PHIL 410A: MIDTERM REVIEW QUESTIONS
The
Midterm Exam will take place in class on Tuesday, May 5. PLEASE BRING A BLANK
EXAM BOOKLET AND A PEN TO THE EXAM. EXAM
BOOKLETS WITH NOTES WRITTEN ON THEM OR WITH PAGES MISSING WILL NOT BE
ACCEPTED. 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. The exam
will consist of selections from the following questions. In answering the following questions,
whenever you are asked to discuss the views of any of the authors we have read,
be careful to distinguish the views they express in the readings from any
modifications or extensions suggested in lecture, or advocated by you.
1.
Explain and distinguish the members of the following groups of terms, as
used in this course:
(a) Top-Down/Bottom-Up Moral
Reasoning;
(b) positive/negative liberty
(c) moral atom/moral molecule
(d) simple ought/moral claim (on
Thomson's view)
(e) infringe/violate a right
(f) belief-mediated/non-belief
mediated distress
(g) first property/second property
(h) direct/indirect utilitarianism
(i)
consequentialist/nonconsequentialist
2.
For each statement or argument below, state whether you believe it is a
correct interpretation of the relevant author's views, and justify your answer
by explaining the relevant parts of the author's view.
(a) As
(b) Thomson believes that financial
loss is not a harm. Therefore, she
believes that no one is ever entitled to compensation for financial loss.
(c) Thomson believes that in a State
of
(d) Thomson believes that in a State
of
(e) Thomson believes that we have a
natural right not to be caused fear.
(f) Mill is a utilitarian. Therefore, he believes that the government
has a duty to infringe individual liberty whenever it believes that doing so is
necessary to maximize total utility.
(g) Mill believes that the only
justification for government coercion is to prevent harm to others. Therefore, he is a libertarian. (A libertarian is someone who believes that the
only justification for government coercion is to protect its citizens from
being harmed in certain ways and to exact compensation and punishment from
those who harm others in those ways.)
(h) Mill believes that all opinions
should be tolerated because all opinions are equally likely to be true.
(i) Mill's argument for freedom of
thought and expression depends crucially on the claim that human beliefs are
fallible. Therefore, Mill's argument
implies that it is a mistake to think that one has any infallible beliefs. Therefore, Mill's argument implies that the
government may prohibit anyone from claiming to have infallible beliefs.
(j) Mill believes that polygamy
should be illegal.
(k) Mill believes that no drugs
should be illegal.
(l) Rawls believes that in the
Original Position a rational person would accept the principle of maximizing
overall utility.
3.
As
4.
What is the Problem of Hobbesian Libertarianism? What does the Problem of Hobbesian
Libertarianism show about any acceptable normative theory of negative
liberty? Explain.
5.
What is a "simple moral ought"? We have described Thomson's moral claims as
moral molecules. According to Thomson,
what are the constituents of moral claims?
Explain each of them. What
constituent does she leave out that other authors (e.g., Locke and Talbott)
include? Explain it.
6.
(a) According to Thomson are all claims absolute? Explain.
(b) According to Thomson are all claims enforceable? (i.e., Is it always
permitted to use the minimum amount of force necessary to prevent a claim violation?) Explain.
7.
(a) According to Thomson, what are our natural (claim) rights? Explain each of them. (b) Consider the following example: In the state of nature, you and a group of
friends are on a camping trip. One night
while you are asleep on unowned property I erect sheer concrete walls to
completely enclose your group. You are
unable to escape. I drop food packages
from helicopters, so you are well-fed. I
also have provided porta-potties for your use, which I empty each week. Have I violated any of the natural rights
that Thomson thinks you have? Explain.
(Thanks to Cyrus Ansari for the example.)
8.
We have used the metaphor of border crossings to represent claim
infringements. According to Thomson,
what are the factors that can make it permissible to cross another person's
borders? Explain each of them briefly.
9.
Why does Thomson's view imply that I do not violate your rights by
playing Russian Roulette on you if the chamber turns out to be empty? Does it matter whether you know that I am
playing Russian Roulette on you or not?
Explain.
10. (a) What is Mill's Harm
Principle? (b) On a literal reading, the
Harm Principle sounds like a statement of libertarianism. Explain why Mill's interpretation of the Harm
Principle is not libertarian. [In class
we listed the kinds of exceptions that Mill allows to the Harm Principle. List
and explain as many of them as you can.]
11. (a) Name and summarize briefly
Mill’s four arguments for freedom of thought and discussion. (b) Identify the three main
arguments. (c) We also identified a
fifth argument that is more implicit.
What is it?
(d)
By their nature, what sorts of expression do Mill's four arguments apply to and
what sorts of expression do they not apply to?
Explain. (e) Give at least three
different kinds of expression that Mill's four arguments don't apply to and
explain why they are not covered by his arguments. (f) Suppose that Mill's three main arguments
for freedom of thought and expression are successful. What is the gap that remains in providing a
utilitarian justification for freedom of thought and expression? (g) How does Mill close the gap?
12.
(a) What is the social process of the free give-and-take of
opinion. (b) Explain Mill's
epistemology. In your answer, you must
explain the role of the social process of the free give-and-take of opinion in
knowledge and rational belief. (c) Why
does Mill think it is rational for him to believe his epistemology?
13.
(a) Does Mill believe that the right to freedom of thought and
discussion is absolute? (i.e., Does he
believe that limits on freedom of expression can never be justified?) Explain.
14.
(a) What does Mill mean by "individuality"? (b) Name and briefly summarize Mill's two
main arguments for individuality. (c)
Which of his arguments seems like an a priori argument? (d) Explain the other argument, the one that
is clearly not a priori, and in your explanation explain why it is indirect
in two senses.
15.
Mill opposes laws that restrict recreational activities on Sunday but
does not oppose laws that restrict working on Sunday. Is he inconsistent? Explain.
16.
(a) Does Thomson believe that any natural rights are inalienable, in the
sense in which we use the term in this course?
Explain. (b) Does Mill advocate
any inalienable rights, in the sense in which we use the term in this
course? Explain.
17.
(a) What is legal paternalism?
(Make sure you explain paternalism.) (b) Briefly summarize Mill's argument for a
right against legal paternalism. In your
explanation, be sure to explain the claim of first-person authority. (c) What is a collective action problem? (d) Why are coercive solutions to collective
action problems not paternalistic? (d)
How can the idea of a collective action problem be used to provide a
non-paternalistic argument for a government to refuse to permit slavery
contracts?
18.
(a) According to Rawls, what are the two moral powers? (Name and explain them.) (b) What is the Original Position? (c) How does the Original Position model the
two moral powers?