PHIL 338A.
FINAL EXAM REVIEW QUESTIONS
The Final Exam will take place in Sieg 134 on Thursday,
Dec. 11 at 10:30 am. PLEASE BRING ONE OR
MORE BLANK EXAM BOOKS AND A PEN TO THE EXAM.
EXAM BOOKS WITH NOTES WRITTEN ON THEM OR WITH PAGES MISSING WILL NOT BE
ACCEPTED. To relieve the time pressure, I will allow an
extra half-hour at the end of the exam (2 hours and 20 minutes total). Please answer all questions completely, but
concisely. Answer in complete
sentences. In preparing for the exam,
you are encouraged to discuss these questions with other members of the class,
and to discuss what the relevant considerations would be in answering
them. However, each student is expected
to develop his/her own answers to the questions. You should not discuss the wording of an
answer or attempt to come up with an agreed upon answer. If you draft answers to the questions, you
should not show your draft answers to others, nor should you read or copy
someone else's draft answers.
Final Exams will be available for pick-up in the Philosophy
Department Office, Condon 511, during the first week of winter quarter. If you would like your Final Exam mailed to
you, please provide your TA with a sufficiently large, stamped, self-addressed
envelope.
1. Explain and distinguish the following terms
(you may use examples):
(a) public/private sphere
(b) Individual right/robust
group right
(c) Individual right of
self-determination/robust group right of self-determination
(d) external
protection/internal constraint (from Kymlicka)
(e) unidirectional/collective
enforcement of human rights
(f) top-down vs. bottom-up
models of moral reasoning
(g) top-down vs. bottom-up
social processes of moral transformation
(h) political emancipation vs.
human emancipation (Marx)
(i) moral realist/moral
anti-realist
2. What is self-reinforcing
paternalism? Why is it difficult for the
victims of self-reinforcing paternalism to object to it?
3. Give an example of an actual or historical
discriminatory practice with a justification that is both self-serving and
socially enforced. Explain the example
in a way that shows: (1) what the
justification is; (2) how the justification is self-serving; (3) how the
justification (not just the practice itself) is socially enforced.
4. (a) What was Wollstonecraft's
"Utopian dream"? (b) Why did
she regard it as simply an extension of the objections of Locke, Rousseau, and
Kant to absolute monarchy? (c) What made
the positions of her opponents (including Locke, Rousseau, and Kant)
paternalistic? (d) How did she reply to
their paternalistic positions?
5. Sen has estimated that in the world there are
100,000,000 missing girls and women. (a)
Why are they missing? This requires not
only a description of how girls are treated but an explanation of why girls are
treated that way. (b) Based on
Sen's research, what are the most effective methods for solving the problem?
6. (a) Why is the title of
Tamir's article on female genital cutting (FGC) misleading? (b) What would be a better title for it? Explain.
Tamir believes that the practice of FGC is similar to some American
practices. (c) What practices does she
think it is similar to? Pick one of the
American practices and answer the following questions: (d) In what relevant respects are FGC
and the American practice similar?
Explain. (e) In what relevant
respects are FGC and the American practice dissimilar? Explain.
7. (a) What does it mean for
a practice to be part of a social equilibrium?
(b) Explain why it is reasonable to believe that the historical practice
of foot binding in China or the current practice of female genital cutting in
many parts of Africa is part of a social equilibrium.
8. (a) Opponents of female
genital cutting (FGC) are often accused of being paternalistic. Why?
(b) Explain how Tostan (the group started by Molly Melching) has been
able to eliminate FGC without being paternalistic. (Or, if you think that Tostan is
paternalistic, explain why.) (c) Explain
how the change produced by Tostan represents change that is Bottom-Up in two
senses. (In your answer you should
explain the two senses of "Bottom-Up".)
9. MacKinnon says: "Atrocities committed against women are
either too human to fit the notion of female or too female to fit the notion of
human." Consider the statement in
two parts: (a) "Atrocities
committed against women are too human to fit the notion of female." Use an example to explain what this means. From a moral point of view, is this a
problem? Explain. (b) "Atrocities committed against women
are too female to fit the notion of human." Use an example to explain what this means. From a moral point of view, is this a
problem? Explain.
10. Why does Rao think that domestic violence is
a rights violation that does not fit well into standard theories of
rights?
11. (a) Explain
Rawls's Original Position thought experiment.
(Make sure you explain the 'veil of ignorance'.) (b) Explain why the choice in Rawls's
Original Position thought experiment, when expanded in the way we discussed in
class, might be described by Rao as made by a "denatured, dehistoricized,
disembodied, disembedded, individual self." (c) Is the Original Position thought
experiment unfair to women's natured, historicized, embodied, embedded
selves? Explain.
12. (a) What is an individual
right? (b) What is a robust group
right? (c) John is a student in PHIL 338
who missed the lectures on robust group rights.
John thinks that rights against discrimination are robust group rights,
because such rights protect certain groups (e.g., Blacks, Latinos, women, gays,
and lesbians). Explain why John's
understanding of robust group rights is mistaken. (d) George realizes that a right against
discrimination is not a robust group right, but he thinks that a right to
affirmative action would be a robust group right. Explain why George is mistaken. (e) Give an example of a right that would be
a robust group right and explain why it would be. [To answer this question, you don't have to
endorse any robust group rights. You can
simply explain the position of someone who does believe that a particular right
is a robust group right. ]
13. Do you believe that there should be a robust
group right against genocide? Explain
your answer in a way that shows you understand what we mean by a "robust
group right".
14. Kymlicka distinguishes three categories of
group rights: the good, the bad, and the
intolerable. (a) Explain his
distinctions and give an example of each.
(b) Explain why Kymlicka's three categories do not require recognizing a
robust group right to self-determination as a moral right (rather than a legal modus
vivendi). In your answer, make sure you
explain what a robust group right of self-determination would be. (c) Do you endorse a robust group right of
self-determination? Explain.
15. (a) Explain why it is reasonable to
categorize Kymlicka as an epistemically modest but metaphysically immodest
advocate of human rights. In your
answer, you must show you understand what "epistemically modest" and
"metaphysically immodest" mean.
(b) Kymlicka advocates coercive intervention to prevent certain kinds of
human rights violations. Explain how
Kymlicka can do so without being a moral imperialist. In your answer, you must show you understand
what "moral imperialist" means.
16. Article 2 of the UNUDHR
says: "Everyone is entitled to all
the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of
any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other
opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, or other
status." Is it reasonable to
believe that there is such a broad moral right against discrimination? Explain.
17. (a) In class we discussed
the Santorum position on discrimination on the basis of sexual or gender
expression. According to Santorum, what
is the important disanalogy between discrimination on the basis of sexual or gender
expression and discrimination on the basis of race, sex, or nationality? Explain.
(b) Do you agree with Santorum that the disanalogy justifies discrimination
on the basis of sexual or gender expression?
Explain.
18. (a) What are the six
steps that Nussbaum identifies for full protection of the rights of gays,
lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered?
(Hint: She classifies them as six
kinds of rights.) (b) Do you agree that
all six kinds of rights should be guaranteed?
Explain. (Focus your explanation
on any disagreements you have with Nussbaum.
If you have no disagreements with her, focus your discussion on the
items on her list that are most controversial.)
19. In Lawrence v. Texas, what kind of
statutes did the U.S. Supreme Court declare to be unconstitutional? (b) In Justice Scalia's dissent, he made
a slippery slope argument in which he listed nine examples of laws that would
be overturned by the reasoning of the Court in
20. (a) Explain why act
utilitarianism might justify laws prohibiting homosexual couples from
socializing in public. (b) Explain why
J.S. Mill would disagree with the act utilitarian on this issue.
21. (a) Locke gives three
problems faced by individuals in a state of nature that he believes would lead
them to establish a government. What are
they? Explain them. (b) What is the International State of
Nature? (c) Which of Locke's three
problems is not faced by all parties in the International State of Nature? Explain.
(d) How would an International Criminal Court with global jurisdiction solve
all three problems for human rights violations in the International State of
Nature?
22. (a) If the International Criminal Court had
existed during World War II and had jurisdiction over the U.S. military, would
the fire bombing of Dresden and Tokyo or the dropping of the atomic bombs on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki have been prosecutable as crimes? Explain.
(b) Suppose they would have been prosecutable. In your opinion, is this a reason that morally
justifies the
23. (a) Mayerfeld lists four
ways that states might deal with the International State of Nature. Interestingly, all four have actually been
tried at one time or another. List all
four and explain each with an historical example of each, with an explanation
of why each example belongs in the relevant category on Mayerfeld's list.
24. (a) What are Burke's three
main objections to the advocates of human rights? (b) Explain why Burke's objections to the
advocates of human rights are primarily objections to the Proof Paradigm.
25. (a) In what important ways is Burke's
political philosophy similar to J.S. Mill's?
(b) What is the most significant disagreement between Burke and J.S.
Mill on human rights? Why do they
disagree?
26. Why does Marx not endorse
a civil right to freedom of religion?
27. (a) What are the four
basic rights that Marx discusses (in addition to freedom of religion)? (b) Why does Marx not endorse any of those
four rights? Discuss each of the four
rights individually.
28. (a) What makes Burke's political theory
paternalistic? (b) What makes Marx's political theory paternalistic?
29. (a) According to Rorty, what is the history
of the development of human rights the history of? Explain.
(b) If Rorty is correct about that history, explain why it would be a
mistake to think of it as a history of objective progress. (c) In what sense of progress could Rorty
claim that there is progress in the history of the development of human rights?
30. (a) Are you a moral realist or moral
anti-realist about human rights? Explain
your position in a way that shows that you understand the distinction between
moral realism and moral anti-realism. (b)
For moral realists: What are the most
persuasive reasons for being a moral anti-realist about human rights? For moral anti-realists: What are the most persuasive reasons for
being a moral realist about human rights?
[NOTE THAT I AM ASKING FOR THE MOST PERSUASIVE REASONS AGAINST YOUR
POSITION.] (c) How would you respond to
the reasons given in your answer to part (b)?
31. Talbott has suggested that the historical
development of many but not all human rights can be understood as representing
a response to paternalism of some kind.
For each right on the following list, say whether its historical
development can be understood as a response to some kind of paternalism and
explain your answer.
(a) Right to life;
(b) Right not to be enslaved;
(c) Right to freedom of
religion;
(d) Right to freedom of
expression;
(e) End of colonialism and
the rights of indigenous peoples;
(f) Rights against
discrimination on the basis of race;
(g) Rights against
discrimination on the basis of sex or gender;
(h) Right of adults to engage
in voluntary sexual acts in private;
(i) Rights against
discrimination on the basis of sexual or gender expression;
(j) Right to use
contraceptives;
(k) Right to assisted suicide
in some circumstances;
32. In this course, we have read and discussed
many official human rights documents.
Give an example of a potential new right that is not included in any of
the official human rights documents that we have read that you believe should
be included in future human rights documents and explain why. (Your answer cannot be the same as your final
project proposal. Pick a different
right.) If there is no such right, give
an example of a potential new right that some people believe should be included
in future human rights documents and explain why you disagree.
33. If the history of the development of human
rights is a history of discovering and overcoming moral blindspots, we can
expect that two hundred years from now our descendents will be shocked at some
things that most of us now take for granted and do not feel to be morally
urgent. For example, two hundred years
ago, many advocates of human rights owned slaves and many of them did not
advocate equal rights for women. What
practice or state of affairs that most people now take for granted and do not
feel to be morally urgent do you expect our descendents to be most shocked
by? Explain.