Morality Exam 1

facts

pertinent details of the situation

rules

what the law says about the issue

values

moral principles that the decision about a question should appeal to

logic

reasoning using valid and sound arguments

valid

conclusion follows from premises such that if premises are true, then conclusion is true

sound

both premises and conclusion are true

true

actually factual premise or conclusion

fallacy

error in reasoning that renders argument incorrect

slippery slope

assuming that a small change will lead to disaster

ad hominem

focus on one person's life rather than the argument they present

tu quoque

claiming that one's argument is false because it is inconsistent with their past actions or claims

straw man/red herring

focuses on issues irrelevant to the argument at hand

post hoc

supposing a causal link between two events

appeal to authority

citing an authority who is irrelevant to the question

appeal to feelings

citing one's personal feelings as justification for an argument

ad populum

justifying an action because "everybody does it"

false dichotomy

presenting an issue as if there are only two possible choices

begging the question

a conclusion which requires good reasons is assumed without argument or proof

equivocation

an argument which utilizes an ambiguous term in multiple, conflicting senses

deontological

referring to morality of the action we take

teleological

referring to morality of the intentions and purposes behind the action we take

constructivist

morality is not something which can be discovered, but is made by and for social groups

utilitarianism

what actions bring about the most happiness?

principle of utility

actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness

rule-utilitarianism

one must follow rules that generally maximize happiness

act-utilitarianism

one must act to maximize happiness

kantian ethics

universal duties tell us what we must do, regardless of our personal desires

principle of universalizability

consistently will that everyone in a similar situation will act a certain way

hypothetical imperative

consider means to an end (if I want..., then I should...)

categorical imperative

consider only ends (I should always...)

maxim

a rule that guides your actions

consequentialism

consequences count rather than motives or intentions

theory of value

good consequences are defined by pleasure or absence of pain and suffering

impartiality

each being's happiness is to count as one and not more

Hobbesian Contractarianism

morality is whatever we decide is to our mutual advantage

veil of ignorance

not knowing what position you would hold in a given society

social contract theory

rational people in the original position (behind veil of ignorance) would choose principles of liberty and equality in hypothetical society

autonomy

respect capacity of individuals to choose their own vision of the good life and act accordingly

beneficence

foster the interest and happiness of other persons and of society at large

nonmaleficence

refrain from harming other persons

justice

act fairly

prima facie duty

must always be acted on unless it conflicts on a particular occasion with another duty

actual duty

act based on examination of respective weights of competing prima facie duties in particular situations

principlism

weigh moral principles and balance conflicting values to make decisions

positive obligation

respectful treatment in informational exchanges and actions involving decision making

negative obligation

no controlling constraints by others

specification

principles must be defined to suit needs and demands of particular contexts; narrow scope of norm

consistency

avoidance of contradiction

argumentative support

explicit support for a position with reasons

intuitive plausibility

feature of a norm or judgment being secure in its own right

compatibility

coherence with available empirical evidence

comprehensiveness

covering as much of the entire moral domain as possible

simplicity

reducing number of moral considerations to the minimum possible

complete coherence

total seamless system of morality

active euthanasia

direct action designed to kill a patient

passive euthanasia

withholding treatment to allow a patient to die

process

there is no single criterion for death; rather, death is a:

coma

eyes closed unconsciousness; not usually permanent

brain death

irreversible loss of the clinical function of the whole brain

persistent vegetative state

eyes opened unconsciousness; brain stem activity, no higher processing

locked-in state

paralyzed consciousness; eye movement and blinking possible

minimally conscious state

severe, but not complete, impairment of awareness

whole brain criterion

death occurs only when all integrative functions of all the parts of the brain irreversibly cease

cortical criterion

death occurs when the cortex irreversibly loses the capacity for essential life function (consciousness, thought, feeling)

cardiorespiratory criterion

death occurs when vital bodily fluids (air and blood) fail to continue to flow through the organism

Halevy-Brody response

life support could be unilaterally withdrawn when the cortex no longer functions

duty to die

patient making the choice for active or (usually) passive euthanasia due to burdens being placed on others