justice / Robert Nozick Reading 14-3: Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal / Ayn Rand Reading 14-4: Evangelii Gaudium / Pope Francis [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

MindTap Educator Guide o A detailed list of the activities and assets in your MindTap course. PowerPoints

Chapter 14: Economic Justice

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 14.1

Explain the concepts of social justice and economic justice from utilitarian, natural law, and deontological points of view.

14.2

Describe the difference between procedural and end-state ideas about justice.

14.3

Explain differences between libertarianism, socialism, and modern liberalism.

14.4

Recount John Rawls’s theory of justice and the communitarian critique of his theory.

14.5

Analyze some proposals for responding to economic inequality.

14.6

Defend a thesis about economic justice.

[return to top]

Chapter 14: Economic Justice

KEY TERMS Laissez-faire capitalism form of economic and social organization that emphasizes leaving the market alone to regulate itself. Living wage a minimum wage standard indexed to the cost of living. Minimum wage legally mandated minimum hourly wage for labor. Negative rights rights of noninterference and prevention of harm, often called liberty rights.. Positive rights rights of entitlement to basic subsistence and other means of living sometimes called welfare rights. Procedural justice a theory of justice focused on the fairness of the procedures used to distribute benefits and harms. Social justice an approach to justice that is concerned with the fair distribution of goods in society, often associated with natural law theories. [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

CHAPTER OUTLINE I. Introduction (Slides 5–10) A. Social arrangements and individuals B. Natural law tradition C. Thomas Massaro D. Pope Francis E. Zakat F. Utilitarianism G. Substantive equality

Chapter 14: Economic Justice

H. I. J. K.

Equality of opportunity Deontology Libertarians Charity

II. Class activity: Compassion (Slide 11) A. Consider the following. A doctor has a patient whom they provide adequate, competent care. The doctor heals the patient. However, the doctor does not show any compassion as they are delivering this care to the patient. Is a doctor obligated to be compassionate? Is compassionate care a supererogatory duty for doctors? Explain your answer. III. Distributive Justice (Slide 12) A. Process or procedural justice B. End-state justice C. Equal opportunity IV. Political and Economic Theories (Slides 13–20) A. Libertarianism B. Capitalism i. Laissez-faire ii. Milton Friedman C. Socialism D. Class activity: company consciousness i. Economist Milton Friedman argues that businesses should not focus on ethics but make the most money possible—that is the right thing for businesses to do. What do you think? Do you think companies are responsible for conducting business ethically? For example, should clothing manufacturers produce clothing in countries where labor is extremely cheap, often to the point of exploitation? Do you consider where your clothing comes from? E. Negative rights and positive rights F. Modern liberalism V. John Rawls's Theory of Justice (Slides 21–24) A. Original position B. Veil of ignorance C. Class activity: applying Rawls's theory i. You are in the original position, where you are with diverse others forming a new society. You are behind the veil of ignorance, so you don’t know whether you will have a

Chapter 14: Economic Justice

high, medium, or low income. Review the chart below, and decide which society you believe would be the best society to live in, according to Rawls, and explain why. D. Communitarian response VI. Current Issues (Slides 25–31) A. Wage and wealth gaps i. Wealth ii. Wage iii. Net worth B. Capitalism C. Socialism D. Modern liberals E. Minimum wage F. Poverty, education, and health care G. Loan forgiveness [return to top]

Chapter 14: Economic Justice

Talking points: Students can distinguish between procedural and end-state justice. They can apply Rawls's two principles of justice to argue for equal opportunity. Students can assert an end-state argument of justice to argue against equal opportunity. 3. Do you think that people in Rawls's "original position" would choose the two principles that he suggests? Explain. Talking points: Students must first articulate Rawls's two principles as well as the original position and its parameters. Students can then evaluate the two principles for their fairness and suggest other principles that might have been chosen.

[return to top]

Chapter 14: Economic Justice

a. Elysium (2013) 109 minutes plus discussion time. This film is a dystopian science fiction action thriller set in the year 2154. Elysium is a space station for the rich and privileged, who have left earth to escape the poverty, disease, and pollution brought about by overpopulation. Max DeCosta is an inhabitant of earth trying desperately to get to Elysium to avail himself of the advanced medical technology on Elysium.

The economic disparities in this film are stark and clear. DeCosta is a down on his luck inhabitant of earth who is trying to turn his life around. When he suffers what will ultimately be a fatal accident at work, he becomes desperate to heal himself using the technology on Elysium. Access to advanced biotechnological medical care is severely restricted to the privileged few on Elysium. The film gives students an opportunity to imagine how inequity develops and is maintained. The film's resolution is overly simple but is illustrative of the point that equality is the goal that we should strive for.

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES •

•

Is inequality inevitable? TED Talks, 6:31. This video explains the gini index, which measures economic inequality, and how governmental policy choices impact inequality. A short, thoughtful introduction to economic inequality. Can the economy grow forever?, TED Talks, 5:51. This video explores an interesting question about whether the economy can grow forever. Concepts of economy are explained accessibly. The video explores how economies can balance efficiency with sustainability. Income and Wealth Inequality: Crash Course Economics #17, CrashCourse, 2016, 10:15. This video gives a long form introduction to wealth and income inequality, including explaining the origins of economic inequality. Good for preparing for lecture.

[return to top]

Chapter 14: Economic Justice

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 14: Economic Justice

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 15: Global Justice and Globalization

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 15: Global Justice and Globalization

TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Perspective of the Chapter ........................................................ 2 Supplements ......................................................................................... 2 Chapter Objectives ............................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Key Terms ......................................................................................... 4 What's New in This Chapter .................................................................... 4 Chapter Outline ...................................................................................... 4 Additional Discussion Questions .............................................................. 6 Additional Activities and Assignments ........................................................... 7 Additional Resources ............................................................................ 8 Internet and Media Resources ........................................................... 8 Appendix .............................................................................................. 9 Generic Rubrics .................................................................................. 9 Standard Writing Rubric ........................................................................ 9 Standard Discussion Rubric............................................................... 9

Chapter 15: Global Justice and Globalization

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to the issues of globalization and global justice. Globalization is a historical process creating global interconnection involving trade, transportation, and technology. Global justice asks ethical questions about how the global community ought to respond to global challenges. The chapter addresses the issue of global poverty by suggesting proposals for compensation and reparations for prior colonialism, charity by individuals and states, and contributions of .7% of GNP by affluent nations. Peter Singer argues the affluent have an obligation to give significant aid to those who are suffering, whether near or far. Garrett Hardin suggests aid stops at the border. The question of charity as supererogatory is raised. Postcolonial theory argues that affluent nations gained their wealth through the exploitation of colonialism and owe reparations or compensation to poorer nations. Postcolonialism calls for decolonization of the ideas, economies, and identities of non-Western cultures. The chapter addresses the “clash of civilizations,” between the West and its values and the non-West, particularly Asian and Islamic cultures. Globalizing institutions such as the World Bank have been criticized for failing to include voices from the developing world and for creating a system of indebtedness. The chapter reviews individualistic solutions such as ethical consumerism and fair trade. Individual consumers can make choices that support working people in other parts of the world while avoiding products made in exploitative conditions. Associated Readings Reading 15-1: The Life You Can Save / Peter Singer Reading 15-2: Living on a Lifeboat / Garrett Hardin Reading 15-3: Transforming Global Justice Theorizing / Krushil Watene Reading 15-4 Moral and Political Philosophy of Immigration / Jose Jorge Mendoza [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. •

MindTap Educator Guide

Chapter 15: Global Justice and Globalization

•

o A detailed list of the activities and assets in your MindTap course. PowerPoints o Ready-to-use and customizable visual presentations for each chapter that include interactive activities and prompts to generate class discussion, promote comprehension and foster student engagement. Solution and Answer Guide o Discussion guide and talking points for discussion and review questions posed in the chapter. Test Bank o Test Bank content, offered in Blackboard, Moodle, Desire2Learn, and Canvas formats, contains learning objective–specific multiple-choice and essay questions for each chapter. You can import the test bank into your LMS to edit and manage questions and to create tests. Transition Guide o A chapter-by-chapter list that highlights content changes and updates in the new edition of the textbook and courseware design. Standard Writing Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ written work, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations. Standard Discussion Rubric o A customizable rubric for evaluating students’ discussion contributions, for use as both a grading tool and a student-facing document for setting expectations.

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 15.1

Describe some of the challenges of globalization and global justice.

15.2

Analyze arguments and proposals for alleviating global poverty.

15.3

Apply concepts such as utilitarianism, justice, and rights to global issues.

15.4

Evaluate arguments about decolonization and the inclusion of Indigenous voices.

15.5

Evaluate supposed clashes of civilizations and the challenge of unequal development.

Chapter 15: Global Justice and Globalization

15.6

Explain the critical perspective of anti-globalization.

15.7

Analyze the ideas of ethical consumerism, fair trade, and other individualistic approaches to global justice.

15.8

Defend a thesis about proposals fordealing with global poverty, immigration, and other global justice issues.

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Globalization process of increasing integration of global markets and ideas, by way of growing international cooperation and international business. [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

CHAPTER OUTLINE I. Introduction (Slides 4–5) A. Globalization B. Global Justice C. Cosmopolitanism II. Moral Approaches to Global Justice and Global Poverty (Slides 6–10) A. Self interest B. Class Activity i. Peter Singer argues in a TED Talk that we should be concerned about those far away from us. Discuss whether you think we should be concerned about those far away from us and why or why not. Explain your answer. Video: https://www.ted.com/talks/peter_singer_the_why_and_how_of_effective _altruism C. Charity

Chapter 15: Global Justice and Globalization

D. Thomas Pogge E. Reparations and compensation F. Class Activity: Charity i. Some people argue that charity is supererogatory, or not required by moral duty. Do you feel that charity is optional, or do you feel it is required morally? Why or why not? Explain your answer. G. Debt forgiveness H. Kok-Chor Tan III. Global Utilitarianism and Other Moral Theories (Slides 11–14) A. Peter Singer B. Effective Altruism C. Garrett Hardin D. Thomas Malthus E. Natural law F. Thomas Aquinas IV. Decolonization and Inclusion (Slides 15–17) A. Decolonization B. Postcolonialism C. Kwasi Wiredu D. Cultural imperialism E. Krushil Watene F. Eddy Souffrant V. Globalization and Its Critics (Slides 18–26) A. Technology B. interpretations i. internationalization ii. liberalization iii. universalization iv. Modernization v. Westernization v1. Deterritorialization C. Two effects of globalization 1. outsourcing 2. offshoring D. Clash of civilizations E. Global inequity and poverty

Chapter 15: Global Justice and Globalization

VI. Globalizing Institutions and Anti-Globalization Movements (Slides 27–29) A. International Monetary Fund B. World Trade Organization C. G7 D. G20 E. Anti-globalization F. Naomi Klein G. Noam Chomsky H. Joseph Stiglitz VII. Individual Solutions and the Challenge of Immigration (Slides 30–33) A. NGOs and individuals B. Individuals C. Class Activity: Fair Trade i. Take a moment with your device and Google “fair trade clothing.” Read around a little to see how these companies organize their businesses to produce “fairly traded” products. Discuss whether you would purchase clothing from any of these companies. In a large group, share the name and philosophy of a company that you learned about during this search. D. Immigration [return to top]

Chapter 15: Global Justice and Globalization

Talking Points: Students ought to be able to articulate postcolonialism in some way, pointing out that Westernizing non-Western cultures may be a form of cultural imperialism. If they do argue for Westernizing non-Western cultures, they should be prepared to give reasoned evidence from the text or other examples to illustrate their point. 3. Do you think that those in wealthier nations have an obligation to help those in poorer nations? If so why, and if not why not? If so, is it an obligation of individuals or of national aid agencies? Talking Points: Students can use the interpretations of globalization to sort an answer to this question. They can also review the strategies for individual aid as well as strategies for national and international aid that are covered in the chapter as well.

[return to top]

Chapter 15: Global Justice and Globalization

a. Snowpiercer (2013) 126 minutes plus discussion time. In this story, a failed scientific experiment has turned Earth into a frozen world and killed off nearly all life on the planet. Everyone that remains of the human population resides on a self-sustaining train that travels nonstop around the globe, powered by a revolutionary perpetual motion engine created by a man called Wilford. But, a brutal class system has evolved over the 18 years that humanity has been confined to the train, dividing its population between the lower-class passengers, discarded to live in squalor at the tail section of the train, and a privileged class travelling in luxury at the head of the train. The train's creator, Wilford, occupies the very front of the train, living in opulence and serving as the absolute authority over all. Throughout Snowpiercer, the powers at large describe the circumstances on the train as representing a "a closed ecological system." Wilford expresses his ruling ethic in these terms: "everyone has their preordained position. . . [and] the fact is, we are all stuck on this blasted train . . . And this train is a closed ecosystem. We must always strive for balance. Air, water, food supply, and population must always be kept in balance. For optimum balance, however, there have been times where more radical solutions were required, when the population needed to be reduced, rather drastically." [return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES • •

•

Globalization explained, explainitychannel, 2013, 4:18. Good introduction to globalization for students. Demand a fair-trade cell phone, TED Talks, Bandi Mbubi, 2012, 9:05. Mbubi presents information that indicates cell phones and other technologies have a bloody history, in the form of tantalum mining. He asks us to demand fair trade cell phones. Anti-globalization movement – in a nutshell, In a Nutshell, 2:59. An informative if bland presentation of the anti-globalization movement. Good for student introduction.

Chapter 15: Global Justice and Globalization

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 15: Global Justice and Globalization

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 16: Sexual Morality

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 16: Sexual Morality

Table of Contents Purpose and Perspective of the Chapter ........................................................ 2 Supplements ......................................................................................... 2 Chapter Objectives .................................................................................. 3 Key Terms ............................................................................................. 3 What's New in This Chapter ........................................................................ 5 Chapter Outline ...................................................................................... 5 Additional Discussion Questions .............................................................. 6 Additional Activities and Assignments ....................................................... 8 Additional Resources ................................................................................ 9 Internet and Media Resources ................................................................ 9 Appendix ................................................................................................... 10 Generic Rubrics .................................................................................. 10 Standard Writing Rubric ......................................................................... 10 Standard Discussion Rubric ..................................................................... 11

Chapter 16: Sexual Morality

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter introduces students to basic philosophical views about sex, including hedonism and the ideal of platonic love. The chapter also discusses Epicurus as a more moderate form of hedonism. Platonic love is a kind of friendship that transcends sex. The chapter applies normative theories to sex and sexuality. Kantian theories may focus on consent and respect for autonomy. Utilitarians focus on maximizing happiness. Natural law focuses on traditional marital sex and procreation. Virtue ethics and care ethics emphasize values like fidelity, honesty, and care. Feminists focus on exploitation of women. Rape and sexual harassment are universally wrong according to every normative theory. A new standard of sexual consent has evolved called affirmative consent which requires both partners to say “yes” to sexual activity. The chapter analyzes moral and legal arguments about marriage equality. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that samesex marriages are legal. The normalization of same sex marriages was opposed by natural law theorists like John Finnis. John Corvino and other utilitarian and libertarian theorists argued in favor of marriage equality. The chapter evaluates issues involving trans and gender nonconforming people. Proponents argue that trans people deserve respect. Opponents like J. K. Rowling are reluctant to welcome trans people into traditional female spaces. The chapter evaluates arguments about sexually transmitted diseases, sex education and sex work. One solution to sexually transmitted disease is comprehensive sex education. This idea is opposed by traditional and religious thinkers. The chapter evaluates the idea of ethical pornography. Associated Readings Reading 16-1: “What’s Wrong with Prostitution” / Carole Pateman Reading 16-2: “Decriminalize Sex Work” / Jessica Flanigan Reading 16-3: U.S. Supreme Court Decision June 26, 2015 / Obergefell v. Hodges Reading 16-4: Law, Morality, and “Sexual Orientation” / John Finnis Reading 16-5: “It’s Not Natural” / John Corvino [return to top]

Chapter 16: Sexual Morality

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 16.1

Describe basic philosophical views of sex including hedonism and the ideal of “platonic love.”

Chapter 16: Sexual Morality

16.2

Apply normative theories to sex and sexuality.

16.3

Explain the argument against sexual coercion and violence, as well as the importance of affirmative consent.

16.4

Analyze moral and legal arguments about marriage equality.

16.5

Evaluate issues involving trans and gender nonconforming people.

16.6

Evaluate arguments about sexually transmitted diseases, sex education, and sex work.

16.7

Defend a thesis about sexual morality.

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Hedonism: Theory that holds that pleasure is the highest good; as a normative theory tells us we ought to pursue pleasure. LGBT: Acronym standing for “lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered” (can be extended to include other sexual identities, sometimes abbreviated as LGBT+). Libertinism: The quality or state of being a libertine, someone focused on sexual freedom and hedonism. Transgender: Persons who do not feel comfortable with or who do not identify with the traditional sex/gender roles assigned to them. [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

CHAPTER OUTLINE I. Introduction (Slides 4–9) A. Sex work

Chapter 16: Sexual Morality

B. Human sexual practices and identities C. Heternormativity D. Cis-normativity E. Transgender F. Theories of pleasure i. Hedonism ii. Libertinism iii. Asceticism G. What is sex? II. Class Activity: Sex and Love (Slide 10) A. We often talk about love when we talk about sex. Is there a direct connection between love and sex? What do you think? Discuss whether and if so how love is connected to sex, and explain why you think as you do. III. Sexual Morality and Ethical Theories (Slides 11–15) A. Consequentialist considerations B. Nonconsequentialist considerations C. Natural law considerations IV. Rape, Sexual Harassment, and Affirmative Consent (Slides 16–18) A. #MeToo movement B. Feminist view C. Affirmative consent V. Marriage Equality (Slides 19–22) A. Obergefell B. Stonewall C. Respect for Marriage Act D. Lawrence v. Texas E. Nonconsequentialist view F. Consequentialist view VI. Issues Involving Trans and Gender Nonconforming Persons (Slides 23–25) A. Gender fluidity B. Gender nonconforming C. Natural law view D. Proponents' view E. Feminism and trans F. TERF VII. STDs, Sex Ed, Sex Work, and Other Issues (Slides 26–33) A. Sex education B. Consequentialist view C. Nonconsequentialist view D. Liberal view

Chapter 16: Sexual Morality

E. Class activity: intimate disclosure i. Should a person who has an STD disclose that information to potential sexual partners? At what point should that person reveal this information? Is there an obligation to disclose? Why or why not? Explain your answer, using the theories we have discussed in class (utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics, care ethics, etc.). F. Pornography G. Ethical Pornography H. Class activity: ethical pornography i. Some proponents of pornography argue that there can be an ethical pornography, that is, where sex occurs in a safe and respectful space. Perhaps ethical pornography promotes “good” sex, or sex that meets the criteria of whatever philosophy we adopt about sex. For instance, pornographic sex represents healthy sexual activity, including but not limited to the use of condoms. Violence is not represented. Do you think it is possible to create an ethical pornography? Why or why not? Should we even try to create an ethical pornography? Explain your answer. I. Child pornography J. Sexting K. Revenge pornography L. Sex trafficking [return to top]

Chapter 16: Sexual Morality

2. Is there such a thing as sexual perversion? What would you mean by "perversion"? Talking Points: Students will likely find natural law helpful in characterizing an idea of sexual perversion. Students can also apply the ideas of hedonism and libertinism to the question of perversion as well. 3. Apply each of the three major normative theories—Kantianism, utilitarianism, and natural law—to the concept of comprehensive sex education. Develop a thesis in favor of or against sex education. Talking Points: Students can characterize the major normative theories and then apply them to the notion of sex education. They can use the theory to develop their own thesis about it.

[return to top]

Chapter 16: Sexual Morality

The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. Kinsey (2004) 118 minutes plus discussion time. This film tells the story of Alfred Charles Kinsey, a pioneer in sexology. He published a report in 1948 that represents one of science's first investigations into human sexuality. b.

This film is an excellent historical introduction to the study of sexuality as well as a primer on the original "Kinsey Scale," which placed people on a spectrum from completely homosexual to completely heterosexual. Many of the concepts from the chapter, such as pleasure, LGBTQ+, and perversions are covered in the film. Kinsey is still a controversial figure; students can reckon with that reality.

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES •

•

J. K. Rowling Writes about Her Reasons for Speaking out on Sex and Gender Issues, June 10, 2020. Rowling explains why she is not in favor of some privileges for trans women. Why kids need to learn about gender and sexuality, Lindsay Amer, TED Talks. Amer discusses how they teach people of all ages, but especially children, about LGBTQ+. Sex needs a new metaphor. Here’s one… Al Vernacchio, TED Talks, 2012. Vernacchio critically analyzes the baseball metaphor for sexual activity and suggests other ways of talking about sexuality.

Chapter 16: Sexual Morality

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 16: Sexual Morality

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 17: Punishment and the Death Penalty

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 17: Punishment and the Death Penalty

Chapter 17: Punishment and the Death Penalty

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter begins by evaluating current trends in punishment and the death penalty. Crime rates have trended down but incarceration rates have gone up. Critics have called for sentencing reform and the abolition of the death penalty. The chapter evaluates the deterrence theory of punishment. The deterrence theory is based on the consequentialist idea that punishment should be used to deter people from committing crime. Retributive justice is grounded in natural law or Kantian deontology, and it is focused on retaliation against those who have committed a crime and deserve to be punished. Restorative justice is utilitarian and is focused on restoring broken communities through compassion, forgiveness, and mercy. Critics of mass incarceration have advocated for sentencing reform, or decarceration. The chapter evaluates racial disparities in the punishment system. The prison system in the United States has disproportionate numbers of Black and Latinx prisoners. Some argue that these numbers reflect the rate at which these groups commit crime. Others argue that these disparities represent structural or institutional racism. Racial profiling and bias in the plea bargaining system may explain this disparity. The chapter reviews moral arguments for and against the death penalty. Retributivists will support the death penalty which appeals to the idea of lex talionis. Deterrence theories will also support the death penalty. Defenders of restorative justice will be opposed to the death penalty, and there is a global trend to abolish the death penalty. Associated Readings Reading 17-1: The New Jim Crow / Michelle Alexander Reading 17-2: Are Prisons Obsolete? / Angela Y. Davis Reading 17-3: Speech in Favor of Capital Punishment (1868) / John Stuart Mill Reading 17-4: A Theory of Just Execution / Lloyd Steffen [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course.

Chapter 17: Punishment and the Death Penalty

• •

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 17.1. Explain current trends in punishment and the death penalty. 17.2. Explain the deterrence theory of punishment. 17.3. Describe the idea of retributive justice. 17.4. Describe the idea of restorative justice. 17.5. Defend a thesis about sentencing reform and the problem of mass incarceration. 17.6. Evaluate racial disparities in the punishment system.

Chapter 17: Punishment and the Death Penalty

17.7. Evaluate moral arguments for and against the death penalty. 17.8. Defend your own ideas about punishment and the death penalty. [return to top]

KEY TERMS Decarceration: The idea of eliminating prisons or radically reducing the role of incarceration in punishment. Deterrence: A focal point for consequentialist approaches to criminal justice, which is concerned with deterring criminals from committing crime (as opposed to retributive justice and restorative justice). Institutional racism: See structural racism. Racial profiling: A law enforcement technique that targets individuals based upon suspicion resulting from the individual’s racial or ethnic identity. Retributive justice: A theory of criminal justice that focuses on giving criminals what they deserve and forcing them to pay back what they owe to victims or to society (as opposed to restorative justice and deterrence). Restorative justice: An approach to criminal justice that seeks to make criminals take responsibility and make amends, while restoring the community that they have broken (as opposed to retributive justice and deterrence). Structural racism: The idea that social structures are constituted in ways that create disparate racial outcomes (also called institutional racism). [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

CHAPTER OUTLINE I. Class Activity: Cannabis (Slide 4)

Chapter 17: Punishment and the Death Penalty

A. Cannabis law is responsible for the uptick in incarceration rates from the 1960s. Cannabis is now being legalized in numerous states for medical and recreational uses. How should cannabis be regulated by the state? Should it be minimally regulated? Do you think cannabis should be legalized, and if so for what purpose or use, both medical and recreational? Is there a moral difference between “medical” use and “recreational” cannabis use? Discuss your answers. II. Introduction (Slides 5–7) A. Moral approaches to punishment B. Legal punishment C. Justification of punishment III. The Deterrence Argument (Slides 8–10) A. Class activity: deterrence i. In this video, A metro station manager argues that crime rates in the train station have gone down as the direct result of playing classical music in the station. The manager states that research shows people do not stay on the platform as long when classical music is playing. Do you think that music has a deterrent effect? Why or why not? Does the research convince you that it works? Why or why not? B. B. Utilitarian argument for deterrence IV. The Retributivist Argument (Slides 11–13) A. Egalitarianism B. Proportionality C. Punishment and responsibility V. Restorative Justice (Slides 14–16) A. Class activity: restorative justice i. Dan Reisel, a neuroscientist, in this video argues that it may be possible to “change human nature,” by using neuroscience to help rehabilitate offenders. He also suggests that we can teach offenders morality by doing things to increase the size of the amygdala in offenders. Do you believe that people can change? Should we try to reeducate offenders in morality? Explain your answer. VI. Prison and Incarceration Rates (Slides 17–18) A. Mass incarceration B. U.S. rates of incarceration C. Decarceration VII. Racial Disparities in the Justice System (Slides 19–21) A. Structural racism B. Racial profiling C. Plea bargaining

Chapter 17: Punishment and the Death Penalty

D. Implicit bias VIII. The Death Penalty (Slides 22–30) A. Legal issues B. Exonerations C. Racial bias and fairness D. Deterrence considerations E. Retributivist considerations F. Mercy and restorative justice G. Humane executions [return to top]

Chapter 17: Punishment and the Death Penalty

In this question students are asked to think about the retributivist argument in the context of discussions about the death penalty. Students will consider what crimes the death penalty "fits." They can also argue against the death penalty using the restorative view of justice.

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES AND ASSIGNMENTS The following are activities and assignments developed by but not included in the text, PPTs, or courseware – they are for you to use if you wish. 1. Questions for Further Thought: These open response writing prompts can be used as in-class reflections or as assessment activities. a. Proponents of restorative justice argue for decarceration, or the reduction of the number of people who are held in custody. Do you think we should decarcerate the U.S. punishment system? Why or why not? b. The Catholic church argues that "the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person." Do you agree or disagree with this statement and why? c. If the relevant fact indicated that punishment does not deter crime, would you be in favor of deterrence? Why or why not? 2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10–25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films, TV episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. Dead Man Walking (1995) 122 minutes plus discussion time. This film tells the story of Sister Helen Prejean, who served as spiritual advisor to Matthew Poncelet, a man convicted of murder and assault and sentenced to death by the State of Louisiana. As she advocates for clemency on Poncelet's behalf, Sister Prejean must also reconcile her compassion for Poncelet with the empathy she feels for the families of Poncelet's victims.

Chapter 17: Punishment and the Death Penalty

Dead Man Walking presents a variety of arguments from both sides of the debate about capital punishment. After watching the film, have students reflect on the distinct natures of the different arguments and discuss if they agree with the prosecution or Sister Prejean.

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES •

•

Lessons from death row inmates, David R. Dow, TED Talks. Dow is a death penalty lawyer; he explains how death row cases happen and how we can intervene on the process. Death row inmates tend to have the same biography; because of this we can map a plan to intervene before murders occur. A juror’s reflections on the death penalty, Lindy Lou Isonhood, TED Talks, 2018. Isonhood reflects deeply on her own vote to give someone the death penalty, exploring the moral dilemmas that she faced. The multi-billion dollar US prison industry – and how to dismantle it, Bianca Tylek, TED Talks. Tylek addresses the cost of phone calls in prison and how corporations profit from seeing more people in prison.

Chapter 17: Punishment and the Death Penalty

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 17: Punishment and the Death Penalty

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 18: Peace, Violence, and War

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 18: Peace, Violence, and War

Chapter 18: Peace, Violence, and War

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter begins by defining positive and negative peace. Positive peace envisions a condition of social harmony and justice, whereas negative peace is merely the absence of overt or direct violence. The chapter defines realism in the context of peace and war. Realism is the view that moral judgment does not apply in thinking about war. There are no moral limits in warfare. Pacifists may oppose war on consequentialist grounds, holding that nonviolence tends to produce better outcomes than violence or war. Pacifists may also oppose war on deontological grounds by claiming that killing is wrong or that nonviolence is a morally superior method. Opponents of pacifism may claim that killing and war can be justified, and that war does not always produce bad outcomes. The idea of jus ad bellum includes the claim hat there ought to be a just cause for war and that those engaging in war are authorized to go to war. The concerns of jus in bello focus on issues that arise within war. This includes the need to discriminate between those who can be legitimately targeted and those who may not. Collateral damage occurs as an unintended result of a legitimate attack. The doctrine of double effect can be used to justify collateral damage. The foreseen but unintended killing of noncombatants can be justified by using double effect. The chapter evaluates the use of drones and targeted assassination using the concepts of realism, pacifism, and just war theory. The chapter concludes with a discussion of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and victor’s justice. Associated Readings Reading 18-1: Selective and Comprehensive Nonviolence / Andrew Fitz-Gibbon Reading 18-2: The Power of Nonviolence in the Fight for Racial Justice / James Lawson Reading 18-3: The Triumph of Just War Theory (and the Dangers of Success) / Michael Walzer Reading 18-4: War Crimes and Just Wars / Larry May [return to top]

Chapter 18: Peace, Violence, and War

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 18.1 18.2. 18.3.

Explain the difference between positive and negative peace. Describe the basic idea of realism. Articulate arguments for and against pacifism and nonviolence.

Chapter 18: Peace, Violence, and War

18.4

Explain the distinction made in just war theory between jus ad bellum and jus in bello, as well as key terms such as just cause, legitimate authority, discrimination, and noncombatant immunity.

18.5.

Demonstrate how the doctrine of double effect applies within the just war theory to deal with the problem of collateral damage

18.6.

Evaluate current issues including the use of drones and targeted assassination, and the morality of terrorism and torture.

18.7.

Explain the history and concept of war crimes and crimes against humanity and the problem of victor’s justice.

18.8.

Defend a thesis about the ethics of war, the idea of peace, and the problem of violence.

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Discrimination: The principle of just war theory that stipulates that just warriors should target only combatants and protect noncombatants; see also noncombatant immunity. Jus ad bellum: Just war concern for ethical issues arising in deciding to go to war, including just cause, legitimate authority, and proportionality. Jus in bello: Just war concern for ethical issues arising within warfare, including proportionality, discrimination, and prohibition on intrinsically evil means. Just cause: The concern of jus ad bellum, which holds that a war is justified only if there is a just cause, including defending the innocent or repelling aggression. Just war theory: A theory about the justification of war that maintains that war should be limited by moral concerns. Legitimate authority: Concern of jus ad bellum that holds that a war is justified only if the entity declaring war holds power legitimately. Negative peace: A conception of peace focused on the lack of actual, physical violence (as contrasted with positive peace).

Chapter 18: Peace, Violence, and War

Noncombatant immunity: Idea in just war theory that noncombatants should not be deliberately targeted. Pacifism: Commitment to nonviolence and opposition to war (associated with Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.). Positive peace: A conception of peace that emphasizes wholeness, harmony, and flourishing—and not merely the absence of violence (as contrasted with negative peace). Realism: View on ethics of war that maintains that limits on warfare are merely pragmatic or prudential and that the goal is strength and victory. Structural violence: Violence that is present in oppressive or unjust social structures, even despite the lack of overt physical violence. [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

CHAPTER OUTLINE I. Introduction (Slides 4–7) A. Positive and negative peace B. Structural violence C. Moral approaches to war and peace i. Pacifism ii. Realism iii. Just war theory II. Class Activity: Violence (Slide 8) A. Consider the idea of violence. What exactly makes something violent? For example, is football a violent game? Discuss what constitutes violence and try to decide where you draw the line. III. Realism (Slides 9–12) A. Thucydides B. Militarism C. Class activity: William James

Chapter 18: Peace, Violence, and War

1. View the video about William James and war. James argues that humans should direct our warlike disposition toward eliminating financial inequality. Do you think that the solution he proposes, to form labor armies to work the land, is a good one? Why or why not? IV. Pacifism (Slides 13–16) A. Tolstoy B. Gandhi C. Martin Luther King Jr. D. Jane Addams V. Just War Theory (Slides 17–19) A. Jus ad bellum B. Jus in bello VI. Current Issues (Slides 20–22) A. Terrorism B. Targeted killing and drones VII. Weapons of Mass Destruction (Slides 23–26) A. Types of WMD B. Realist view C. Just war view D. Principle of discrimination E. Torture VIII. War Crimes and Universal Human Rights (Slides 27–28) A. Robert McNamara B. Victor's justice C. Nuremburg Code [return to top]

Chapter 18: Peace, Violence, and War

Students can refine their own notion of pacifism by thinking about what it means to them to be pacifist. Students should be able to discuss the prohibition of violence and whether they support such a view. By asking students to present arguments for and against It they can practice critical thinking as they develop their moral view. 2. How would you distinguish combatants from non-combatants (in an urban warfare scenario, for example)? Talking points: Students will confront the challenge of discrimination as they consider this question. Discrimination is a complex topic, particularly in the context of war. Students can discuss this complexity. 3. Explain the principle of last resort. What are some ways of applying this ideal? Talking points: Students should be able to talk about jus ad bellum or the justness of going to war. They should be able to articulate that a just war should be a last resort after all other means have been tried. Some ways of applying the principle of last resort are negotiations, threats, or boycotts prior to the commencement of any violent act.

[return to top]

Chapter 18: Peace, Violence, and War

in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara (2003) 107 minutes. In this film, Robert McNamara reflects on his military experience in the Pacific Theater during World War II, discusses his tenure as Secretary of Defense under presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, and presents eleven lessons learned from those experiences. b. Many of the topics in this chapter are found in McNamara's eleven lessons; students can find these concepts in action. In addition to illustrating the major concepts of this chapter, the film also brings to students' attention a major figure in recent American history. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES •

•

War and what comes after, Clemantine Wamariya, TED Talks, 2017. Wamariya shares her deeply personal story as a victim of war. The intimacy of this talk of war is an appropriate complement to the chapter. Why veterans miss war, Sebastian Junger, TED Talks, 2014. Junger explores the psychological impact of war on veterans and the loss they feel upon returning to civilian life. Junger argues that we have to understand why veterans miss war in order to learn how to stop war. War, AI and the new global arms race, Alexandr Wang, TED Talks, 2023. Wang considers the impact of AI technology on warfare. He argues that in an AI war everything comes down to data, and the United States is on the losing end of this fight.

Chapter 18: Peace, Violence, and War

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 18: Peace, Violence, and War

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 19: Environmental Ethics

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 19: Environmental Ethics

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter begins by distinguishing between anthropocentric and nonanthropocentric approaches to environmental ethics. Anthropocentric approaches are human-oriented. Non-anthropocentric approaches think about environmental issues from a perspective that does not privilege human rights, needs, and interests. The chapter also introduces biocentrism and ecocentrism. Biocentrism focuses on the value of living things and ecocentrism adopts an even wider viewpoint, considering the value of ecosystems, watersheds, and the planet as a whole. The chapter also presents the distinction between instrumental and intrinsic value with respect to environmental issues. A cost–benefit analysis of environmental issues is usually connected to an anthropocentric and utilitarian approach to environmental ethics. Environmental justice is understood as an anthropocentric concern for how environmental harms and benefits are distributed across human populations. The concerns of environmental justice attend to the needs of human beings who are impoverished, marginalized, or disenfranchised. The chapter analyzes differences and similarities between ecofeminism and deep ecology. Ecofeminism connects the domination of nature to the domination of women. Deep ecology is critical of exploitative uses of nature and views humans as separate from nature. The chapter concludes with an evaluation of current environmental challenges, including issues related to climate change, pollution, and wilderness preservation and native lands. Associated Readings Reading 19-1: People or Penguins: The Case for Optimal Pollution / William F. Baxter Reading 19-2: Deep Ecology / Bill Devall and George Sessions Reading 19-3: Radical American Environmentalism and Wilderness Preservation: A Third World Critique / Ramachandra Guha Reading 19-4: There Are No Climate Leaders Yet / Greta Thunberg [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course.

• •

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 19.1.

Explain the difference between anthropocentric and non-anthropocentric (ecocentric or biocentric) approaches about in terms of environmental ethics.

19.2.

Clarify the difference between intrinsic value and instrumental value.

19.3.

Explain how cost–benefit analysis applies in thinking about environmental issues.

19.4.

Apply the concept of environmental justice to some concrete issues.

19.5.

Analyze differences and similarities between ecofeminism and deep ecology.

19.6.

Evaluate current environmental challenges, including issues related to climate change, pollution, wilderness preservation, and native lands.

19.7.

Defend a thesis with regard to environmental issues and the value of nonhuman nature.

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Anthropocentrism: An approach to environmental ethics (and animal welfare) that maintains that human interests alone are the proper focal point (as opposed to biocentrism and ecocentrism). Biocentrism approach to environmental ethics that is focused on the value of biotic systems and all life (as opposed to anthropocentrism). Ecocentrism: An approach to environmental ethics that is focused on the value of the ecosystem as a whole and not merely on its relation to human beings (as opposed to anthropocentrism). Inherent value: Value residing by nature in something and without reference to any other value or good. Instrumental value: Value that reside in things that are useful or good as tools or as means toward some other good. Intrinsic value: Value that resides in things that have value in themselves and not merely as tools or means (as opposed to instrumental goods). Moral agent: A being who is able to express ethical concern and take responsibility for behaviors, attitudes, and actions. Moral patient: An object of ethical concern, a recipient of moral concern, or a being that is viewed as having value. Non-anthropocentric: The opposite of a human-centered (anthropocentric) worldview; related to claims about intrinsic value, biocentrism, or ecocentrism.

[return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

CHAPTER OUTLINE I. Introduction (Slide 4) A. Anthropocentrism B. Non-anthropocentrism C. Biocentrism D. Ecocentrism II. Class Activity: Anthropocentrism (Slide 5) A. Define and discuss anthropocentrism and non-anthropocentrism. What is the difference between the two? On which side do you situate yourself, and why? Do you think you are more anthropocentric in your outlook, or more nonanthropocentric? Explain your answer. III. The Environment and Its Value (Slides 6–11) A. Environs B. Intrinsic or inherent value C. Instrumental value D. Ecosystem services E. Class activity: the sequoias i. In this writing assignment, take 10 minutes to make the case that the sequoias in California have intrinsic value rather than instrumental value. It may be helpful to define instrumental and intrinsic value as well. F. Prima facie value G. Anthropocentrism IV. Cost–Benefit Analysis (Slide 12) A. Utilitarian reasoning B. Description and evaluation C. Opportunity cost V. Environmental Justice (Slides 13–20) A. Environmental racism B. Ecocentrism

C. Biocentrism D. Moral agents and patients E. Aldo Leopold F. Emerson and Thoreau G. John Muir and Sierra Club i. Environmentalism and racism H. Class activity: John Muir and racism i. View the video by an ABC affiliate about John Muir. The Sierra Club is reckoning with the founder’s racism. Discuss whether or if we should hold Muir’s legacy morally accountable for what we know to be wrong today. What would it look like to acknowledge his wrongs while still remembering the history? I. Native American views of nature and biocentrism J. Deep Ecology VI. Ecofeminism (Slides 21–23) A. Social ecology B. Karen Warren C. Ecofeminism and ethics of care D. Ecofeminist rejection of dualism E. Ecofeminism and postcolonialism i. Winona LaDuke ii. Leah Thomas VII. Current Issues (Slides 24–33) A. Climate change B. Global warming C. Greenhouse gases D. Waste disposal and pollution E. Wilderness Preservation and native lands F. International Environmental Conventions G. Greta Thunberg H. Global justice and the tragedy of the commons [return to top]

1. Do you think that a book, a plant, or a building can be said to have intrinsic value? Can things be done for the best interest of such things? Explain your answer. Talking Points: Students should first be able to define and distinguish intrinsic and instrumental value. Students can then form a thesis of their own about whether or not a book, plant, or building has instrumental or intrinsic value. 2. Do you favor an anthropocentric approach or an ecocentric approach to environmental ethics? Why? Talking Points: Students should first be able to define and characterize anthropocentrism and ecocentrism. Students can then shape their own viewpoint and form a thesis that they can then articulate. 3. What is ecofeminism? In what ways do environmental ethical concerns overlap with feminist ethical concerns? Talking Points: Students should be able to define ecofeminism. By doing so, they establish the connection between the domination of nature and the domination of women. They may discuss thinkers such as Winona LaDuke.

[return to top]

2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10–25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films, TV episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. Promised Land (2012) 106 minutes plus discussion time. This film tells the story of Steve Butler, a salesman for a large natural gas company, making his pitch to a small Pennsylvania community where his corporation wants to tap into the available resources. Debate ensues regarding controversial technology that Steve's employer is known for using. b. The argument in the film that seems to propose a broader perspective on the consequences of fracking is made by the older farmer, Frank Yates, who raises the first moral concerns against fracking in the film. At one point Frank explains, " Hell, I need the money too. I guess I'm lucky…to be old enough to have a shot at dying with my dignity." The suggestion that a person's human dignity is contingent on the way they care for the environment hints at Mr. Yates's deep ecology point of view. [return to top]

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES •

•

Watch what you dispose of, Rania Bahaa, TED Talks. Bahaa brings awareness to waste disposal and proposes innovative strategies for achieving zero waste in landfills. Lasting conservation, led by Indigenous heritage, Adjany Costa, TED Talks, 2022. Costa is a conservationist who looks at the role of Indigenous communities in planning and implementing environmental policies. She advocates for Indigenous communities to take back ownership of their land. It’s time to write a new climate story, narrated by Don Cheadle, TED Talks. TED Countdown is a global initiative to advocate for climate solutions. This short video narrates briefly the challenges we face and the goals we can achieve for environmental justice.

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Chapter 20: Animal Rights—and Beyond

Instructor Manual Fiala/MacKinnon, Ethics: Theory & Contemporary Issues, 10th Edition, 2024, , Chapter 20: Animal Rights—and Beyond

TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Perspective of the Chapter ........................................................ 2 Supplements ......................................................................................... 2 Chapter Objectives .................................................................................. 3 Key Terms ............................................................................................. 3 What's New in This Chapter ........................................................................ 3 Chapter Outline ...................................................................................... 4 Additional Discussion Questions .............................................................. 5 Additional Activities and Assignments ....................................................... 6 Additional Resources ................................................................................ 7 Internet and Media Resources ................................................................ 7 Appendix .............................................................................................. 8 Generic Rubrics ................................................................................. 8 Standard Writing Rubric ....................................................................... 8 Standard Discussion Rubric ................................................................... 9

Chapter 20: Animal Rights—and Beyond

PURPOSE AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHAPTER This chapter begins by applying anthropocentric and non-anthropocentric views to animal ethics. An anthropocentric account will value animals for their usefulness to humans. A non-anthropocentric account will be concerned with the well-being of animals as entities that have value in themselves apart from human uses. Sentience is the ability to suffer and feel pain or pleasure; it is used as moral measure of the significance of animal experience. Some defenders of animal welfare argue that we ought to give equal consideration for the suffering of animals. Peter Singer has coined the term “speciesism” to refer to the unjustified privileging of human interests over other species’ interests. The chapter distinguishes between animal welfare and animal rights. Animal welfare develops out of a non-anthropocentric utilitarianism that is concerned with animal suffering but does not imply animals have rights. Animal rights advocates argue that animals have basic rights because they have needs and interests of their own. The chapter evaluates current issues in animal ethics, including vegetarianism, animal research, and endangered species protection. The chapter concludes by drawing connections between animal ethics and ethics related to nonhuman beings. These include extraterrestrial life and artificial intelligence. The chapter applies the ideas of moral patients and sentience to help understand what moral regard we ought to give nonhuman entities. Associated Readings Reading 20-1: All Animals are Equal / Peter Singer Reading 20-2: The Case for Animal Rights / Tom Regan Reading 20-3: Speciesism and the Idea of Equality / Bonnie Steinbock Reading 20-4: Do Androids Dream of Animal Rights? / Michael C. Dorf [return to top]

Supplements The following product-level supplements provide additional information that may help you in preparing your course. • •

MindTap Educator Guide o A detailed list of the activities and assets in your MindTap course. PowerPoints

Chapter 20: Animal Rights—and Beyond

•

[return to top]

LEARNING OUTCOMES The following objectives are addressed in this chapter: 20.1

Explain the difference between anthropocentric and non-anthropocentric views of animal ethics.

20.2

Explain the importance of sentience and equal consideration in thinking about animal ethics.

20.3

Define speciesism and articulate criticisms of this idea.

20.4

Explain the difference between a concern for animal welfare and a concern for animal rights.

20.5

Evaluate current issues in animal ethics including hunting, vegetarianism, animal research, and endangered species protection.

Chapter 20: Animal Rights—and Beyond

20.6

Articulate some connections between animal ethics and other topics involving nonhuman beings.

20.7

Defend a thesis with regard to animal ethics.

[return to top]

KEY TERMS Anthropocentrism: An approach to environmental ethics (and animal welfare) that maintains that human interests alone are the proper focal point. Moral agent a being who is able to express ethical concern and take responsibility for behaviors, attitudes, and actions Moral patient: An object of ethical concern, a recipient of moral concern, or a being that is viewed as having value. Non-anthropocentric: The opposite of a human-centered (anthropocentric) worldview; related to claims about intrinsic value, biocentrism, or ecocentrism. Speciesism a pejorative term used to describe anthropocentrists, who maintain that human beings are superior to nonhuman animals (associated with Singer). [return to top]

WHAT'S NEW IN THIS CHAPTER See the Transition Guide for this title for information about what is new to this chapter. [return to top]

CHAPTER OUTLINE I. Introduction (Slides 4–6) A. Anthropocentrism B. Non-anthropocentrism

Chapter 20: Animal Rights—and Beyond

C. Moral approaches to animal ethics II. Sentience, Equal Consideration, and Animal Welfare (Slides 7–10) A. Sentience B. Jeremy Bentham C. Cruelty D. Animals and pain III. Speciesism (Slide 11) A. Peter Singer IV. Animal Rights (Slides 12–18) A. Positive and negative rights B. Moral patients C. Moral agents D. Class activity: moral patients i. Define briefly the status of the moral patient. Then, consider and discuss whether you think trees have rights in the sense that they are moral patients? Consider whether trees fit the definition of moral patient. E. Duty, rights, and interests F. Abolition or reform V. Current Issues (Slides 19–32) A. Hunting B. Harvesting C. Fair chase D. Aerial hunting E. Approaches to hunting F. Moral vegetarianism G. Class activity: eating meat i. Now that you’ve seen some of the statistics about eating meat, consider whether you would make any changes in the way you eat. If reducing meat consumption would help mitigate climate change and reduce cruelty to animals, would you change your diet to achieve that? Write for five minutes about the subject. H. In vitro meat I. Animal Experimentation J. The three R's of animal research VI. Other Nonhumans (Slides 33–35) A. Extraterrestrial life B. Sentient AI C. The Turing test D. Class activity: How would you know?

Chapter 20: Animal Rights—and Beyond

The main definition of a sentient being is one who can feel pleasure and pain. If this is the case, how would we know that a computer or an AI is sentient? What would it look like for a machine to feel pain and pleasure? Is it easier to tell if an animal feels pain and pleasure? What if we don’t know machine suffering when we see it? Discuss the possibilities.

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION QUESTIONS Regardless of whether your class is taught in person or virtually, you can assign these questions several ways: in a discussion forum in your LMS; as content for creating inclass polls using online polling tools or the MindTap mobile application; as wholeclass discussions in person; or as a partner or group activity in class. 1. Do you think that nonhuman animals have interests? Does this mean that they also have rights? Explain your answer. Talking Points: The key to understanding this question is being able to distinguish animal welfare from animal rights. Worrying about animal welfare does not therefore imply that animals have rights. Students can practice making this distinction. 2. Do some animals have greater value than others? Why or why not? Talking Points: Students can explore the concept of usefulness or instrumental value as they evaluate whether some animals have more value—value to whom? Students can also argue that all animals are sentient and should have equal consideration without regard for differences in instrumental value. 3. Do you think that it is morally permissible to use animals in experiments? If so, are there any conditions you would set on the experiments regarding the type of animal used, the purpose of the experiments, or how to conduct the experiments? Explain. Talking Points: Students might discuss prima facie values, which places a premium on a value until another value comes into conflict with it. Students can further discuss whether animals should receive equal consideration or if there is some instrumentality about animals that morally justifies experimentation.

Chapter 20: Animal Rights—and Beyond

[return to top]

ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES AND ASSIGNMENTS The following are activities and assignments developed by but not included in the text, PPTs, or courseware – they are for you to use if you wish. 1. Questions for Further Thought: These open response writing prompts can be used as in-class reflections or as assessment activities. a. Do you think you will eat in vitro meat when it becomes generally available? Why or why not? b. What is your view of hunting wild animals? Do you believe it is morally acceptable? Are there conditions that you would place on hunting? Explain your answer. 2. Film Activity (Time: Film viewing, plus 10–25 minutes for discussion): Incorporate films, TV episodes, podcasts, and other media that include plots or conversations related to ethics and the activity of philosophical inquiry as an in-class activity. By viewing popular media, students understand that philosophical ideas and ethical issues are part of everyday, contemporary life. The suggested film and questions offer an opportunity for reflection on why the textual material matters, which can be used as the basis for discussion or assessment. a. Live and Let Live (2013) 100 minutes plus discussion time. This documentary presents a variety of arguments against animal exploitation in general and in favor of veganism in particular. b. As the film progresses, recall the three broad approaches to animal ethics that are discussed in the text: the animal rights approach, the animal welfare approach, and the anthropocentric approach. These approaches are represented among the arguments for veganism that are given throughout the film. [return to top]

Chapter 20: Animal Rights—and Beyond

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES INTERNET AND MEDIA RESOURCES •

• •

A modern argument for the rights of animals, Peter Singer, TED Talks, 35:00. This longer video introduces students to the philosopher Peter Singer, who is mentioned in the text numerous times. How do animals experience pain? Robyn J. Crook, TED Talks, 4:47. This video explains how animals feel pain. Can other animals understand death? Barbara J. King, TED Talks, 5:43. This beautiful video tells the story of an orca whale who lost her baby and explores whether animals understand death.

Chapter 20: Animal Rights—and Beyond

STANDARD WRITING RUBRIC Criteria Content

Organization and Clarity

Research

The assignment is based upon appropriate and adequate academic literature, including peer reviewed journals and other scholarly work. 5 points

Research

The assignment follows the required citation guidelines. 5 points The assignment has two or fewer grammatical and spelling errors. 5 points

Grammar and Spelling

[return to top]

Chapter 20: Animal Rights—and Beyond

STANDARD DISCUSSION RUBRIC Criteria Participation

Contribution Quality

Etiquette

[return to top]

Incomplete Does not participate in discussion. 0 points

Does not participate in discussion. 0 points