“Objective moral standards” are: standards that apply to everyone, everywhere, no matter what.

Category:

“Objective moral standards” are: standards that apply to everyone, everywhere, no matter what.

0
0

“Objective moral standards” are:

standards that apply to everyone, everywhere, no matter what.

Moral claims are objectively true when:

the claims tell us what objective moral standards are or what they require of us.

The truth value of objective moral claims will vary from culture to culture

False

According to the moral realist, claims about morality merely restate our preferences- our likings and dislikings.

False

Which of the following is the FIRST premise in the argument from disagreement?
a. If selfish, irrational people agree about objective morality, it most likely exists.
b. Science cannot verify the existence of objective morality.
c. If science cannot verify the existence of X, our best evidence suggests X does not exist.
d. If well-informed, open-minded, rational people persistently disagree about some
claim, then that claims is not objectively true.

D. If well-informed, open-minded, rational people persistently disagree about some claim, then that claims is not objectively true.

The following statement is an “argument” as we defined it in class:
“The world would be a better place if everyone would just get along!”

False

Which of the following is the SECOND premise in the argument from disagreement?
a. Science cannot verify the existence of objective morality.
b. There is no such thing as objective morality.
c. Well-informed, open-minded, rational people persistently disagree about all moral claims.
d. The world would be a better place if more people agreed about morality.

C. Well-informed, open-minded, rational people persistently disagree about all moral claims.

Which of the following best summarizes the “argument from disagreement”?
a. It is really disappointing that there is not more consensus about morality.
b. Objective morality requires that everyone agree about the truth of moral claims.
c. If smart, rational, open-minded people cannot agree about objective morality, then our best evidence suggests no objective morality exists.
d. For every moral claims which seems to be objective, we can find at least one person who disagrees with it.

C. If smart, rational, open-minded people cannot agree about objective morality, then our best evidence suggests no objective morality exists.

Which of the following is the first premise in the skeptical argument from the “scientific test of reality”?
a. Science cannot prove the existence of objective morality.
b. If science cannot prove the existence of X, our best evidence suggests that X does not exist.
c. Scientists have no concern for morality.
d. Science can tell us objective facts about morality.

B. If science cannot prove the existence of X, our best evidence suggests that X does not exist.

Which of the following is a potential objection to the argument from disagreement that we covered in class?
a. The world is a better place because people disagree about morality.
b. Well-informed, rational, open-minded people disagree about claims in empirical science, and those claims are objective.
c. It is impossible to actually disagree with somebody about morality.
d. We have laws and norms which govern disagreement.

B. Well-informed, rational, open-minded people disagree about claims in empirical science, and those claims are objective.

Which of the following is a potential objection to the argument from scientific test of reality that we covered in class?
a. Science has nothing to do with morality.
b. Science just does not have the technology to make objective claims yet.
c. Conducting scientific experiments presupposes values and norms which science, itself, cannot verify.
d. We ought to care more about science than philosophy. It pays better.

C. Conducting scientific experiments presupposes values and norms which science, itself, cannot verify.

To say morality is a “human construct,” is to say:

Morality was “invented” by human beings.

According to Relativism, an act is morally permissible or prohibited just because:

it is allowed or disallowed by the guiding ideals of the society in which it is performed.

Imagine two individuals discussing the moral permissibility of eating meat. Person 1 claims, “Eating meat is morally permissible.” Person 2 claims, “Eating meat is morally prohibited.”
According to the Relativist, one of these people is objectively correct and the other is objectively wrong.

False

One potential benefit of Relativism is:

It overcomes the skeptical argument from scientific testing of reality.

One other potential benefit of Relativism is:

It overcomes the skeptical argument from disagreement.

One potential problem of Relativism is:

It makes no room for moral progress

According to Relativism, the claim “Slavery was morally prohibited in the pre-Civil War south, just like it is morally prohibited right now!” is:

False

According to Relativism, the claim “It was morally permissible to murder your infant if you suspected they would grow up with severe cognitive impairments in ancient Greece, because that action was in line with the ideals of that society” is:

True

According to Relativism, there is no such thing as “moral progress” .

True

Which of the following is an essential claim of Error Theory:
a. There are no moral features of the world.
b. Only science can tell us what exists.
c. Morality has been, on the whole, bad for humanity.
d. Believing in objective morality leads to many errors in other fields.

A. There are no moral features of the world.

Which of the following is an essential claim of Error Theory:
a. It was an error signing up for Intro to Ethics
b. Moral claims can be true if the society is not founded on an error.
c. No moral judgments are true.
d. Only well-educated folks can know the truth about objective morality.

C. No moral judgments are true.

Which of the following is an essential claim of Error Theory:
a. We are actually being deceptive when we claim to make objective statements about morality.
b. Humans are, by nature, selfish.
c. We only have moral duties to ourselves.
d. Our sincere moral judgments try, but always fail, to describe moral features of things.

D. Our sincere moral judgments try, but always fail, to describe moral features of things.

From the central claims of Error Theory, the theory argues that:
a. Only a select few can have moral knowledge.
b. Moral knowledge is relative to your society or culture.
c. There is no such thing as moral knowledge.
d. There is objective moral knowledge, but it always leads to error in other fields.

C. There is no such thing as moral knowledge.

T/F: The Error Theorist agrees that objective moral standards apply to everyone, all the time, no matter what.

False

According to Error Theory, the claim “It is objectively morally impermissible to torture puppies for fun” is:

False

According to Error Theory, the claim “It is objectively wrong for you to steal my money” is:

False

According to Error Theory, the claim “I ought to do what makes me best off” is:

False

One potential problem with Error Theory is:

The problem of moral progress

T/F: According to Error Theory, morality provides us with “categorical reasons” to act in certain ways:

False

According to meta-ethical Naturalism:

Moral claims are reducible to scientific claims about the material world.

According to meta-ethical naturalism, which of these is the foundation for all value?

The existence of natural entities.

An entity is “ontologically subjective” iff:

The entity exists in the subjective experience of the person experiencing it.

T/F: If an entity is ontologically subjective, then nobody can make any objectively true claims about that entity.

False

An entity is “epistemically objective” iff:

It is possible to possess objectively true knowledge about that entity.

T/F: According to meta-ethical naturalism, no conscious experiences are any more or less valuable than any others.

False

Which of the following claims is most likely to have support from meta-ethical Naturalism?
a. Our minds have not evolved to take ethical considerations into account.
b. We can never derive morality from our knowledge of the natural world.
c. If a culture believes it is morally permissible to torture infants, then it is actually morally permissible.
d. The pain experienced by an infant if tortured is objective evidence of the moral impermissibility of torture.

D. The pain experienced by an infant if tortured is objective evidence of the moral impermissibility of torture.

Which of the following claims would the meta-ethical naturalist explicitly deny?
a. One can never derive an “ought” from an “is”
b. Some ways of obtaining pleasure are more valuable to well-being than others.
c. Some biological species display more cooperation than others.
d. Chemistry is a more valuable tool in studying objective morality than is biology.

A. One can never derive an “ought” from an “is”

T/F: Meta-ethical naturalists argue that our emotions have evolved to induce cooperation.

True

Which of the following best summarizes the notion of a “prisoner’s dilemma”
a. It is always better to cooperate with others, no matter what.
b. It is always better to act in self-interest, no matter what.
c. In some circumstances, cooperating is in everyone’s self-interest.
d. It is difficult to decide whether escaping from prison is morally permissible.

C. In some circumstances, cooperating is in everyone’s self-interest.

Which of the following is an example of a prisoner’s dilemma that we mentioned in class?
a. Deciding whether to donate to charity.
b. Deciding whether to come to class or stay home.
c. Deciding whether to attempt an escape from prison.
d. Deciding whether to take performance enhancing drugs, as an athlete.

D. Deciding whether to take performance enhancing drugs, as an athlete.

T/F: The prisoner’s dilemma is meant to illustrate our moral obligation to cooperate

False

T/F: According to notions of meta-ethical consistency, if a reason for acting is rational, that reason applies to everyone.

True

According to notions of meta-ethical consistency, the justification for morality is:

Rationality

Reasons for action which apply to every person universally are called _____________ reasons.

Categorical

List the three branches of ethics

Descriptive, Normative, Metaethics

“Ethical egoism” argues that _______________ act in self-interest

we ought to

“Psychological egoism” argues that

We are only capable of acting in self-interest

49. State an objection to one of the premises from the “Argument from disagreement”
(indicate which premise)

Premise: If well-informed, open-minded rational people persistently disagree, then claim is not objectively true.
Objection: False, contradicts self

The following statement is which kind of claim? “There are no objective values?”
a. Descriptive
b. Normative
c. Metaethical

C. Metaethical

“Objective moral standards” are:

standards that apply to everyone, everywhere, no matter what.

Moral claims are objectively true when:

the claims tell us what objective moral standards are or what they require of us.

The truth value of objective moral claims will vary from culture to culture

False

According to the moral realist, claims about morality merely restate our preferences- our likings and dislikings.

False

Which of the following is the FIRST premise in the argument from disagreement?
a. If selfish, irrational people agree about objective morality, it most likely exists.
b. Science cannot verify the existence of objective morality.
c. If science cannot verify the existence of X, our best evidence suggests X does not exist.
d. If well-informed, open-minded, rational people persistently disagree about some
claim, then that claims is not objectively true.

D. If well-informed, open-minded, rational people persistently disagree about some claim, then that claims is not objectively true.

The following statement is an “argument” as we defined it in class:
“The world would be a better place if everyone would just get along!”

False

Which of the following is the SECOND premise in the argument from disagreement?
a. Science cannot verify the existence of objective morality.
b. There is no such thing as objective morality.
c. Well-informed, open-minded, rational people persistently disagree about all moral claims.
d. The world would be a better place if more people agreed about morality.

C. Well-informed, open-minded, rational people persistently disagree about all moral claims.

Which of the following best summarizes the “argument from disagreement”?
a. It is really disappointing that there is not more consensus about morality.
b. Objective morality requires that everyone agree about the truth of moral claims.
c. If smart, rational, open-minded people cannot agree about objective morality, then our best evidence suggests no objective morality exists.
d. For every moral claims which seems to be objective, we can find at least one person who disagrees with it.

C. If smart, rational, open-minded people cannot agree about objective morality, then our best evidence suggests no objective morality exists.

Which of the following is the first premise in the skeptical argument from the “scientific test of reality”?
a. Science cannot prove the existence of objective morality.
b. If science cannot prove the existence of X, our best evidence suggests that X does not exist.
c. Scientists have no concern for morality.
d. Science can tell us objective facts about morality.

B. If science cannot prove the existence of X, our best evidence suggests that X does not exist.

Which of the following is a potential objection to the argument from disagreement that we covered in class?
a. The world is a better place because people disagree about morality.
b. Well-informed, rational, open-minded people disagree about claims in empirical science, and those claims are objective.
c. It is impossible to actually disagree with somebody about morality.
d. We have laws and norms which govern disagreement.

B. Well-informed, rational, open-minded people disagree about claims in empirical science, and those claims are objective.

Which of the following is a potential objection to the argument from scientific test of reality that we covered in class?
a. Science has nothing to do with morality.
b. Science just does not have the technology to make objective claims yet.
c. Conducting scientific experiments presupposes values and norms which science, itself, cannot verify.
d. We ought to care more about science than philosophy. It pays better.

C. Conducting scientific experiments presupposes values and norms which science, itself, cannot verify.

To say morality is a “human construct,” is to say:

Morality was “invented” by human beings.

According to Relativism, an act is morally permissible or prohibited just because:

it is allowed or disallowed by the guiding ideals of the society in which it is performed.

Imagine two individuals discussing the moral permissibility of eating meat. Person 1 claims, “Eating meat is morally permissible.” Person 2 claims, “Eating meat is morally prohibited.”
According to the Relativist, one of these people is objectively correct and the other is objectively wrong.

False

One potential benefit of Relativism is:

It overcomes the skeptical argument from scientific testing of reality.

One other potential benefit of Relativism is:

It overcomes the skeptical argument from disagreement.

One potential problem of Relativism is:

It makes no room for moral progress

According to Relativism, the claim “Slavery was morally prohibited in the pre-Civil War south, just like it is morally prohibited right now!” is:

False

According to Relativism, the claim “It was morally permissible to murder your infant if you suspected they would grow up with severe cognitive impairments in ancient Greece, because that action was in line with the ideals of that society” is:

True

According to Relativism, there is no such thing as “moral progress” .

True

Which of the following is an essential claim of Error Theory:
a. There are no moral features of the world.
b. Only science can tell us what exists.
c. Morality has been, on the whole, bad for humanity.
d. Believing in objective morality leads to many errors in other fields.

A. There are no moral features of the world.

Which of the following is an essential claim of Error Theory:
a. It was an error signing up for Intro to Ethics
b. Moral claims can be true if the society is not founded on an error.
c. No moral judgments are true.
d. Only well-educated folks can know the truth about objective morality.

C. No moral judgments are true.

Which of the following is an essential claim of Error Theory:
a. We are actually being deceptive when we claim to make objective statements about morality.
b. Humans are, by nature, selfish.
c. We only have moral duties to ourselves.
d. Our sincere moral judgments try, but always fail, to describe moral features of things.

D. Our sincere moral judgments try, but always fail, to describe moral features of things.

From the central claims of Error Theory, the theory argues that:
a. Only a select few can have moral knowledge.
b. Moral knowledge is relative to your society or culture.
c. There is no such thing as moral knowledge.
d. There is objective moral knowledge, but it always leads to error in other fields.

C. There is no such thing as moral knowledge.

T/F: The Error Theorist agrees that objective moral standards apply to everyone, all the time, no matter what.

False

According to Error Theory, the claim “It is objectively morally impermissible to torture puppies for fun” is:

False

According to Error Theory, the claim “It is objectively wrong for you to steal my money” is:

False

According to Error Theory, the claim “I ought to do what makes me best off” is:

False

One potential problem with Error Theory is:

The problem of moral progress

T/F: According to Error Theory, morality provides us with “categorical reasons” to act in certain ways:

False

According to meta-ethical Naturalism:

Moral claims are reducible to scientific claims about the material world.

According to meta-ethical naturalism, which of these is the foundation for all value?

The existence of natural entities.

An entity is “ontologically subjective” iff:

The entity exists in the subjective experience of the person experiencing it.

T/F: If an entity is ontologically subjective, then nobody can make any objectively true claims about that entity.

False

An entity is “epistemically objective” iff:

It is possible to possess objectively true knowledge about that entity.

T/F: According to meta-ethical naturalism, no conscious experiences are any more or less valuable than any others.

False

Which of the following claims is most likely to have support from meta-ethical Naturalism?
a. Our minds have not evolved to take ethical considerations into account.
b. We can never derive morality from our knowledge of the natural world.
c. If a culture believes it is morally permissible to torture infants, then it is actually morally permissible.
d. The pain experienced by an infant if tortured is objective evidence of the moral impermissibility of torture.

D. The pain experienced by an infant if tortured is objective evidence of the moral impermissibility of torture.

Which of the following claims would the meta-ethical naturalist explicitly deny?
a. One can never derive an “ought” from an “is”
b. Some ways of obtaining pleasure are more valuable to well-being than others.
c. Some biological species display more cooperation than others.
d. Chemistry is a more valuable tool in studying objective morality than is biology.

A. One can never derive an “ought” from an “is”

T/F: Meta-ethical naturalists argue that our emotions have evolved to induce cooperation.

True

Which of the following best summarizes the notion of a “prisoner’s dilemma”
a. It is always better to cooperate with others, no matter what.
b. It is always better to act in self-interest, no matter what.
c. In some circumstances, cooperating is in everyone’s self-interest.
d. It is difficult to decide whether escaping from prison is morally permissible.

C. In some circumstances, cooperating is in everyone’s self-interest.

Which of the following is an example of a prisoner’s dilemma that we mentioned in class?
a. Deciding whether to donate to charity.
b. Deciding whether to come to class or stay home.
c. Deciding whether to attempt an escape from prison.
d. Deciding whether to take performance enhancing drugs, as an athlete.

D. Deciding whether to take performance enhancing drugs, as an athlete.

T/F: The prisoner’s dilemma is meant to illustrate our moral obligation to cooperate

False

T/F: According to notions of meta-ethical consistency, if a reason for acting is rational, that reason applies to everyone.

True

According to notions of meta-ethical consistency, the justification for morality is:

Rationality

Reasons for action which apply to every person universally are called _____________ reasons.

Categorical

List the three branches of ethics

Descriptive, Normative, Metaethics

“Ethical egoism” argues that _______________ act in self-interest

we ought to

“Psychological egoism” argues that

We are only capable of acting in self-interest

49. State an objection to one of the premises from the “Argument from disagreement”
(indicate which premise)

Premise: If well-informed, open-minded rational people persistently disagree, then claim is not objectively true.
Objection: False, contradicts self

The following statement is which kind of claim? “There are no objective values?”
a. Descriptive
b. Normative
c. Metaethical

C. Metaethical

Looking for the solution to this or another homework question?

If you need essay writing assistance or homework solutions, log in or sign up for a free account and ask our writers any homework question.