Description
1. According to Kant, making a lying-promise is morally wrong because:
A. It is not expected to maximize happiness. |
B. It violates a rule that tends to contribute positively to the overall utility of society. |
C. It is self-defeating in that it results in a practical contradiction. |
D. It tends to corrupt the character of the cheater. |
E. It annihilates happiness. |
2. According to Kant, our moral duties (as given by the categorical imperative):
A. Can only be determined from a consideration of what is seen to be rational from the viewpoint of a particular culture or society. | ||
B. Can only be determined from a consideration of the “historical struggle” of a culture or society. | ||
C. Are binding on all human beings from the moment of conception until death. | ||
D. Are binding on all rational persons, at all times, in all places. | ||
E. Are binding on all persons if, and only if, they are seen to promote the general interests of society. |
3. The basic idea behind Kant's categorical imperative is that our moral duties are:
A. Binding only on those persons who are expected to live flourishing or "eudaimonic" lives on the whole. |
B. Binding on all persons at all times regardless of whether a given individual is a rational person or not. |
C. Binding on all rational persons at all times independently of what a given rational person happens to want or desire at a given time. |
D. Binding on all rational persons, but are fully determined by the culture in which a person lives, and thus allow for a "categorical difference" between one society and another. |
4. According to Kant, I treat someone merely as a means if:
A. I ask someone to act in way that he does not want to act.
B. I ask someone to act in way that is in my self-interest.
C. I act according to a principle that conflicts with the customs of society.
D. I act according to a principle that a reasonable person could not reasonably accept.
E. I act according to a principle that does not tend to contribute to the happiness of others.
5. A Kantian criticism of a deterrence (utilitarian) justification of punishment is that:
A. A maxim of punishment can never be willed to be a universal law of nature.
B. A society that punishes criminal offenders nevers succeeds in maximizing overall happiness. |
C. By making an example of a convicted criminal by punishing him we treat him as a means only. |
D. Punishment is never an effective deterrent. |
E. Punishment can never reform a person's character. |
6. The claims made by Phadke and Anandh that kidney sales commercialize or commodify the human body, and so kidney sales undercut human dignity can best be seen as what type of argument in spirit.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Explanation & Answer
Attached. Please let me know if you have any questions or need revisions.
Running head: BIOETHICS
1
Bioethics
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date
BIOETHICS
2
Bioethics Questions
1. According to Kant, making a lying promise is morally wrong because (B) it violates a
rule that tends to contribute positively to the overall utility of society.
2. According to Kant, our moral duties as given by the categorical imperative (C) are
binding on all human beings from the moment of conception until death.
3. The basic idea behind Kant\'s categorical imperative is that our moral duties (C) are
binding on all rational persons at all times independently of what a given rational person
happens to want or desire at a given time.
4. According to Kant, I t...
Review
Review
