Question 1

If an action is supererogatory, it is wrong for you to fail to do it.

Accepted Answer

Supererogatory actions go beyond what is required by duty or obligation, meaning they are commendable but not obligatory, so it is not wrong to fail to do them.

Question 2

Descriptive claims are about how the world is, was, or would be in certain circumstances.

Accepted Answer

Descriptive claims aim to describe or report factual information about the world, including its current state, past conditions, or hypothetical situations under specific circumstances.

Question 3

Normative claims are about how the world should be or about what is good or bad.

Accepted Answer

Normative claims involve judgments or prescriptions about how the world ought to be, expressing values, ethics, or what is considered good or bad, as opposed to descriptive claims which state facts about how the world is.

Question 4

All normative claims are moral claims.

Accepted Answer

Normative claims include moral claims but also encompass claims about what is rational, reasonable, or appropriate, which are not strictly moral in nature.

Question 5

All moral claims are normative claims.

Accepted Answer

Moral claims prescribe how things ought to be, which is a characteristic of normative claims.

Question 6

Aesthetic claims are normative claims.

Accepted Answer

Aesthetic claims are normative because they involve judgments about what is considered beautiful or pleasing, which are based on cultural norms and subjective standards.

Question 7

"The United States imprisons too many people" is a normative statement.

Accepted Answer

A normative statement expresses a value judgment or opinion about what ought to be, rather than stating a fact that can be tested or measured.

Question 8

To say that something is morally permissible is the same as saying that society actually permits it.

Accepted Answer

Morally permissible means it aligns with ethical principles, while societal permission refers to what is legally or socially accepted, which may not always coincide.

Question 9

If something is illegal, then it is always morally wrong.

Accepted Answer

Legality and morality are separate concepts; something can be illegal but not necessarily morally wrong, and vice versa.

Question 10

Hume's Law says that you cannot have a cogent moral argument without at least one normative premise.

Accepted Answer

Hume's Law, also known as the is-ought problem, posits that you cannot derive an ought (a normative statement about what should be) from an is (a descriptive statement about what is) without including at least one normative premise in your argument. This principle suggests that moral conclusions require at least one moral or normative premise to be logically valid.

Question 11

An argument with a moral conclusion but only descriptive premises has a hidden moral premise.

Accepted Answer

An argument that moves from descriptive (is) premises to a normative (ought) conclusion implicitly relies on at least one moral (ought) premise to bridge the gap between description and prescription, making it a hidden moral premise.

Question 12

Hume's Law applies only to deductively valid arguments.

Accepted Answer

Hume's Law, or the is-ought problem, applies broadly to arguments in ethics and moral philosophy, stating that one cannot derive an "ought" from an "is," rather than applying only to deductively valid arguments.

Question 13

The following argument violates Hume's Law: "When you are a witness in a criminal trial, lying to the jury is illegal. Therefore, it's wrong for witnesses to lie to the jury."

Accepted Answer

Hume's Law, or the is-ought problem, posits that one cannot derive an "ought" statement (what should be) solely from "is" statements (what is). The argument transitions from a legal fact (lying is illegal) to a moral judgment (it's wrong to lie) without a moral premise, thus violating Hume's Law.

Question 14

The following argument violates Hume's Law: "It is wrong to deprive animals of the chance to exercise their natural tendencies. Zoos deprives lions of the chance to hunt for their food. That's why it is wrong to hold lions in zoos."

Accepted Answer

Hume's Law states that one cannot derive an "ought" from an "is." The argument does not violate Hume's Law because it starts with a moral premise ("It is wrong to deprive animals...") and derives a moral conclusion, maintaining the same normative framework throughout.

Question 15

The following argument violates Hume's Law: "Pluto is not a planet. Planets must be roughly spherical objects that orbit the Sun and have cleared the neighborhood around their orbit."

Accepted Answer

Hume's Law, also known as the is-ought problem, concerns the logical gap between descriptive statements (what is) and prescriptive or normative statements (what ought to be). The argument provided is descriptive, outlining criteria for what constitutes a planet, and does not involve a transition from descriptive to normative claims.

Question 16

The following argument violates Hume's Law: "Everyone ought to treat others with respect. Therefore, no one should ever tell a lie, regardless of the consequences."

Accepted Answer

The answer of The following argument violates Hume's Law: "Everyone...

Question 17

When finding hidden premises, any premise that connects the premises to the conclusion is equally appropriate to use as a hidden premise.

Accepted Answer

Not all premises that connect the premises to the conclusion are equally appropriate as hidden premises; the most appropriate hidden premise is one that logically and coherently bridges the gap between the given premises and the conclusion in a way that reflects the argument's intended reasoning.

Question 18

When finding hidden premises, you should avoid using unacceptable premises if you can.

Accepted Answer

Hidden premises should be both acceptable and relevant to the argument to ensure it is strengthened logically and ethically. Using unacceptable premises can undermine the argument's validity and credibility.

Question 19

The following argument commits the fallacy of circular reasoning: "I read last week on Wikipedia that any false information is removed from Wikipedia within 24 hours. Therefore, any information that's been on Wikipedia for more than 24 hours is true."

Accepted Answer

The argument assumes that information on Wikipedia is true because it is not removed, which is the same as saying it is not removed because it is true, thus reasoning in a circle without providing external verification.

Question 20

The following argument commits the fallacy of circular reasoning: "Physician-assisted suicide violates the Hippocratic Oath that all doctors take when they finish medical school. Therefore, physician-assisted suicide is morally wrong."

Accepted Answer

The argument does not commit the fallacy of circular reasoning; it makes a moral claim based on the principles of the Hippocratic Oath, rather than restating its conclusion as its premise.

Quiz 2: Moral Arguments