The passage below makes a moral IBE argument. Do the following:
-First, represent the argument in standard form using the General Form of IBE.
-Second, evaluate premise 2 of the Principle Justification Sub-argument by suggesting an opposing alternative principle that explains the paradigm cases.
The passage:
Mr. Bigshot, the CEO of his own private movie company, was just revealed to have done something shocking: he offered an actress a role in one of his movies in exchange for sexual favors. Many have charged that he wrongfully used the actress for sex. This charge is unwarranted.
Consider some clear cases of wrongful sexual use. Sean knows Gertrude will not have sex with him unless they use birth control, so he lies to her and tells her that his doctor has
certified he is sterile. Grant gets Shanice extremely drunk so that she can no longer resist his advances, as she always has before. Max threatens to accuse Lola of cheating on an exam unless she has sex with him.
Consider also a case where wrongful sexual use is clearly absent. Mark and Dominick are in a long-term, loving relationship. Sometimes, when Dominick is not in the mood, Mark persists in trying to persuade him by giving him a long back rub, which eventually leads to their both desiring and having sex.
These cases show that threats, force, or deception are necessary conditions of wrongful use. Sean, Grant, and Max are wrongfully sexually using others because they hope to obtain sex through force, threat, or deception. Mark is not sexually using Dominick because he's not using force, threat, or deception to win him over.
What of Mr. Bigshot?
He offered an actress a role in exchange for sex. This is not an instance of force, threat, or deception. Since he did not meet the necessary conditions of wrongful sexual use, Mr. Bigshot did not wrongfully sexually use the actress.

Question

The passage below makes a moral IBE argument. Do the following:
-First, represent the argument in standard form using the General Form of IBE.
-Second, evaluate premise 2 of the Principle Justification Sub-argument by suggesting an opposing alternative principle that explains the paradigm cases.
The passage:
Mr. Bigshot, the CEO of his own private movie company, was just revealed to have done something shocking: he offered an actress a role in one of his movies in exchange for sexual favors. Many have charged that he wrongfully used the actress for sex. This charge is unwarranted.
Consider some clear cases of wrongful sexual use. Sean knows Gertrude will not have sex with him unless they use birth control, so he lies to her and tells her that his doctor has
certified he is sterile. Grant gets Shanice extremely drunk so that she can no longer resist his advances, as she always has before. Max threatens to accuse Lola of cheating on an exam unless she has sex with him.
Consider also a case where wrongful sexual use is clearly absent. Mark and Dominick are in a long-term, loving relationship. Sometimes, when Dominick is not in the mood, Mark persists in trying to persuade him by giving him a long back rub, which eventually leads to their both desiring and having sex.
These cases show that threats, force, or deception are necessary conditions of wrongful use. Sean, Grant, and Max are wrongfully sexually using others because they hope to obtain sex through force, threat, or deception. Mark is not sexually using Dominick because he's not using force, threat, or deception to win him over.
What of Mr. Bigshot?
 He offered an actress a role in exchange for sex. This is not an instance of force, threat, or deception. Since he did not meet the necessary conditions of wrongful sexual use, Mr. Bigshot did not wrongfully sexually use the actress.

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Answer of The passage below makes a moral IBE argument. Do the following:
-First, represent the argument in standard form using the General Form of IBE.
-Second, evaluate premise 2 of the Principle Justification Sub-argument by suggesting an opposing alternative principle that explains the paradigm cases.
The passage:
Mr. Bigshot, the CEO of his own private movie company, was just revealed to have done something shocking: he offered an actress a role in one of his movies in exchange for sexual favors. Many have charged that he wrongfully used the actress for sex. This charge is unwarranted.
Consider some clear cases of wrongful sexual use. Sean knows Gertrude will not have sex with him unless they use birth control, so he lies to her and tells her that his doctor has
certified he is sterile. Grant gets Shanice extremely drunk so that she can no longer resist his advances, as she always has before. Max threatens to accuse Lola of cheating on an exam unless she has sex with him.
Consider also a case where wrongful sexual use is clearly absent. Mark and Dominick are in a long-term, loving relationship. Sometimes, when Dominick is not in the mood, Mark persists in trying to persuade him by giving him a long back rub, which eventually leads to their both desiring and having sex.
These cases show that threats, force, or deception are necessary conditions of wrongful use. Sean, Grant, and Max are wrongfully sexually using others because they hope to obtain sex through force, threat, or deception. Mark is not sexually using Dominick because he's not using force, threat, or deception to win him over.
What of Mr. Bigshot?
 He offered an actress a role in exchange for sex. This is not an instance of force, threat, or deception. Since he did not meet the necessary conditions of wrongful sexual use, Mr. Bigshot did not wrongfully sexually use the actress.

The Passage Below Makes a Moral IBE Argument