Philosophy 2803-056
Health Ethics

Quiz Solutions

1a. True. The ‘Cultural Differences’ argument attempts to show that moral relativism is correct (although as we noted in class, the argument fails).

1b. False. Descriptive, not normative, approaches to ethics simply record the ethical attitudes of particular individuals or groups without passing judgment on what those attitudes should be.

1c. False. This one was slightly tricky since some people have claimed the two versions of the Categorical Imperative are different principles and so claimed that Kant is a pluralist. However, as the lecture notes say “Kant is a monist since he thinks both versions of the C.I. ultimately say the same thing.”

1d. True. To think something has only instrumental value is to think that “it is only valuable for what it may get you.”

1e. False. Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, not the other way around.

2a. It is possible because it may be the case that the person described in the question believes that some of the views people disagree about are objectively true while others are objectively false. The scenario described in the question does not commit the person to being a relativist because relativism is more than a descriptive theory (see lecture 2). To be a relativist, one would have to believe that there are no moral facts over and above what is believed in a particular culture, but the scenario described in the question does not commit the person described to that view.

2b. As most of you noted, it is most reasonable to think this person is a consequentialist. He or she suggests that we should address the issue of cloning by focusing on its consequences (and not by focusing on some abstract principle or rule or duty). Consequentialists say morality is ultimately to be assessed based on the consequences of our actions. The person in the question certainly takes this approach.

3. This first line in the passage focuses on the importance of respecting human life. This sounds very Kantian. The second line rules out a focus on what a culture believes, thus ruling out moral relativism. The third line rules out utilitarianism by saying unhappiness and suffering are morally irrelevant. Forms of consequentialism other than utilitarianism aren’t explicitly ruled out at any point, but sentences 4 & 5 clearly confirm the impression that this is a deontological view and, more specifically, a Kantian view. Sentence 4 stresses a focus on our duties. Sentence 5 narrows the focus even further to respecting humans as having intrinsic value, a very Kantian concern (think of the second version of the Categorical Imperative), thus confirming the initial impression that the person holds a Kantian version of a deontological view.

[This is a little more detailed than what it took to get full value on question 3. Ruling out other theories would have been ideal, but what you needed to do in order to get full value was simply to explain how the passage clearly commits the person to a Kantian version of deontology.]