Question 1

Three models of ethical theory include top-down reasoning, bottom-up reasoning, and reasoning based on coherence and considered judgments.

Accepted Answer

These three models represent different approaches to ethical reasoning: top-down reasoning starts with broad principles and applies them to specific cases, bottom-up reasoning begins with specific cases or intuitions and builds up to general principles, and reasoning based on coherence and considered judgments seeks a balance between principles and specific judgments, aiming for consistency and reflection on considered moral intuitions.

Question 2

Casuists focus on description and comparison of particular cases, but they think moral judgments must still be made based on an appeal to principles.

Accepted Answer

Casuists focus on particular cases and often avoid strict adherence to moral principles, instead emphasizing context and practical judgment.

Question 3

Casuistry is similar to case law in its reliance on precedent to make moral decisions.

Accepted Answer

Casuistry, like case law, involves analyzing previous cases or moral dilemmas to make decisions in new, similar situations, relying on precedent to guide ethical judgments.

Question 4

Proponents of casuistry point out that ethicists often agree on what is morally right to do in a given case, even if they don't agree on the reason or reasons why.

Accepted Answer

Casuistry, a case-based method in ethics, allows for agreement on moral decisions in specific cases without necessitating consensus on the underlying ethical principles or theories. This approach emphasizes practical resolution of moral problems by drawing on analogies with previous cases, allowing ethicists to reach a consensus on what is morally right in a given situation, even if they have different theoretical justifications.

Question 5

According to Beauchamp and Childress, casuists do not recognize the moral principles involved in ethical reasoning about cases, but they at least do describe the ethical issues involved in a given case properly.

Accepted Answer

Casuists do recognize the moral principles involved in ethical reasoning about cases; they use analogical reasoning from paradigm cases to analyze and resolve moral dilemmas, thus implicitly or explicitly acknowledging underlying ethical principles.

Question 6

Beauchamp and Childress reject the use of the casuistical method and of analogy in moral reasoning.

Accepted Answer

Beauchamp and Childress, in their work on biomedical ethics, actually incorporate the use of casuistry and analogy as part of their methodological approach to address complex ethical issues, recognizing the value of case-based reasoning in moral deliberation.

Question 7

As discussed by Beauchamp and Childress, when some feature in a person's or group's prevailing structure of moral views conflicts with one or more of their considered judgments, they must modify something in their viewpoint in order to achieve equilibrium.

Accepted Answer

Beauchamp and Childress discuss the concept of reflective equilibrium in moral reasoning, which involves adjusting one's moral beliefs and considered judgments to achieve consistency and coherence in one's moral framework. When a conflict arises between a prevailing moral view and specific considered judgments, adjustments are necessary to restore equilibrium.

Question 8

Proponents of reflective equilibrium in ethical thinking argue that a theory or set of moral beliefs is justified if it maximizes the coherence of the overall set of beliefs that are accepted upon reflective examination.

Accepted Answer

Reflective equilibrium is a method of ethical reasoning which seeks to achieve consistency and coherence between a set of moral beliefs and principles by mutually adjusting them until they fit together in a harmonious way. This involves reflecting on and revising one's beliefs in light of new considerations, aiming for a balance where the set of beliefs, when considered together, support each other and appear justified.

Question 9

The form of reflective equilibrium Beauchamp and Childress use in their ethical reasoning is known as coherentism.

Accepted Answer

Beauchamp and Childress use a form of reflective equilibrium known as coherence theory.

Question 10

One unresolved problem with the method of reflective equilibrium is that it is not always clear how to know when the effort to achieve reflective equilibrium is going well or when it has succeeded.

Accepted Answer

Reflective equilibrium is a method of ethical reasoning that seeks to bring coherence between our moral principles and judgments. However, one of its criticisms is the lack of clear criteria for determining when an equilibrium has been successfully achieved, making it difficult to assess the progress or success of the effort.

Question 11

Beauchamp and Childress claim that the four basic principles they describe in their book are an expression of the full moral content of the common morality.

Accepted Answer

Beauchamp and Childress argue that the four principles of biomedical ethics (autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence, and justice) are a pragmatic approach to ethical decision-making and do not claim these principles exhaust the full moral content of the common morality. They acknowledge that these principles need to be specified and balanced in particular contexts and that other moral considerations can also be relevant.

Question 12

Common-morality theories and customary moralities are two expressions of the same thing.

Accepted Answer

Common-morality theories refer to a set of universal moral principles that apply to all persons in all places, while customary moralities are the specific moral norms and practices that vary from one culture or society to another.

Question 13

Norms in particular moralities can differ because the abstract starting points in the common morality can be developed in different ways to create practical guidelines with varying degrees of coherence.

Accepted Answer

The abstract principles of common morality can be interpreted and applied differently across various cultures or societies, leading to diverse moral norms and guidelines that reflect these interpretations while maintaining a level of coherence within their own contexts.

Question 14

We can have the most confidence in principles and considered judgments if we can justify them on the basis of a comprehensive ethical theory.

Accepted Answer

The answer of We can have the most confidence in...

Question 15

In ethical discourse, the objective of __________ is to establish one's case by presenting sufficient reasons for it.

Accepted Answer

The answer of In ethical discourse, the objective of __________...

Question 16

___________ is the use of case comparison and analogy to reach moral conclusions.

Accepted Answer

The answer of ___________ is the use of case comparison...

Question 17

The case that provides an enduring and authoritative source of appeal for moral thinking about similar cases is called the _________ case.

Accepted Answer

The answer of The case that provides an enduring and...

Question 18

_________ ________, as a form of ethical reasoning, is a way of bringing principles, judgments, and background theories into a state of equilibrium or harmony.

Accepted Answer

The answer of _________ ________, as a form of ethical...

Question 19

Reflective equilibrium that takes into account assessments of the strengths and weaknesses of the full body of all relevant and impartially formulated judgments, principles, theories, and facts is called _________ reflective equilibrium.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Reflective equilibrium that takes into account assessments...

Question 20

According to John Rawls, as quoted by Beauchamp and Childress, the moral convictions in which we have the highest confidence and believe to have the least bias are _________ _________.

Accepted Answer

The answer of According to John Rawls, as quoted by...

Quiz 10: Method and Moral Justification