Question 1

Rachels argues that an important distinction between active and passive euthanasia lies in the fact that in cases of passive euthanasia, the doctor can be truly said to have done nothing to assist in the patient's death.

Accepted Answer

Rachels argues that there is no morally important distinction between active and passive euthanasia, emphasizing that in both cases, the doctor's actions or inactions are aimed at bringing about the patient's death, thus challenging the notion that passive euthanasia involves doing nothing to assist in the patient's death.

Question 2

A key premise of Rachels's argument against the traditional distinction between active and passive euthanasia is that a patient's death must always be considered a greater evil than the patient's continued existence.

Accepted Answer

Rachels argues that there is no moral difference between active and passive euthanasia based on the effects or outcomes of actions, not on the premise that death is always a greater evil than continued existence. He challenges the traditional distinction by suggesting that in some cases, allowing a patient to die (passive euthanasia) can be morally equivalent to directly causing the death (active euthanasia), especially if the intention and outcome are to relieve unbearable suffering.

Question 3

According to the American Medical Association's policy statement on euthanasia, active euthanasia is never an acceptable practice, whereas passive euthanasia is sometimes acceptable.

Accepted Answer

The American Medical Association (AMA) distinguishes between active and passive euthanasia, considering active euthanasia unethical under its policies, while acknowledging that passive euthanasia, which involves withholding or withdrawing treatment, can be acceptable in certain circumstances.

Question 4

According to Rachels, the cessation of treatment in many cases can be considered legitimate instances of the intentional termination of life of one human being by another.

Accepted Answer

Rachels argues that there is no moral difference between killing and letting die in certain contexts, implying that the cessation of treatment (letting die) can be morally equivalent to the intentional termination of life (killing), and thus can be considered legitimate in some cases.

Question 5

Rachels argues that a doctor who gives a patient a lethal injection for humane reasons is morally on par with a doctor who allows a patient to die for humane reasons.

Accepted Answer

Rachels argues that there is no moral difference between killing and letting die if the motives and outcomes are the same, thus a doctor who gives a lethal injection for humane reasons is morally on par with a doctor who allows a patient to die for humane reasons.

Question 6

In your own words, explain the traditional distinction between active and passive euthanasia as reflected in the American Medical Association's official policy statement on the intentional termination of life.

Accepted Answer

The answer of In your own words, explain the traditional...

Question 7

In your own words, state Rachels's main conclusion about the "conventional doctrine" regarding active and passive euthanasia. Summarize his main argument for this conclusion.

Accepted Answer

The answer of In your own words, state Rachels's main...

Question 8

What conclusion about "killing" versus "letting die" is Rachels arguing for on the basis of the Smith and Jones illustrations? In your own words, explain his argument for this conclusion.

Accepted Answer

The answer of What conclusion about "killing" versus "letting die"...

Question 9

Rachels argues that it is incorrect to claim that a doctor who allows his patient to die truly "does nothing" to cause the death of his patient. Describe in your own words another case in which an agent who refrains from a certain type action would not correctly be described as having "done nothing." Explain why it would be wrong to ascribe inaction rather than action to the agent in this case.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Rachels argues that it is incorrect to...

Question 10

How might one object to Rachels's argument that the refusal to perform relatively simple operations such as those to remove intestinal blockages in children with Down's syndrome constitutes the making of life-and-death decisions on irrelevant moral grounds? Be sure to state your objection as a complete argument.

Accepted Answer

The answer of How might one object to Rachels's argument...

Question 11

Which of the following best captures the basic question that Garcia is trying to answer in this paper?
A) What is sexism?
B) What is racism?
C) What makes people racist?
D) What makes institutions racist?

Accepted Answer

Garcia's paper focuses on defining and understanding the concept of racism, rather than sexism, the reasons behind individual racist behavior, or institutional racism.

Question 12

Garcia's main conclusion in this paper is:
A) Racism is a form of action that advantages or disadvantages individuals simply because they belong to a certain racial group.
B) Racism is a vicious sort of racially based disregard for certain people's welfare.
C) Racism is the dogma that one ethnic group is inferior by nature and another group is superior by nature.
D) Racism consists of structures and institutions with the power to discriminate.

Accepted Answer

Garcia's main conclusion focuses on racism as a morally charged behavior, emphasizing the disregard for the welfare of individuals based on their racial identity, rather than structural or dogmatic definitions.

Question 13

Which of the following best captures Garcia's response to the objection that there is no such thing as racism because there is no such thing as races?
A) Racism and races are both real because there are material consequences of oppression based on racial groupings that we can see in the world.
B) We can still usefully analyze racism even if it is based on a fiction, just as we can usefully analyze a literary character even if it is based on a fictional novel.
C) Just because race is socially constructed doesn't mean race isn't real, and racism could still be real even if races aren't real.
D) Races are real classifications of people based on the color of their skin, but racism is not real because racism is based on false beliefs.

Accepted Answer

Garcia argues that even if race is a social construct and not biologically real, the social reality and impact of racism can still be significant and real.

Question 14

Of the following explanations, which most accurately explains the infection model of wrongdoing?
A) An action is wrong because of the moral disvalue that enters it, rather than the nonmoral value that results from it.
B) An action is wrong if it infects the ideas and beliefs of other people to make them act immorally.
C) An action is wrong because of the nonmoral value that constitutes it, rather than the moral value of what comes out of it.
D) An institution is wrong if its power structures infect the ideologies of the individuals it governs over or affects.

Accepted Answer

The infection model of wrongdoing focuses on the moral disvalue inherent in an action itself, rather than the consequences or outcomes of that action. This perspective emphasizes the intrinsic moral flaws or negative aspects within the action, distinguishing it from models that evaluate actions based on their results or effects.

Question 15

Why does Garcia think that his view of racism helps to explain why racism is always immoral?
A) Racism is always immoral because racist institutions encompass the entire society and affect everyone negatively.
B) Racism is always immoral because one is obligated to have true and rational beliefs but racist beliefs are always false.
C) Racism is always immoral because as a form of morally insufficient respect for others, it opposes the virtues of benevolence and justice.
D) Racism is always immoral because everyone has equal moral worth and deserves the same basic human rights.

Accepted Answer

Garcia believes racism is always immoral because it represents a lack of sufficient moral respect for others, conflicting with virtues like benevolence and justice.

Question 16

Which of the following best captures Garcia's explanation for what makes institutions racist?
A) An institution is racist when its effects disproportionately favor or privilege one group of people over another based on their races.
B) An institution is racist when the leaders of that institution themselves hold racist beliefs and views.
C) An institution is racist when its members are exclusively or predominantly members of a single race.
D) An institution is racist when people give it racist aims and plans and when individual racism informs its behavior.

Accepted Answer

Garcia's explanation focuses on the intentionality behind the institution's actions, where racist aims and individual racism influence the institution's behavior, rather than just the outcomes or composition of the institution.

Question 17

Why does Garcia think that prejudice is not essential to racism?
A) Prejudice could be based on other forms of oppressions such as sexism, classism, or ableism.
B) Prejudice is a matter of feeling, whereas racism is a matter of beliefs.
C) Prejudice is a cognitive matter, whereas racism is a matter of racial disregard.
D) Prejudice only exists in institutions, whereas racism is fundamentally individual in nature.

Accepted Answer

Garcia argues that racism is a matter of racial disregard, which is a moral failing, rather than a cognitive matter like prejudice. He distinguishes racism from mere prejudice by emphasizing the moral aspect of racism, focusing on the disregard or lack of respect for individuals based on race, rather than just the cognitive or belief-based aspects that characterize prejudice.

Question 18

Which of the following best captures Garcia's main argument for why preferential treatment in affirmative action need not be racist?
A) Discrimination on the basis of race is not equivalent to discrimination against people because of racial disregard.
B) Preferential treatment treats all races equally by trying to level out the playing field between whites and people of color.
C) Preferential treatment in affirmative action is positive, and only preferential treatment in negative action can be racist.
D) Although preferential treatment in affirmative action benefits one group over another group, it does not take race into account.

Accepted Answer

Garcia argues that preferential treatment in affirmative action is not inherently racist because it distinguishes between discrimination based on race and discrimination stemming from racial disregard or prejudice. This perspective suggests that actions taken to address racial inequalities do not necessarily equate to racism if they are not motivated by a disregard for or devaluation of a race.

Question 19

According to Garcia, what is the difference between racially offensive speech and racist hate speech?
A) Racially offensive speech is private speech made by individuals to their friends or acquaintances, whereas racist hate speech is a public act made in a public setting such as the workplace or legislative assembly.
B) Racially offensive speech must be heard by others who are insulted by its content, whereas racist hate speech can be the internal speech of one's own thoughts that one does not voice out loud.
C) Racially offensive speech is constituted by racist disaffection toward the welfare of a certain group, whereas racist hate speech is defined by ill will toward racist institutions and governments.
D) Racially offensive speech is defined by its effects and whether people were insulted by what was said, whereas racist hate speech is defined by its origins and whether it expresses racial disregard.

Accepted Answer

Racist hate speech is distinguished by its origins and the expression of racial disregard, while racially offensive speech is characterized by its effects, particularly whether it insults individuals.

Question 20

Why does Garcia discuss the cases of southern white aristocrats who were protective of "their Negroes" but supported the antebellum system of racial oppression and Kiplingesque paternalists who thought "primitive" people would benefit from "civilized" European culture?
A) Garcia discusses these cases to argue that such people were racist because of the social system of racial hierarchy and oppression that they were part of.
B) Garcia considers these cases to refute the objection that his account of racism cannot explain why such people were racists.
C) Garcia discusses these cases to defend the northern white abolitionists who proactively fought against slavery and helped slaves escape on the Underground Railroad.
D) Garcia considers these cases to analyze why such people's racial hatred for blacks coincided with their motivations to protect and help blacks.

Accepted Answer

Garcia considers these cases to refute the objection that his account of racism cannot explain why such people were racists, demonstrating that their actions and beliefs can still be understood within a framework of racism despite apparent contradictions.

Quiz 13: Aristotle's Ethics: Exploring Virtue and Justice

Rachels argues that an important distinction between active and passive euthanasia lies in the fact that in cases of passive euthanasia, the doctor can be truly said to have done nothing to assist in the patient's death.

A key premise of Rachels's argument against the traditional distinction between active and passive euthanasia is that a patient's death must always be considered a greater evil than the patient's continued existence.

According to the American Medical Association's policy statement on euthanasia, active euthanasia is never an acceptable practice, whereas passive euthanasia is sometimes acceptable.

According to Rachels, the cessation of treatment in many cases can be considered legitimate instances of the intentional termination of life of one human being by another.

Rachels argues that a doctor who gives a patient a lethal injection for humane reasons is morally on par with a doctor who allows a patient to die for humane reasons.

In your own words, explain the traditional distinction between active and passive euthanasia as reflected in the American Medical Association's official policy statement on the intentional termination of life.

In your own words, state Rachels's main conclusion about the "conventional doctrine" regarding active and passive euthanasia. Summarize his main argument for this conclusion.

What conclusion about "killing" versus "letting die" is Rachels arguing for on the basis of the Smith and Jones illustrations? In your own words, explain his argument for this conclusion.

Which of the following best captures the basic question that Garcia is trying to answer in this paper?

Garcia's main conclusion in this paper is:

Which of the following best captures Garcia's response to the objection that there is no such thing as racism because there is no such thing as races?

Of the following explanations, which most accurately explains the infection model of wrongdoing?

Why does Garcia think that his view of racism helps to explain why racism is always immoral?

Which of the following best captures Garcia's explanation for what makes institutions racist?

Why does Garcia think that prejudice is not essential to racism?

Which of the following best captures Garcia's main argument for why preferential treatment in affirmative action need not be racist?

According to Garcia, what is the difference between racially offensive speech and racist hate speech?

Why does Garcia discuss the cases of southern white aristocrats who were protective of "their Negroes" but supported the antebellum system of racial oppression and Kiplingesque paternalists who thought "primitive" people would benefit from "civilized" European culture?