ethics, and metaethics. Value theory addresses questions about what makes a life go well and

5

Introduction

Summary

Three core areas of moral philosophy will be discussed in the text: value theory, normative ethics, and metaethics. Value theory addresses questions about what makes a life go well and what is worth pursuing for its own sake. Normative ethics is concerned with what moral duties we have and how we ought to behave. Metaethics deals with questions about the status of ethics, including whether ethics is objective and whether we can have moral knowledge. Some people, sometimes called “moral skeptics,” believe that the entire enterprise of moral philosophy is fundamentally bankrupt. Such skepticism will be addressed in later chapters; here we simply note that such views are deeply controversial and must be argued for. Furthermore, even if morality turns out to not be objective, it may still be worth studying.Ethical reflection must start somewhere, and while a precise definition of morality is difficult to come by, we can get a sense of the subject matter by distinguishing stereotypically moral questions and claims from those of other related fields, such as law and etiquette. Getting from these starting points to interesting conclusions, however, requires philosophical argument.A moral argument consists of a set of reasons (called “premises”) that are intended to support a given conclusion. Good moral arguments must avoid both false premises and bad reasoning.Arguments containing watertight reasoning, where the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion, are called “valid arguments.” Valid arguments that contain all true premises are called “sound arguments.” The task of moral philosophy is to use rational argument to assess the merits of different moral principles, including very general moral theories that seek to cover a wide variety of particular cases.

Essay Questions

• Explain the difference between normative ethics and metaethics. Give an example of a claim

from each area and explain why each claim falls into the category it does. Do you think that theories about metaethics have any bearing on claims about normative ethics, or are the two areas basically independent? Defend your answer.

• Define moral skepticism and present what you take to be the strongest argument for the view.

How do you think someone who is not a skeptic would respond to this argument? Do you think moral skepticism is true? Why or why not?

• What are the two ways that a moral argument can go wrong? Give an example of an

argument with the first failing and another example of an argument with the second. Explain what is wrong with each argument and show how these defects could be corrected.

• Give an example of a moral principle that you take to be plausible and explain how the

principle gives guidance about how to act in a variety of different situations. Do you think there are any exceptions to the principle you cite? Why or why not?

• Give an example of a particular action that you take to be morally right or morally wrong.

What do you take to be the morally relevant features of that action? What implications does (Fundamentals of Ethics 4e, Shafer-Landau) (Instructor Manual with Test Bank) 1 / 4

6

your discussion have for the morality of other actions?

• How would you define moral philosophy? How does moral philosophy differ from other

disciplines that sometimes give advice, such as economics or psychology?

Multiple-Choice Questions

• The area of moral philosophy known as “value theory” includes questions such as:
• Is morality objective?
• What do we owe to each other?
• What kind of life is most worth living?*
• How do we know which actions are morally right?

• The question “do the ends justify the means?” falls within the area of
• value theory.
• normative ethics.*
• metaethics.
• moral psychology.

• The claim that morality is a human invention and therefore not objective is a claim about
• applied ethics.
• value theory.
• normative ethics.
• metaethics.*

• Skepticism about morality is
• a position that no one has ever argued for.
• nearly universally accepted.
• nearly universally rejected.
• deeply controversial.*

• In philosophy, an argument is a(n)
• formal debate between two parties who disagree.
• heated confrontation concerning a key philosophical issue.
• chain of reasoning consisting of a set of reasons that supports some conclusion.*
• objection to a stated philosophical position.

• It is impossible for a valid argument to have
• true premises and a false conclusion.*
• true premises and a true conclusion.
• false premises and a false conclusion.
• none of the above

• There is no such thing as a
• sound argument that is also valid.
• sound argument that is not valid.* 2 / 4

7

• valid argument that is also sound.
• valid argument that is not sound.

• The conclusion of a sound argument
• will always be true.*
• will always be false.
• might be true but also might be false.
• will always be relevant to the debate at hand.

• A moral agent is
• someone who acts morally all the time.
• someone who acts in accordance with the ethics of his or her profession.
• anyone who is capable of controlling his or her behavior through moral reasoning.*
• any individual whose interests we must consider to act morally.

• Moral theorizing essentially involves
• trying to decide what is right or wrong on a case-by-case basis.
• trying to come up with general moral principles that apply to many different cases.*
• consulting the relevant laws and the Constitution.
• trying to explain what causes people to make the moral judgments they do.

• “Conventional morality” is the set of
• laws of a particular government.
• principles genuinely believed by a moral agent.
• traditional principles that are widely shared within a culture or society.*
• true moral principles.

• Which is not a central concern of morality?
• protecting people’s well-being
• justice
• blame
• legality*

• The desire for “unification” in ethics is a desire for
• everyone to agree on moral principles.
• everyone to treat each other well.
• a single general moral principle.*
• a scientific account of morality.

• What do principles of law, etiquette, self-interest, tradition, and morality all have in

common?

• They all represent a set of standards for how we ought to behave.*
• They all are objective.
• They all are descriptive.
• all of the above
• / 4

8

• Some moral actions are
• illegal.
• impolite.
• generous.
• all of the above*

• Which of the following questions falls within the domain of metaethics?
• What is the status of moral claims and advice?*
• What are our fundamental moral duties?
• Do the ends always justify the means?
• What is the good life?

Appears on the student website.

• Which of the following claims falls within the domain of value theory?
• Morality is objective.
• Moral knowledge is impossible.
• The right thing to do is whatever maximizes happiness.
• The only thing that matters in order to live well is to get what you want.*

Appears on the student website.

• What area of moral philosophy deals with questions about what our moral obligations are?
• value theory
• normative ethics*
• metaethics
• moral epistemology

Appears on the student website.

• Which of the following commonly motivates people to be skeptical about morality?
• the existence of moral disagreement
• the belief that science is the only way of discovering truth
• the view that all moral rules have exceptions
• all of the above*

Appears on the student website.

• An argument in philosophy is a
• set of claims, including a conclusion and reasons given in support of the conclusion.*
• formal debate between competing positions.
• heated exchange of the sort that is frowned upon by serious philosophers.
• complex philosophical theory.

Appears on the student website.

• According to the text, moral philosophy begins from a set of
• moral principles that cannot be doubted.
• moral rules that is clear enough so as to not require interpretation.
• plausible ethical claims that is subject to revision.*
• none of the above
• / 4