PHIL-225-004 – Ethic Belief and Action ( Russ Shafer- Landau, Living Ethics ). Chapter 2 pertains to (moral) reasoning and the homework questions are more like “practice problems”. Complete the following in accordance with the instructions (they are the same as in the text but reproduced here). Consider the sample arguments. Some are valid and some are invalid. Reveal the logical structure of each argument by presenting it in terms of “Ps and Qs” and then explain why each argument is valid or invalid. E) 1) If there is an afterlife, then is it wise to be moral. 2) There is no afterlife. Therefore, 3) it isn’t wise to be moral. I) 1) If euthanasia is legalized, then this will reduce the overall amount of misery in society. 2) If euthanasia reduces the overall amount of misery in society, then it is morally acceptable. Therefore, 3) If euthanasia is legalized, then it is morally acceptable. M) 1) The death penalty is justified only if it gives criminals their just deserts. 2) The death penalty gives criminals their just deserts. Therefore, 3) The death penalty for murderers is justified. Review the following fallacious arguments and identify the informal fallacy committed by each. (a short explanation of why may be warranted as well): O. The death penalty is an excellent deterrent of crime; after all, sociologists haven’t been able to prove that it isn’t. Q. Some corporations have voluntarily taken steps to reduce their emission of greenhouse gases. So, we don’t need to impose any regulations in order to mitigate the effects of climate change. R. How would you feel if someone killed a member of your family? Angry, right? That shows that the death penalty is morally justified.
Hide
