Question 1

According to Marquis, "The moral generalizations of both sides are not quite correct. The generalizations hold for the most part, for the usual cases. This suggests that they are all necessary generalizations, that the moral claims made by those on both sides of the dispute do not touch on the essence of the matter."

Accepted Answer

The answer of According to Marquis, "The moral generalizations of...

Question 2

According to Marquis, "What primarily makes killing wrong is neither its effect on the murderer nor its effect on the victim's friends and relatives, but its effect on the victim."

Accepted Answer

Marquis argues that the moral wrongness of killing is not primarily about how it affects the murderer or the victim's loved ones, but rather because it deprives the victim of their future, which they would have valued.

Question 3

According to Marquis, "The view that what makes killing wrong is the loss to the victim of the value of the victim's future gains additional support when some of its implications are examined."

Accepted Answer

Marquis argues that the view that killing is wrong because it deprives the victim of their future value gains additional support when its implications are examined.

Question 4

According to Marquis, "Of course, this value of a future-like-ours argument, if sound, shows only that abortion is prima facie wrong, not that it is wrong in any and all circumstances."

Accepted Answer

Marquis' argument does not support the idea that abortion is always and absolutely wrong, but rather that it is wrong in most cases because it involves depriving a potential future of value.

Question 5

Marquis considers two rival accounts to his theory that have different implications for the ethics of abortion; they are: the serendipity effect and the stochastic effect.

Accepted Answer

Marquis actually discusses the "future like ours" theory in relation to the ethics of abortion, not the serendipity effect and the stochastic effect.

Question 6

According to Marquis, "Since a fetus possesses a property, the possession of which in adult human beings is sufficient to make killing an adult human being wrong, abortion is wrong."

Accepted Answer

Marquis argues that since a fetus possesses the property of "having a valuable future like ours," which is also present in adult human beings, killing a fetus is morally equivalent to killing an adult human being and therefore, abortion is wrong.

Question 7

Explain what Marquis means when he says, "If 'human being,' on the other hand, is taken to be a moral category, then the claim that a fetus is a human being cannot be taken to be a premise in the anti-abortion argument, for it is precisely what needs to be established."

Accepted Answer

The answer of Explain what Marquis means when he says,...

Question 8

Explain what Marquis means when he says, "The moral generalizations of both sides are not quite correct. The generalizations hold for the most part, for the usual cases. This suggests that they are all accidental generalizations, that the moral claims made by those on both sides of the dispute do not touch on the essence of the matter."

Accepted Answer

The answer of Explain what Marquis means when he says,...

Question 9

Marquis says, "The view that what makes killing wrong is the loss to the victim of the value of the victim's future gains additional support when some of its implications are examined." Describe some of those "implications."

Accepted Answer

The answer of Marquis says, "The view that what makes...

Question 10

Explain what Marquis means when he says, "Of course, this value of a future-like-ours argument, if sound, shows only that abortion is prima facie wrong, not that it is wrong in any and all circumstances."

Accepted Answer

The answer of Explain what Marquis means when he says,...

Question 11

Describe the discontinuation account and the desire account, and explain some of Marquis's criticisms of the two accounts.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Describe the discontinuation account and the desire...

Question 12

According to Singer, "I shall argue that the way people in relatively affluent countries react to a situation like that in Bengal ___________________; indeed, the whole way we look at moral issues-our moral conceptual scheme-needs to be altered, and with it, the way of life that has come to be taken for granted in our society."

Accepted Answer

Singer argues that the way people in relatively affluent countries react to a situation like that in Bengal cannot be justified and that our moral conceptual scheme needs to be altered, along with our way of life, which has come to be taken for granted in our society.

Question 13

Singer offers a simple principle: "if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it." Singer then goes on to say, "The uncontroversial appearance of the principle just stated is __________. If it were acted upon, even in its qualified form, our lives, our society, and our world would be fundamentally changed."

Accepted Answer

Singer suggests that the principle's simplicity and apparent uncontroversial nature are deceptive because if people truly acted on it, it would lead to significant changes in our lives and society, indicating the principle's profound implications are not immediately apparent.

Question 14

According to Singer, "Expert observers and supervisors, sent out by famine relief organizations or permanently stationed in famine-prone areas, can direct our aid to a refugee in Bengal almost as effectively as we could get it to someone in our own block. There would seem, therefore, to be no possible justification for discriminating on ..."

Accepted Answer

Singer is arguing that aid should not be discriminated based on geographical grounds, as it can be equally effective regardless of where the recipient is located. He does not mention race, religion, or science as factors for discrimination in aid distribution.

Question 15

According to Singer, "Should I consider that I am less obliged to pull the drowning child out of the pond if on looking around I see other people, no further away than I am, who have also noticed the child but are doing nothing? One has only to ask this question to see the absurdity of the view that ..."

Accepted Answer

Singer's argument is centered on the idea that the presence of other people who are also capable of helping but choose not to does not diminish an individual's moral obligation to assist someone in need, such as a drowning child. This illustrates the absurdity of thinking that the more people there are who could help, the less responsibility any one person has.

Question 16

An act which it would be good to do, but not wrong not to do is called:

Accepted Answer

The term "supererogatory" refers to an act that is morally good and praiseworthy, but not necessarily required. Therefore, it would be good to do, but not wrong not to do, making it the best choice for the given question. The other options are not applicable as they do not describe this specific type of moral action.

Question 17

According to Singer, "The issue here is: Where should we draw the line between conduct that is required and conduct that is good although not required, so as to get the best possible result? This would seem to be _____________ question, although a very difficult one."

Accepted Answer

Singer is discussing how to determine the best course of action in order to achieve the best possible result, which is an empirical question that requires empirical evidence for validation. The other options are not relevant to Singer's argument.

Question 18

According to Singer, a point that relates to the question of just how much we all ought to be giving away "is that we ought to give until we reach the level of _________________, that is, the level at which, by giving more, I would cause as much suffering to myself or my dependents as I would relieve by my gift."

Accepted Answer

Singer is referring to the concept of marginal utility, which in this context means giving until the point where the marginal benefit of giving more is equal to the marginal cost, or the point where giving more would cause as much suffering to oneself or one's dependents as the gift would relieve.

Question 19

According to Singer, "it should be clear that we would have to give away enough to ensure that the ________________, dependent as it is on people spending on trivia rather than giving to famine relief, would slow down and perhaps disappear entirely."

Accepted Answer

Singer suggests that to effectively combat global poverty, we would have to give away enough to radically alter the current consumer society, which values spending on "trivia" rather than giving to important causes like famine relief.

Question 20

According to Singer, "I shall argue that the way people in relatively affluent countries react to a situation like that in Bengal cannot be justified; indeed, the whole way we look at moral issues-our moral conceptual scheme-needs to be altered, and with it, the way of life that has come to be taken for granted in our society."

Accepted Answer

Singer argues that the way people in affluent countries react to a situation like the one in Bengal cannot be justified and that our moral conceptual scheme needs to be altered along with the way of life taken for granted in our society.

Quiz 7: Plato Why Should We Be Good

According to Marquis, "What primarily makes killing wrong is neither its effect on the murderer nor its effect on the victim's friends and relatives, but its effect on the victim."

According to Marquis, "The view that what makes killing wrong is the loss to the victim of the value of the victim's future gains additional support when some of its implications are examined."

According to Marquis, "Of course, this value of a future-like-ours argument, if sound, shows only that abortion is prima facie wrong, not that it is wrong in any and all circumstances."

Marquis considers two rival accounts to his theory that have different implications for the ethics of abortion; they are: the serendipity effect and the stochastic effect.

According to Marquis, "Since a fetus possesses a property, the possession of which in adult human beings is sufficient to make killing an adult human being wrong, abortion is wrong."

Explain what Marquis means when he says, "If 'human being,' on the other hand, is taken to be a moral category, then the claim that a fetus is a human being cannot be taken to be a premise in the anti-abortion argument, for it is precisely what needs to be established."

Marquis says, "The view that what makes killing wrong is the loss to the victim of the value of the victim's future gains additional support when some of its implications are examined." Describe some of those "implications."

Explain what Marquis means when he says, "Of course, this value of a future-like-ours argument, if sound, shows only that abortion is prima facie wrong, not that it is wrong in any and all circumstances."

Describe the discontinuation account and the desire account, and explain some of Marquis's criticisms of the two accounts.

An act which it would be good to do, but not wrong not to do is called:

According to Singer, "The issue here is: Where should we draw the line between conduct that is required and conduct that is good although not required, so as to get the best possible result? This would seem to be _____________ question, although a very difficult one."

According to Singer, "it should be clear that we would have to give away enough to ensure that the ________________, dependent as it is on people spending on trivia rather than giving to famine relief, would slow down and perhaps disappear entirely."