PHILOSOPHY 355, FALL 1999
FINAL EXAM STUDY QUESTIONS

The final exam will consist of three questions selected from the following set.  Although 
it is possible there will be some choice, there may not be.  You should therefore prepare 
as though you will have no choice of questions.  The exam will be close book.

1. Describe the main features and doctrines of each of utilitarianism, natural rights 
theory (libertarianism), and contractualism (justice as fairness).  In each case be brief 
but specific and refer as appropriate to authors we have read.  Which of these 
approaches to moral questions do you think is best.  Or if you think that different 
frameworks are more helpful in thinking about different issues say why.  Back up 
your judgment with reasons.

2. “Working out a satisfactory position on a moral issue is a matter of getting the right 
balance or equilibrium between relevant moral principles or theory, on the one hand, 
and what may be complex facts of the case, on the other.”  Critically discuss this 
quote in relation to the issue of race-based affirmative action, bringing in what you 
think are the strongest arguments on each side of the issue.

3. Critically discuss the debate between Singer and Hardin over our moral obligations to 
help relieve world hunger and poverty.  What are the most fundamental moral 
principles underlying each position and what are the main empirical claims that each 
writer makes in supporting his view?  What are the strongest arguments on each side 
and how would each writer best respond to the arguments and criticisms of the other?

4. Critically discuss the issues concerning our moral obligations towards animals from 
the perspective of, respectively, utilitarianism, natural rights theory, and 
contractualism, with specific attention to the writings of Carruthers, Singer, and 
Cohen.  Where would you fit Regan’s ideas in relation to these frameworks and why?  
Which perspective provides the most illuminating treatment of these issues?  Give 
reasons to support your answer.

5. Discuss the debate between Duvall and Sessions, on the one hand, and Baxter, on the 
other, concerning the value of non-human (and, in some cases, non-sentient) nature.  
Discuss what Duvall and Sessions mean by “biocentric equality” and “biocentric 
unity,” respectively.  How might we relate these ideas to the frameworks we have 
studied or to the ideas that Regan puts forward?  What are the fundamental principles 
behind Baxter’s outlook?  What sorts of policy issues might Baxter be expected to 
agree with Duvall and Sessions?  Where might he disagree?  Critically evaluate this 
debate.

6. In the middle lecture on abortion (“The Case Against the Immorality of Abortion”), it 
was suggested that we might consider three different dimensions—the moral status of 
the fetus, the degree of moral responsibility for the fetus’s existence, and the degree 
of the woman’s hardship—as lines along which morally relevant factors might vary.  
Critically discuss this matrix with special reference to the writings of English, 
Warren, Noonan, and Thomson.  Then consider whether Marquis’s argument doesn’t 
cut through these distinctions, showing that wherever along these dimensions a given 
case lies, abortion is nonetheless wrong.

7. Critically discuss the argument put forward by Dworkin, et al, in favor of the 
proposition that physician-assisted suicide should be legally permitted, considering 
also, where this argument should be placed in relation to the major frameworks we 
studied.  How might an argument against this position best be made from within one 
of these frameworks?  Which arguments do you find stronger and why?

8. Critically discuss the race, genes, and IQ debate with special attention to Kottak’s 
position on the concept of race and the position put forward for your consideration in 
lecture.  Then discuss the relevance of these matters to the affirmative action.  Present 
what you think is the strongest argument in favor of race-based affirmative action that 
can be based on these considerations (i.e., the considerations you have adduced in 
discussing the debate concerning race, genes, and IQ) and the strongest argument 
against.

9. Critically discuss what you think is the most important ethical issue related to gender 
from the perspective of two of the different moral frameworks we have studied, and 
in relation to the readings from Okin and Farrell.  Make sure you give your reasons 
for its importance.

10. One of the most contentious contemporary moral issues concerning sexual orientation 
is that of same sex marriage.  Construct the strongest argument against legalizing 
same sex marriage and discuss where this argument might be located in relation to the 
moral theories we studied.  Do the same for what you think is the strongest argument 
in favor, and then discuss how you weigh these arguments and why.