PHIL 140 Contemporary Moral Issues : Matters of life and death
(CORE HO)
Instructor: Peter
Carruthers - pcarruth@umd.edu
Office hours: Tue / Thur
11.00-12.00, or by appointment.
Craig Derksen
1118D Skinner Building
301-405-5841
Office Hours: Thursday 1-2
or by appointment
cderksen@wam.umd.edu |
Eran Zamir1107A Skinner Building Office
Hours: Mondays 11-12, Tuesdays 3-4, or by appointment |
Benedicte Veillet1122C Skinner Building 301-405-5841 Office Hours: Tuesday 1-2, Thursday 3-4, or by appointment |
The goals of this course are two-fold. First, it aims to help students think critically and constructively about a range of practical moral issues and dilemmas. (These include: death and the value of life, suicide, euthanasia, abortion, punishment and capital punishment, the rights of animals, famine, and population policy). Second, it aims to help students gain an understanding of the way in which moral theories can be used to illuminate those issues. We will look at arguments advanced by moral philosophers on each of the topics, and the ways in which those arguments depend upon background moral theories. Students will be encouraged to think seriously about the writers views, as well as the issues in question.
You should be aware that on many of the issues under discussion the instructor has his own views (in some cases, published views). So it should be stressed that you are not obliged to tow his line. What matters for purposes of assessment is the quality of the arguments you can present for whatever views you end up with, not what those views are. (See section #4 below for some advice on writing philosophy answers. See section #6 below for the assessment policy.)
The text for the course will be: Peter Singer (ed.) Applied Ethics (Oxford), together with on-line materials provided by the instructor.
There will be one class-exam, one term paper and one final two-hour exam
in which you will be required to answer two essay-type questions. The
class-exam and term paper will count for 25% of the grade each, and each final
exam answer will also count for 25% the final grade for the course.
2.1 Class exam
This will be held on February 24 in class. The exam will cover the theoretical issues discussed in the opening sessions of the course (1-5). It will be designed to gauge your understanding of those issues, which are foundational to the remainder of the course. You will be required to answer five short questions (ten minutes each) out of a total of c.10 questions on the exam.
The class exam will be worth one quarter of the grade. It will be graded anonymously (by folding back the cover sheet and shuffling).
2.2 Term paper
There will be one term paper, due for submission on March 18, in
your Friday discussion class. This will be worth one quarter of the grade for
the course. The paper will be on one of the following topics: death,
punishment, or euthanasia (sessions 6-12). Detailed paper topics are listed
below.
If you have a problem
in meeting the above submission deadline, speak with your TA before the
due date. But we will not normally grant extensions on the grounds that you
have work due in other classes. If you have not made prior arrangements with us
to the contrary (and excluding documented medical or family emergencies), late
papers will be penalized one grade (e.g., 'B' to 'B‑') per
calendar day or portion thereof after the due date.
Your term paper should be between 1000 and 2000 words in length, and should be accompanied by an accurate word-count. Under-length papers will be penalized. We will cease reading over-length papers at the point where we judge that they exceed the word-limit. Papers should be typed, double-spaced, with margins all round of at least one inch.
Write your paper on one of the following questions:
1. How (if at all) is death a harm to the one who dies, and under what circumstances is continued life a good from the perspective of the one who lives?
(Especially relevant: sessions
6 & 7; Nagel; P. Foot Euthanasia.)
2. What, if anything, justifies the infliction of suffering upon law-breakers?
(Especially relevant: sessions
9 & 10; Mill.)
3. Is there any important moral distinction between an act and an omission? Discuss with reference to both the morality of euthanasia and Harris survival lottery.
(Especially
relevant: sessions 11 & 12; Rachels; Harris.)
4. Are there any inalienable rights? Your answer should consider how this question bears on issues to do with suicide, capital punishment, and/or euthanasia.
(Especially
relevant: sessions 8, 10 & 12; Mill; P.Foot Euthanasia.)
5. Does Justice necessarily rule out the killing of those who are incapable of forming a view of their own, even if Charity sometimes speaks strongly for it?
(Especially
relevant: session 12; P.Foot Euthanasia.)
2.3 Final exam
The final exam is scheduled for Monday May 17, 10:30-12:30. You will be required to answer two essay-type questions, each worth 25% of the grade for the course. Your answers will be graded anonymously (by folding back the cover sheet and shuffling)
The questions will be pre-released in the final class of the term, on Tuesday May 11. You can, therefore, prepare your answers in advance. Note, however, that you are forbidden from bringing with you any written materials into the final exam.
The exam will cover only those topics which werent available in the class exam and term paper. That is, it will cover the topics of double effect, abortion, animals, famine, and population policy (sessions 13-27).
The general ethos of the course is described in 3.1 below, my policy on class attendance is described in 3.2, and a tentative schedule of topics and readings is listed in 3.3. Some further suggested readings are listed in 3.4.
3.1
Class arrangements
Classes will be devoted to exposition and discussion of the topics listed in 3.3 below. (Note that this schedule may change; if so, you will be notified in class and by e-mail. It will be your responsibility to be aware of any changes.) Most of each Tuesday & Thursday class will be devoted to an exposition of the main points in the material covered. But some limited time for questions, discussion and debate will also be allowed. Friday classes will be for discussion of that material, under the guidance of a TA.
Following each Tuesday and Thursday lecture, a handout covering the main points will be posted on the instructors web-page (follow the links from the schedule of topics below).
It is essential to come to each Friday class well prepared. Make sure that you study the required reading in advance; and ensure that you have time to think about what you have read, make notes on it, and begin to frame questions and suggestions.
Classes will begin promptly. Please make sure that you arrive and are seated by this time. Late arrivals are discourteous, and disrupt the learning of others.
3.2 Class
attendance
There will be no penalty for missing classes (though the TAs may continue to take a register for the purpose of learning names). You are adults, and must take your own decisions.
But note that, on the assumption that you take a total of five courses per semester, then missing just a single class is equivalent to throwing away $25 for in-state students, and equivalent to throwing away nearly $60 for out-of-state students.
Note, too, that listening to exposition and discussion of (often difficult) material in class is an important determinant of the level of your understanding; and that participating in class discussions will both test that understanding, and help you to develop your own ideas on the topics under debate.
3.3 Schedule of topics
The sessions for the course will follow the sequence outlined below. Names in square-brackets refer (by author) to chapters in the course text (Applied Ethics, ed. P. Singer). These should be regarded as essential reading, and should be read in advance wherever possible. References to Animals Issue are to the instructors book of with the title The Animals Issue: moral theory in practice, a copy of which is available on his website (under Books (2): Full texts of books on ethics, epistemology etc.).
These chapters, too, should be regarded as essential reading and read in advance whenever possible. Further suggested readings are given in 3.4 below.
[1] Jan 27 Introduction (1): some theoretical approaches [Animals Issue ch.1]
[2] Jan 29 Introduction (2): on method in ethics [Animals Issue ch.1]
[3] Feb 3 Theory (1): Utilitarianism: too demanding? [Animals Issue ch.2]
[4] Feb 5 Theory (2): Utilitarianism and justice [Hare]
[5] Feb 10 Theory (3): Contractualism [Animals Issue ch.2]
[6] Feb 12 Death (1): is it a harm? [Nagel]
[7] Feb 17 Death (2): the value of life
[8] Feb 19 Death (3): suicide and the right to life [Hume]
Feb 24 class exam covering theoretical issues and approaches (sessions 1-5)
[9] Feb 26 Punishment (1): some approaches
[10] Mar 2 Punishment (2): contractualist & capital [Mill]
[11] Mar 4 Euthanasia (1): acts and omissions [Rachels]
[12] Mar 9 Euthanasia (2): theory and practice
[13] Mar 11 Justice, the survival lottery and runaway trolleys [Harris]
[14] Mar 16 The doctrine of double effect
[15] Mar 18 Abortion (1): conflicting claims [Thomson]
Mar 20-28 Spring break - no
classes
[16] Mar 30 Abortion (2): the demands of charity [Thomson]
[17] Apr 1 Animals (1): speciesism [Singer]
[18] Apr 6 Animals (2): Utilitarianism & animal lives [Animals Issue 3-4]
[19] Apr 8 Animals (3): humans in, animals out? [Animals Issue 5-6]
[20] Apr 13 Animals (4): Contractualism and character [Animals Issue ch 7]
[21] Apr 15 Abortion (3): the status of the foetus [Tooley sects. IV&V]
[22] Apr 20 Abortion (4): abortion and infanticide [Tooley]
[23] Apr 22 Famine
(1): charity versus justice [Pascal]
[24] Apr 27 Famine (2): a matter of justice?
[25] Apr 29 Famine (3): lifeboat earth [Pascal]
[26] May 4 Population (1): The non-identity problem
[27] May 6 Population (2): How many people should there be? [Parfit]
[28] May 11 Review, and issuing of exam questions covering: the trolley problem, doctrine of double effect, abortion, animals, famine, and population policy (sessions 13-27)
May 17 (Mon) Final exam, 10.30-12.30.
3.4 Further Reading
You will find it useful to do a little more reading around your chosen topic when preparing for exams or writing the term paper. Any of the following collections of readings are recommended:
H. LaFollette (ed.) Ethics in Practice.
L. Pojman (ed.) Life and Death.
J. Rachels (ed.) Moral Problems.
T. Regan (ed.) Matters of Life and Death.
J. White (ed.) Contemporary Moral Problems.
The following book authored by Peter Singer could also be used quite extensively:
P. Singer, Practical Ethics.
A number of important papers related to topics covered in the course are available on-line from the original journal, accessible through any university computer:
For Ethics go to: www.jstor.org/journals/00141704.html
For Philosophy and Public Affairs go to: www.jstor.org/journals/00483915.html
Jeff McMahan Death and the value of life Ethics 99:1 (1988).
Francis Kamm Physician-assisted suicide Ethics 109:3 (1999).
Judith Jarvis Thomson Physician-assisted suicide Ethics 109:3 (1999).
Philippa Foot Euthanasia Philosophy
& Public Affairs 6 (1977).
Joel Feinberg Voluntary euthanasia & the inalienable right to life Phil. & Pub Affairs 7 (1978).
Allen Buchanan Justice and Charity Ethics, 105 (1994).
Jeffrie Murphy Marxism and Retribution in Philosophy & Public Affairs 2 (1973).
Steven Goldberg, Does capital punishment deter?, in Ethics 1974.
Warren Quinn Acts, intentions and consequences: the doctrine of double effect Phil & Public Affairs, 18:4 (1989).
John Finnis The rights and wrongs of abortion Philosophy and
Public Affairs, 2:2 (1973).
Judith Jarvis Thomson Rights and Deaths Philosophy and Public Affairs, 2:2 (1973).
Tom Regan Utilitarianism, vegetarianism and animal rights Phil & Public Affairs, 9:4 (1980).
Peter Singer Utilitarianism and vegetarianism Phil & Public Affairs, 9:4 (1980).
Peter Singer Famine, affluence and morality Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1:3 (1972).
Onora Nell Lifeboat earth Philosophy and Public Affairs, 4:3 (1975).
In 4.1 below you will find some advice on writing philosophy papers; and in 4.2 some advice on writing exam answers.
Allow yourself enough time. When the questions are set and you have decided which one to answer, try to do some preliminary reading as soon as possible. Give yourself time to write both a rough draft and a further more polished version.
You will find discussion (particularly of your rough draft) with others (either friends, or others in the course) to be very useful. It is part of the purpose of a university and in particular of a major in philosophy to give students opportunities for argument and the exchange of ideas.
Plan your paper beforehand. Read over the topic carefully and decide what exactly it means. (Check with the instructor if you are unsure.) Then consider what thesis or view you are trying to demonstrate in regard to the topic. Finally, try to work out what your arguments are.
The introduction to your paper should mirror your plan by succinctly stating your overall strategy. Dont give enormous vague meandering introductions; get down quickly to the set topic.
The core of philosophy is learning how to argue your case coherently and validly, and the core of a philosophy paper is its arguments. Those who grade your work (in both essays and examinations) are more likely to be interested in the reasons you have given than in the truth of your conclusions. If, however, you feel you must offer a conclusion and cannot give reasons for it, give reasons why you feel that it is impossible to give reasons!
Dont be afraid to defend a position which diverges from that of the instructor. You will not be marked down for this. (On the contrary, it is generally refreshing to have someone present careful criticisms of ones views.) But you do need to offer arguments for your divergence.
Write as clearly and simply as possible. Write your paper (or examination answer, for that matter) as if you were explaining your position, and the arguments for it, to an intelligent person from another course who knows nothing about philosophy.
An indispensable tool for both good argument and clear expression is sensitivity to the correct use of words. Use words carefully. Dont use words about whose meaning you are uncertain. Dont adopt the vocabulary of some book you have just consulted. Use your own vocabulary; avoid jargon.
Avoid just stringing together quotations. Indeed, you should be extremely careful in your use of quotations. At most a quote can illustrate a point for you; it cannot prove it, no matter how great the thinker you are quoting from. Again, do not just paraphrase or summarize views without comment. This is generally of little value. If you refer to someones views on the topic under discussion, you should critically assess the worth of that persons view.
Ensure that you follow the university Code of Academic Integrity, especially as it concerns plagiarism. (See section 5 below.)
The essays you write in answer to exam questions should be written in
good, clear English; they should be well organized; they should avoid dogmatism
(evidence, reasons, analyses, justifications, arguments, objections, and the
like should be provided); they should be relevant (their content should
comprise all and only what is needed to answer the question); they should
display sophisticated understanding and wide knowledge of the subject matter;
they should avoid jargon, repetition, and mere paraphrase of the views of
others; and (of course) they should avoid falsity and invalidity.
There are a number of
simple Dos and Donts that should be observed when taking any exam:
· As far as possible allot the same amount of time to questions that have the same weight; and in particular, allow one hour to each of the two questions on a standard two-hour exam.
· Answer the question! Irrelevance will be severely penalized (especially in a pre-released exam).
· Dont use the same material twice in answers to different questions. (If necessary, cross-refer to your other answer.)
· Write as legibly as possible. An essay which is barely legible will tend to seem philosophically unclear too, and is apt to make graders less sympathetic.
If you incorporate quotations or other material from the writings of others or from lecture handouts, these must be explicitly acknowledged as such. The rules about plagiarism apply in exams too!
A variety of forms of exam is possible, ranging
from long-release seen exams (where the exam questions
are released to students well in advance) to traditional unseen exams. Between these two poles can fall a variety of other
forms of exam, including exams which consist of a sub-set of questions from a
previously released set, and various forms of open book unseen exam, in which
students may take books or notes into the exam with them.
All forms of exam provide some defense against
plagiarism. The rationale for exams at the unseen
end of the spectrum is that, besides testing for the usual philosophical
virtues (clear thinking, sound argumentation, and so forth) they also encourage
breadth and retention of knowledge. On the other hand, the rationale for seen exams is that they test for the philosophical virtues without
the distorting effects of surprise, nerves, and a capacity to think quickly
under pressure. In addition, they enable students to pursue a question in some
depth.
4.2(a) Pre-released exams. You should approach a pre-released exam in exactly the way that you would approach the writing of a term paper. Decide which questions to answer. Consult your lecture notes, lecture handouts, and notes made from books and articles you have been reading to remind yourself of the layout of the issues. Perhaps do some further reading if necessary. Then set yourself to plan, draft, and polish an answer. Having written a paper, ensure that you have a firm grasp of its structure so that you can reproduce essentially the same content in the exam room.
Remember that you will be expected to write somewhat longer answers in a seen exam than in an unseen one, and that graders will expect essays which are well structured and polished, with critical material well developed.
4.2(b) Unseen exams. Preparing for an unseen exam is a somewhat different sort of exercise. You should have received advice from the instructor on the range of topics to be covered and the kinds of question you might expect. Select three or four of these to work up in preparation. Do not just prepare two topics for a two-answer unseen exam. Since one or more of the topics in question may not come up, or may come up in a form which you dont know how to answer, to do so is to take a big gamble.
In preparing a topic it can be helpful to assemble a variety of essay components (explanations of important doctrines or ideas, outlines of important arguments, developed criticisms or arguments of your own) which you can then assemble in a variety of different ways in answering the actual question set.
Academic dishonesty is a corrosive force in the academic life of a university. It jeopardizes the quality of education and depreciates the genuine achievements of others. Apathy or acquiescence in the presence of academic dishonesty is not a neutral act. All members of the University Community students, faculty, and staff share the responsibility to challenge and make known acts of apparent academic dishonesty. Any of the following acts, when committed by a student, is an act of academic dishonesty.
A. Cheating: Intentionally using or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information or study aids in any academic exercise.
1. Students completing any examination should assume that external assistance (e.g., books, notes, calculators, conversation with others) is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the instructor.
2. Students must not allow others to conduct research or prepare any work for them without advance authorization from the instructor. This comment includes, but is not limited to, the services of commercial term paper companies.
3. Substantial portions of the same academic work may not be submitted for credit or honors more than once without authorization.
B. Fabrication: Intentional and unauthorized falsification or invention of any in formation or citation in an academic exercise.
1. Invented information may not be used in any laboratory experiment or other academic exercise without notice to and authorization from the instructor.
2. One should acknowledge reliance upon the actual source from which cited information was obtained.
3. Students who attempt to alter and resubmit returned academic work without notice to the instructor would be in violation of the Code of Student Conduct.
C. Facilitating Academic Dishonesty: Intentionally or knowingly helping or attempting to help another to commit an act of academic dishonesty.
D. Plagiarism: Intentionally or knowingly representing the words or ideas of another as ones own in any academic exercise.
1. Direct Quotation: Every direct quotation must be identified by quotation marks or by appropriate indentation and must be promptly cited in a footnote.
2. Paraphrase: Prompt acknowledgment is required when material from another source is paraphrased or summarized in whole or in part in your own words.
3. Borrowed Facts or Information: Information that is obtained in ones reading or research; which is not common knowledge among students in the course, must be acknowledged. Materials which contribute only to ones general understanding of the subject may be acknowledged in the bibliography and need not be immediately footnoted.
Academic dishonesty is a serious offense which may result in suspension or expulsion from the University. The normal sanction for academic dishonesty is a grade of XF, denoting failure due to academic dishonesty. That grade will normally be recorded on the transcripts of students found responsible for acts of academic dishonesty in addition to any other action taken (e.g., suspension or expulsion).
Students are now asked to make an Honor Pledge on all pieces of assessed work. They are asked to hand write and sign the following statement on all examinations and papers:
I pledge on my honor that I have not given or received any unauthorized assistance on this assignment / examination.
Grades will be assigned in accordance with the criteria laid out below. Exam answers will be graded anonymously (by folding back the cover-sheet and shuffling the answer books).
There are eight broad dimensions of assessment:
A good piece of philosophical writing should be clearly expressed in good English, therefore, and should be well-organized and well-structured; it should display detailed understanding of the subject area, and should adopt a critical stance in relation to that material (i.e. giving evidence of having been thought through in a critical way for yourself); it should, moreover, display an ability to argue cogently. While your paper need not contain original theories or arguments, there should be some evidence of independence (e.g. in the ordering or choice of material, or through the invention of novel examples).
(One way of being independent is to find a novel slant on material gleaned from lectures or the textbook, finding your own way of linking that material together in a critical manner; another way of being independent is to read around more, and then weave together for yourself a variety of materials in your answer; yet another way of displaying independence is to invent some examples or counter-examples of your own to illustrate the points you are making.)
For purposes of averaging and calculating final
grades, the following conversion will be used:
Missing work will be assigned zero. Note that this will have a very significant effect on your overall average grade.
Academic dishonesty (as defined in the University Honor Policy reproduced in #5 above) will automatically result in a grade of XF.
You should note that undergraduate grades
issued at the University of Maryland have recently followed roughly the
following distribution at levels 100/200:
This normal distribution will be borne in mind when assigning the grades for this course.
If you have a disability of any sort which requires some accommodation to be made in the arrangements for the course, you should inform your TA at the start of the course, who will then consult with the Universitys Disability Support Service.
It is the students responsibility to inform their TA and/or Instructor of any intended absences for religious observances in advance.
Enjoy !