12–41
93.
Suppose that the following pair of statements appears in a review of the same work of art.
Identify which of the aesthetic principles referred to in the text each statement in the pair
appeals to. Then state whether the principles are compatible and thus form the basis for a
consistent review, or whether they are incompatible and cannot both be used in a
consistent review.
a. Art that misleads us about reality is dangerous.
b. The great virtue of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novels is that they evoke a desire for a way of
life that is extinct—indeed, a kind of life that likely never was.
(a) Principle 1; (b) Principle 5;
incompatible
.
94.
State whether the reason given here is relevant according to any one of the aesthetic
principles; and if it is relevant, identify the principle that makes it so.
Raphael’s painting is so illuminating because it manifests the Renaissance conviction that
the realms of heaven and earth can be merged.
Relevant on Principle 2.
95.
State whether the reason given here is relevant according to any one of the aesthetic
principles; and if it is relevant, identify the principle that makes it so.
Ruben’s nudes are so sensuous that this exhibit of them will make Manhattan society
reject the dangerous motto, “Never too rich or too thin.”
Relevant on Principle 3.
96.
State whether the reason given here is relevant according to any one of the aesthetic
principles; and if it is relevant, identify the principle that makes it so.
Rostropovich’s virtuosity on the cello sends waves of delight up and down my spine.
Relevant on Principle 4.
97.
State whether the reason given here is relevant according to any one of the aesthetic
principles; and if it is relevant, identify the principle that makes it so.
As Mimi sang her last aria, the audience was submerged in sadness.
Relevant on Principle 4.
98.
State whether the reason given here is relevant according to any one of the aesthetic
principles; and if it is relevant, identify the principle that makes it so.
Ruben’s nudes are a terrific advertisement for Weightwatchers.
Irrelevant.
Essay Questions
99.
Evaluate the issue of human cloning from the utilitarian consequentialist viewpoint.
Possible answer: Overall potential consequences must be examined. If more overall
happiness than unhappiness is likely to result from human cloning, then cloning should be
an option.
100.
Evaluate the issue of human cloning from the viewpoint of a deontologist (duty theorist).
Possible answer: Human cloning is morally wrong if the cloned persons are created for
someone else’s purpose. If we can imagine a cloned population becoming a new race of
slaves, then cloning should never be allowed.
101.
Evaluate the issue of human cloning from the viewpoint of a virtue ethicist.
Possible answer: If we can ensure that parents of cloned babies are morally responsible
and that they will raise the cloned children with respect for their personhood and teach
them moral responsibility, then cloning may be an option.
102.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina’s will stipulates that her son by birth will receive substantially more of her estate
than will her adopted son, even though both sons love her equally, have treated her with
similar regard, and have lived with her for about the same amount of time.
Our view is that she is treating relevantly similar cases differently.
103.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina leaves large tips at a posh restaurant, where meals are quite expensive, but she
leaves much smaller tips at another, much plainer and less expensive restaurant, even
though the service is as good and the waiters work just as hard.
We think this is treating like cases differently, but we’re afraid Marina has a lot of
104.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina is the principal source of financial support for one of her sons at college; the other
son won a large scholarship, and Marina sends him a much smaller amount.
From what’s said here, we’d count this as sufficiently similar treatment, given the
dissimilarities of the cases.
105.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina calls it to the clerk‘s attention when she is overcharged but not when she is
undercharged.
Here she is inconsistent; the cases are relevantly similar but are treated differently.
106.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina criticizes her brother for expressing racist views but does not criticize Mr. Durban,
a business associate, who holds similar views.
Like cases are treated differently.
107.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina’s automobile is a large, gas-guzzling, luxury car, but in some circumstances (such
as cocktail parties when she is among strangers), she will make it a point to criticize
people who drive such cars.
This is not a case of treating like cases differently; there’s another name for this kind of
inconsistency: hypocrisy.
108.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina instructs her children to always be truthful but lies to her young daughter when the
daughter asks if her (the daughter’s) illness is running up large medical bills.
The cases are not relevantly similar.
109.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina tells her children to tell the truth, but she claims deductions on her income tax
return to which she knows she is not legally entitled.
This is hypocrisy again: There is an inconsistency between what she says and what she
does, but it is not one of treating similar cases differently. She would be treating such
cases in dissimilar ways if, for example, she told her children to tell the truth and also told
them to lie on their income tax forms.
110.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina tells her children not to smoke, but she smokes herself.
Here once again we find her not practicing what she preaches. But this is an inconsistency
between word and deed, not between deed and deed or between word and word. She
would be guilty of treating relevantly similar cases in a dissimilar way if, for instance, she
told her children not to smoke cigarettes but to smoke cigars, if that can be imagined.
Note: The issue here is her treatment of the cases; if her children were to reject her
advice, they commit an ad hominem (Chapter 6).
111.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina offers her daughter’s fiancé a job in the company she owns, but it never occurs to
her to do the same for her son’s fiancée.
Different treatment of relevantly similar cases
112.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
At election time, Marina votes for the candidate she thinks will do the best job—in every
election except one. In that race, she votes for her second choice, because she is certain
that the best person for the job has no chance of winning and that her second choice is
still better than any of the rest of the candidates.
The cases are different enough to justify the different actions.
113.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina opposes tyrannical despots in several countries in the world. But even though the
government of Almeria is equally tyrannical, she is not inclined to oppose it because she
has a friend who works in the Almerian foreign ministry.
Treating like cases differently
114.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina criticizes the Japanese for killing and eating whales, but she eats beef.
That is, she approves beef killing but not whale killing. The cases are arguably dissimilar.
115.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
The company that Marina owns allows the secretarial staff to accumulate one vacation
day per month, but managers at the company accumulate 1.5 days per month.
We expect our view may be controversial in some quarters, but we think this is treating
relevantly similar cases dissimilarly.
116.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina says she believes in equality, but she tells lots of ethnic and racial jokes.
Even though it is unlikely, it is not impossible that a person could tell such jokes and
believe in equality.
117.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina is usually a careful shopper, looking for bargains and buying generic products
when she’s at the market. But she has a weakness for gloves and handbags, and she owns
a closet full of elegant and expensive examples.
The opposite of this kind of inconsistency is not injustice; it’s tedium.
118.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina watches a viewer-supported public television station, but she does not make
contributions to it.
She is taking selfish advantage of the public station, but this is not a case of treating
relevantly similar cases differently. Perhaps she is perfectly consistent and takes selfish
advantage of others every time she gets the chance.
119.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina’s twins, Mary and Myron, have different aspirations. Mary wants to be an engineer.
She’s good at mathematics and has a good chance of winning a scholarship to a good
college. Myron is both inept and uninterested in such matters. He shows signs of artistic
talent and wants to study painting. For their seventeenth birthdays, Marina got them a
computer.
Unless Myron gets interested in computer graphics, Marina has been somewhat unfair to
him in treating his relevantly different case as though it were just like his sister’s. This is
the other side of the coin.
120.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Marina votes against a tax increase for maintenance of her city park even though she uses
the park and plans to continue using it whether or not the measure passes.
The comments on this item should parallel those on the item about Marina’s enjoyment of
user-supported public television: Perhaps she is perfectly consistent and takes selfish
advantage of others every time she gets the chance.
121.
In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently
similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.
Although she doesn’t believe in stealing, Marina uses the office copy machine for personal
business and makes person-to-person long-distance calls to fictitious persons as a code
to avoid paying for the calls.
These activities are relevantly similar to stealing.
12–53
122.
Answer the question in the following paragraph from one of the perspectives described in
the text.
An employer who is considering hiring Eva has asked Donna, Eva’s former supervisor, for a
report on Eva. In truth, Eva’s work for Donna has been only average. However, (a) Eva is
Donna’s friend, and Donna knows that Eva probably will not get the job if she says
anything negative about Eva, and Donna knows that Eva desperately needs the job.
Further, (b) Donna knows that if the situation were reversed, she would not want Eva to
mention her deficiencies. Nevertheless, (c) it has been Donna’s policy to reveal the
deficiencies of employees when she has been asked for references by employers, and she
knows that some of Eva’s faults may be bothersome to this particular employer. Finally,
(d) this employer has leveled with Donna in the past when Donna has asked for a report
on people who have worked for him. Should Donna reveal deficiencies in Eva’s past
performance?
Answers will vary
12–54
123.
Answer the question in the passage below from one of the perspectives described in the
text.
Shelley and Maurita are both disturbed by their C+ final grades in Mr. Carlton’s geography
class, and they request that he recheck his grade book. He does so and finds that, indeed,
he had made mistakes. Maurita was supposed to get a B- and Shelley was supposed to
get a C-. He gives Maurita the B- and allows Shelley to keep the C+.
Should he have lowered Shelley’s grade to a C-? Construct one argument whose
conclusion is that he should, and construct one argument whose conclusion is that he
should not. Be sure to spell out clearly any moral principles in the arguments.
Answers will vary
12–55
124.
Answer the question in the following paragraph from one of the perspectives described in
the text.
The water pump in Michelle’s car isn’t working, and her friend Felipe replaces it for her as
a favor. Michelle decides to repay Felipe’s kindness by promising to buy him a six-pack of
beer. Unfortunately, Michelle isn’t quite old enough to buy beer legally, so she asks her
friend Carol, who is, to buy the beer for her and explains why. Felipe, too, is slightly under
the legal age, but Carol knows Felipe and regards him as a responsible and mature
individual. Further, (a) Carol knows that Michelle will be embarrassed if she has to tell
Felipe she cannot get beer for him after all, and (b) Michelle has recently done something
nice for Carol, and Carol owes her a favor. However, (c) Michelle is aware that if Felipe
drinks the beer all at once and goes driving—an unlikely event in Carol’s opinion—he could
be injured or injure others. Carol could be held liable in that event. But (d) Carol knows
Michelle’s other friends and doubts that any of them are old enough to buy beer for
Michelle. If Carol turns Michelle down, Michelle will have to live without getting Felipe the
beer she promised to give him. Should Carol get the beer for Michelle, everything
considered?
Answers will vary
12–56
125.
Answer the question in the passage below from one of the perspectives described in the
text.
Jan witnessed a certain Mr. Gaines commit a crime several months ago. Despite his
certain knowledge of Gaines’s guilt, the charges against him were dismissed because of
an error in the investigation. Jan is especially upset about the nature of the crime—(a)
Gaines was defrauding a charitable organization that Jan happens to think accomplishes a
lot of good. Jan also knows that the crime was committed out of greed, since (b) Gaines
owns a large jewelry store and is already well-off. Gaines has spoken to his friends about
how he got away without having to stand trial, and (c) he is gloating about it.
One day, Jan is walking up the alley that runs behind Gaines’s store, and he notices that
the back door has been left unlocked and, from the look of things, it appears that the
burglar alarm has not been turned on. One of several vaults in the back room has a half-
open door. He realizes that he could make off very easily with a large amount of expensive
jewelry. (d) The likelihood of his being caught is very small. It occurs to him that it
wouldn’t be quite the same as stealing, certainly not as bad as what he saw Gaines do, if
(e) he did not keep the loot for himself but gave it away. It occurs to him that (f) if he
takes what doesn’t belong to him he may not be any better than Gaines, and on the small
chance he did get caught, nobody would believe him, and (g) the penalties would be stiff.
But (h) this is his chance to see justice done with regard to Gaines, and he can make
some deserving people very happy with the proceeds of the burglary. Should Jan grab the
jewels?
Answers will vary
12–57
126.
Answer the question in the following paragraph from one of the perspectives described in
the text.
Kevin’s mother and father are divorced. Kevin is eight, and he lives with his father, John,
for three months every summer. The rest of the time, except for occasional weekends, he
lives two hundred miles away with his mother. John is the one with the problem: He and
Kevin talked a lot last summer about getting a dog. For the first time, John is living in a
house that has a backyard big enough to keep a dog and a fence around it as well. John
had always used the “no place to keep it” line to avoid making promises, but that no longer
applies. John finally promised to get Kevin a dog at the beginning of the next summer, and
he knows Kevin is hoping to get one. In fact, John knows that Kevin is expecting a dog with
enough confidence that (a) he’ll be very disappointed if he doesn’t get one, even though he
may not say much about it. Furthermore, (b) not getting a dog will deprive both Kevin and
John of considerable pleasure, since John knows how happy it would make his son to get
one. But the danger of having a dog around is that John lives alone during most of the
year, and having a dog means being responsible for another creature. (c) When John
travels, as his job requires him to do from time to time, who will look after the dog? He
can’t leave it with a friend for a week or two at a time. And he has no neighbors close by
who could look after it. It looks like a difficult trade-off: Three months a year of pleasure
for John, Kevin, and a dog, balanced against what might be nine months a year of frequent
unpleasantness for both John and the dog. What should he do?
Answers will vary
127.
Answer the question in the following paragraph from one of the perspectives described in
the text.
Lisa’s algebra class has a quiz every other Friday. This is the third time she’s been so
worried about other matters that she hasn’t done quite as well on the quiz as she might
have otherwise. What has her upset is the fact that the instructor leaves the room while
the students take the quiz, and over half the class is taking the opportunity to cheat. She
knows and likes several of the other students in the class, and some of the ones she likes
are among those who are cheating. Lisa knows that (a) a failure to speak to the teacher
about the cheating will result in her own grade being lower, since the teacher grades in
part on the curve. But (b) she will be doing her friends and the others a great harm, since
cheating is taken very seriously at the school. If she doesn’t “turn in” her classmates, (c)
the only other alternative to getting a worse grade than she deserves is to begin cheating
herself, something she’s never done. What should she do?
Answers will vary
128.
Let’s say that person A has a piece of heavy equipment and needs an operator to do a
certain job with it. But the equipment has not had a legally required safety inspection.
Person B is able to operate the equipment, and he badly needs a job. So B signs a
document that says, if there is any harm done as a result of the equipment not meeting
safety standards, he assumes responsibility for the harm and that A is not to be held
responsible.
B goes to work, an accident happens, and B is injured. A refuses to pay for B’s medical
costs, so B files a suit against him for those costs.
Should B collect his medical costs from A? Construct an argument on one side or the
other.
Answers will vary
129.
If you were a member of a state legislature, what kind of law might you write to prevent
such situations as the preceding from arising? On what grounds would you justify it?
One might write a law that says an agreement to assume responsibility may not be used
as a defense against a charge of allowing one’s equipment to be used in violation of safety
regulations. Justification would be paternalistic, given B’s willingness to assume the
responsibility in order to get the job.