Course Information
Moral Problems

PHL 118
3 Credits
Offered Every Semester
Meets UP Requirement

Overview

 

 

 

One interesting implication of living in a relatively free and open society such as ours is the fact that we can freely and openly express both our agreement and our disagreement with the views of others regarding the important moral issues of our day. Although it seems that we all basically agree about many ethical prescriptions (e.g. that it is morally wrong to hurt your best friend’s feelings for no reason whatsoever, that it is morally wrong to torture your dog just for the hell of it, and that one should in general demonstrate respect towards one’s parents), it nevertheless remains the case that we just as often disagree over other more controversial issues. Over the course of the semester, we will discuss the following controversial moral questions:

  • Should voluntary abortion remain a legal option for pregnant women or should it be criminalized?
  • Should we continue to support and fund welfare programs that use taxation to transfer wealth from one segment of society to others? Or should we abolish or curtail current welfare programs?
  • Should access to some or all forms of pornography be limited and the possession of pornography be criminalized? Or should access to pornographic materials continue to remain legal?
  • Should current government policies that criminalize the sale, use, or possession of recreational drugs continue, or should recreational drug laws be repealed?
  • Should the government continue to fund and support famine relief programs for developing nations? Or should the government discontinue funding such programs? Do private individuals have a moral obligation to support famine relief efforts?
  • Should Americans continue to support the raising and harvesting of animals as a food source? Or is vegetarianism the only ethically-defensible option?
As you can see, the particular topics that we will discuss in class this semester are for the most part voting issues; that is, they are the kinds of issues that divide candidates and political parties in elections. In thinking in a general way, then, we might ask whether the best arguments on these topics ultimately support liberal, libertarian, conservative, or socialist policies or candidates? What are the differences between these policies, and what specific arguments can be advanced in favor of these positions? If we are going to be consistent, in what ways does an acceptable answer to one of these questions commit you to a certain answer on another question?

A Note About the Readings

Weekly reading assignments are drawn from anthologized articles written by ethicists, journalists, lawyers, and philosophers. In addition to short introductory lectures on various topics in applied ethics, class time will be primarily devoted to discussing the content of these articles. For this reason, it is vitally important that you carefully read and digest the assigned material so that you can benefit from (and participate in) the class discussions.

Philosophical Writing

Philosophical writing is, by nature, argumentative writing. A philosophical essay is designed to rationally persuade you through the use of argument to adopt a particular position on a substantive and controversial issue; for example, to rationally persuade you to believe that unnecessarily harvesting animals for food is not morally acceptable.

Obviously, after reading a philosophical essay, you may not be rationally persuaded by the author’s reasoning and, therefore, might reject their conclusions. Nevertheless, the author in writing the essay assumes that it is at least possible to rationally convince you to adopt the position that they are advocating; that is, the author assumes that you could be convinced to adopt their view, if they present you with a strong enough case for doing so.

If you are certain that it is not even possible to convince you to change your position on substantive ethical questions, then taking this course will be a waste of your time. If, for example, you are certain that no one could ever rationally convince you to change your position on, for example, the abortion question, euthanasia, the moral status of homosexuality, etc., then you will find this course either pointless, exasperating, or boring.

Materials

For this class, you will need to purchase:

Thomas Mappes and Jane Zembaty, Social Ethics: Morality and Social Policy, Sixth Edition (New York: McGraw Hill, 2002).

 The book is available at the campus bookstore and through various on-line sources such as Amazon.com and bn.com.

Environmental Ethics Animal Issues

Singer's "All Animals Are Equal"
Hugh LaFollette's "Animal Rights and Human Wrongs"
Carl Cohen's "Why Animals Have No Rights"

Environment and Human Nature

Matt Ridley and Bobbi S. Low, "Can Selfishness Save the Environment?"
Garrett Hardin, "The Tragedy of the Commons"

 

 

Brief Syllabus

(Week By Week)

Monday

Wednesday

Friday

Welcome

Introducing Arguments

Validity and Soundness

Labor Day: No Class

The Structure of Arguments

Arguing from Cases and Principles

Logic Test

Abortion: The Basics

Pope John Paul II: “The Unspeakable Crime of Abortion”

Warren: “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion”

Marquis: “Why Abortion is Immoral”

No Class

No Class

Thomson: “A Defense of Abortion”

Thompson, Continued

Welfare and Social Justice: The Basics

Hospers: “What Libertarianism Is”

Hospers, Continued

Neilsen: “A Moral Case for Socialism”

Neilsen, Continued

No Class

Mead: “Paternalism and Welfare”

Mink: “The End of Welfare”

Freedom and Censorship: The Basics

Mill: “On Liberty”

The Commission on Pornography: “The Question of Harm”

Longino: “Pornography, Oppression, and Freedom”

Wicclair: “Feminism, Pornography, and Censorship”

Final Notes on Topic

Drug Control and Addiction: The Basics

Szasz: “The Ethics of Addiction”

Goodin: “The Ethics of Smoking”

Nadelmann: “The Case for Legalization”

Wilson: “Against the Legalization of Drugs”

Shapiro: “Addiction and Drug Policy”

 

World Hunger and Poverty: The Basics

Singer: “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”

Hardin: “Living in a Lifeboat”

Neilsen: “Some Facts About Famine”

(Final Paper is Due)

No Class: Thanksgiving Break

Sen: “Property and Hunger”

Final Notes on Topic

Review for Final Examination

Links

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The Dictionary of Philosophical Terms and Names
Ethics Updates
The Ethics Center
The Association for Practical and Professional Ethics