Q&A Hero

Q: State whether the following item expresses moral value or nonmoral value; or no value at all.People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Q: State whether the following item expresses moral value or nonmoral value; or no value at all.Debbie has been very good tonight according to the babysitter.

Q: State whether the following item expresses moral value or nonmoral value; or no value at all.It was wrong for Shirley to insult Nathan.

Q: State whether the following item expresses moral value or nonmoral value; or no value at all.Elliott delivered the presentation in an elegant manner.

Q: State whether the following item expresses moral value or nonmoral value; or no value at all.Every year this town records more than 100 homicide cases.

Q: State whether the following item expresses moral value or nonmoral value; or no value at all.Elizabeth should compensate her neighbor for damaging her lawn.

Q: Reasoning used by jurists and attorneys in applying the law is both deductive and inductive.

Q: Virtue ethics is an abstruse ethical theory.

Q: Utilitarianism holds the idea that what is right and wrong is merely a matter of subjective opinion.

Q: A moral imperative prescribes an action, not for the sake of some result, but simply because that action is our moral duty.

Q: Ethical egoism discounts one's own happiness as of lesser value than the happiness of others.

Q: In estimating the moral worth of what people do, utilitarianism seems to discount people's intentions.

Q: Immanuel Kant's deontologism urges people to act so as to produce the most happiness.

Q: The application of stare decisis always involves analogical argument.

Q: Stare decisis is the doctrine that even though a court has pronounced a principle of law applicable to a certain set of facts, other judges should follow common sense in determining whether to apply that principle to other cases in which the facts are substantially the same.

Q: A law justifiable by legal moralism always prohibits activities that do not harm others.

Q: Defenders of the harm principle usually believe that it is only one among several acceptable justifications for laws forbidding conduct.

Q: Legal reasoning and moral reasoning both lead to prescriptions about whether or not certain actions should be done.

Q: In this pair of cases, the first may serve as precedent for the second. Decide whether the second case is so relevantly similar to the first that it should be decided identically. Explain your decision. First case: Officers arrested D in his living room on a charge of using the mails to transport forged checks. Then they searched the other rooms of his apartment for forged checks, which they did not find. But they did find unlawfully possessed draft cards. D was convicted of possession and alteration of the draft cards. The court held the search was lawful as incidental to a valid arrest.

Q: In this pair of cases, the first may serve as precedent for the second. Decide whether the second case is so relevantly similar to the first that it should be decided identically. Explain your decision. First case: A court has ruled that victim-impact statements, which document the suffering of the victim and the victim's family that results from the crime, are admissible among the evidence to be considered by a jury during the sentencing phase of criminal trials.

Q: In this pair of cases, the first may serve as precedent for the second. Decide whether the second case is so relevantly similar to the first that it should be decided identically. Explain your decision. First case: The U.S. Supreme Court upheld federal regulations that bar abortion counseling at federally funded family-planning clinics in the United States.

Q: In this pair of cases, the first may serve as precedent for the second. Decide whether the second case is so relevantly similar to the first that it should be decided identically. Explain your decision. First case: The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 extended federal antibias protections to pregnant workers.

Q: In this pair of cases, the first may serve as precedent for the second. Decide whether the second case is so relevantly similar to the first that it should be decided identically. Explain your decision. First case: Officers on a late-night automobile patrol approached two men parked in a car in a lover's lane, who then drove away at high speed. The officers chased and overtook them, searched the car, and found narcotics. The court ruled that the search of the automobile was lawful even though no arrest had been made: The presence of two men in that place was suspicious, and their sudden flight indicated consciousness of guilt of some crime.

Q: In this pair of cases, the first may serve as precedent for the second. Decide whether the second case is so relevantly similar to the first that it should be decided identically. Explain your decision. First case: Federal and local officers, seeking to arrest Mr. J on a narcotics charge but having no warrant or search warrant, knocked on the door of his apartment. He asked, "Who's there?" and the reply was, "Police." He opened the door partly, keeping the chain latch on, asked what they were doing there. Before they answered, he tried to close the door, whereupon they broke in and arrested him, seizing as evidence marked money from a narcotics sale. The court ruled that the arrest was unlawful and therefore that the money was unlawfully seized: the authority of officers to break the door of a home to make an arrest is limited; the officers must first state their authority in demanding admission. Mr. J's reaction in attempting to close the door did not show with certainty that he knew that the officers were there to arrest him.

Q: In this pair of cases, the first may serve as precedent for the second. Decide whether the second case is so relevantly similar to the first that it should be decided identically. Explain your decision.First case: The owner of an amusement park, believing that homosexual activity was taking place in its pay toilets, authorized police to use an observation pipe leading from the roof to the booths. Officer H regularly visited the roof for surveillance. If he observed illegal conduct, he would notify officers below, who would make the arrest. A court ruled that the evidence of Officer H was illegally obtained and set aside the information.Second case: A motel manager complained to police that his motel was being used for the sale of narcotics. Officers conducting surveillance from an unmarked vehicle observed suspicious activity and, approaching and looking through an unshaded window, witnessed drug use and made arrests.

Q: In this pair of cases, the first may serve as precedent for the second. Decide whether the second case is so relevantly similar to the first that it should be decided identically. Explain your decision.First case: The owner of an amusement park, believing that homosexual activity was taking place in its pay toilets, authorized police to use an observation pipe leading from the roof to the booths. Officer H regularly visited the roof for surveillance. If he observed illegal conduct, he would notify officers below, who would make the arrest. A court ruled that the evidence of Officer H was illegally obtained and set aside the information.Second case: The management of a department store suspected illegal homosexual activity in the men's room. In this case, the booths, unlike those in the first case, were not pay toilets (and thus were not in the same sense "private"), and the observed behavior was committed in the space below the partition, and thus was observable by anyone who might have been in the public, or common-use, portion of the men's room at the time. An officer just happened to open the door of the men's room at the time of the activity, observed it through the doorway, and arrested the participants.

Q: In this pair of cases, the first may serve as precedent for the second. Decide whether the second case is so relevantly similar to the first that it should be decided identically. Explain your decision.First case: The owner of an amusement park, believing that homosexual activity was taking place in its pay toilets, authorized police to use an observation pipe leading from the roof to the booths. Officer H regularly visited the roof for surveillance. If he observed illegal conduct, he would notify officers below, who would make the arrest. A court ruled that the evidence of Officer H was illegally obtained and set aside the information.Second case: The management of a department store authorized police to observe suspected illegal homosexual activity in the men's room. An officer did observe such activity and arrested the participants. But in this case, the officer looked through a legitimately installed vent instead of a special spypipe. Furthermore, in this case, the booths, unlike those in the first case, were not pay toilets (and thus were not in the same sense "private"). Finally, unlike in the first case, the observed behavior was committed in the space below the partition, and thus was observable by anyone who might have been in the public, or common-use, portion of the men's room at the time, though nobody was.

Q: In this pair of cases, the first may serve as precedent for the second. Decide whether the second case is so relevantly similar to the first that it should be decided identically. Explain your decision. First case: On the basis of observation and a car license number, police reasonably suspected Mrs. H of possessing stolen radios. Informed by the manager of her apartment that a man living with her was sickly, officers knocked on the apartment door and received no response but heard "moans and groans." When they were admitted by the manager, no one was present, but one of the stolen radios was in plain sight. On the basis of this information, they obtained a search warrant and seized the radio. Mrs. H was later arrested. A court held that the radio was admissible as evidence: The officers testified that they believed someone in the apartment was in distress and had entered for the purpose of giving aid. The court ruled that this justified what would otherwise have been a trespass.

Q: If you were a member of a state legislature, what kind of law might you write to prevent such situations as the preceding from arising? On what grounds would you justify it?

Q: Let's say that person A has a piece of heavy equipment and needs an operator to do a certain job with it. But the equipment has not had a legally required safety inspection. Person B is able to operate the equipment, and he badly needs a job. So B signs a document that says, if there is any harm done as a result of the equipment not meeting safety standards, he assumes responsibility for the harm and that A is not to be held responsible. B goes to work, an accident happens, and B is injured. A refuses to pay for B's medical costs, so B files a suit against him for those costs. Should B collect his medical costs from A? Construct an argument on one side or the other.

Q: Answer the question in the following paragraph from one of the perspectives described in the text. Lisa's algebra class has a quiz every other Friday. This is the third time she's been so worried about other matters that she hasn't done quite as well on the quiz as she might have otherwise. What has her upset is the fact that the instructor leaves the room while the students take the quiz, and over half the class is taking the opportunity to cheat. She knows and likes several of the other students in the class, and some of the ones she likes are among those who are cheating. Lisa knows that (a) a failure to speak to the teacher about the cheating will result in her own grade being lower, since the teacher grades in part on the curve. But (b) she will be doing her friends and the others a great harm, since cheating is taken very seriously at the school. If she doesn't "turn in" her classmates, (c) the only other alternative to getting a worse grade than she deserves is to begin cheating herself, something she's never done. What should she do?

Q: Answer the question in the following paragraph from one of the perspectives described in the text.Kevin's mother and father are divorced. Kevin is eight, and he lives with his father, John, for three months every summer. The rest of the time, except for occasional weekends, he lives two hundred miles away with his mother. John is the one with the problem: He and Kevin talked a lot last summer about getting a dog. For the first time, John is living in a house that has a backyard big enough to keep a dog and a fence around it as well. John had always used the "no place to keep it" line to avoid making promises, but that no longer applies. John finally promised to get Kevin a dog at the beginning of the next summer, and he knows Kevin is hoping to get one. In fact, John knows that Kevin is expecting a dog with enough confidence that (a) he'll be very disappointed if he doesn't get one, even though he may not say much about it. Furthermore, (b) not getting a dog will deprive both Kevin and John of considerable pleasure, since John knows how happy it would make his son to get one. But the danger of having a dog around is that John lives alone during most of the year, and having a dog means being responsible for another creature. (c) When John travels, as his job requires him to do from time to time, who will look after the dog? He can't leave it with a friend for a week or two at a time. And he has no neighbors close by who could look after it. It looks like a difficult trade-off: Three months a year of pleasure for John, Kevin, and a dog, balanced against what might be nine months a year of frequent unpleasantness for both John and the dog. What should he do?

Q: Answer the question in the passage below from one of the perspectives described in the textJan witnessed a certain Mr. Gaines commit a crime several months ago. Despite his certain knowledge of Gaines's guilt, the charges against him were dismissed because of an error in the investigation. Jan is especially upset about the nature of the crime(a) Gaines was defrauding a charitable organization that Jan happens to think accomplishes a lot of good. Jan also knows that the crime was committed out of greed, since (b) Gaines owns a large jewelry store and is already well-off. Gaines has spoken to his friends about how he got away without having to stand trial, and (c) he is gloating about it.One day, Jan is walking up the alley that runs behind Gaines's store, and he notices that the back door has been left unlocked and, from the look of things, it appears that the burglar alarm has not been turned on. One of several vaults in the back room has a half-open door. He realizes that he could make off very easily with a large amount of expensive jewelry. (d) The likelihood of his being caught is very small. It occurs to him that it wouldn't be quite the same as stealing, certainly not as bad as what he saw Gaines do, if (e) he did not keep the loot for himself but gave it away. It occurs to him that (f) if he takes what doesn't belong to him he may not be any better than Gaines, and on the small chance he did get caught, nobody would believe him, and (g) the penalties would be stiff. But (h) this is his chance to see justice done with regard to Gaines, and he can make some deserving people very happy with the proceeds of the burglary. Should Jan grab the jewels?

Q: Answer the question in the following paragraph from one of the perspectives described in the text.The water pump in Michelle's car isn't working, and her friend Felipe replaces it for her as a favor. Michelle decides to repay Felipe's kindness by promising to buy him a six-pack of beer. Unfortunately, Michelle isn't quite old enough to buy beer legally, so she asks her friend Carol, who is, to buy the beer for her and explains why. Felipe, too, is slightly under the legal age, but Carol knows Felipe and regards him as a responsible and mature individual. Further, (a) Carol knows that Michelle will be embarrassed if she has to tell Felipe she cannot get beer for him after all, and (b) Michelle has recently done something nice for Carol, and Carol owes her a favor. However, (c) Michelle is aware that if Felipe drinks the beer all at once and goes drivingan unlikely event in Carol's opinionhe could be injured or injure others. Carol could be held liable in that event. But (d) Carol knows Michelle's other friends and doubts that any of them are old enough to buy beer for Michelle. If Carol turns Michelle down, Michelle will have to live without getting Felipe the beer she promised to give him. Should Carol get the beer for Michelle, everything considered?

Q: Answer the question in the passage below from one of the perspectives described in the text. Shelley and Maurita are both disturbed by their C+ final grades in Mr. Carlton's geography class, and they request that he recheck his grade book. He does so and finds that, indeed, he had made mistakes. Maurita was supposed to get a B- and Shelley was supposed to get a C-. He gives Maurita the B- and allows Shelley to keep the C+. Should he have lowered Shelley's grade to a C-? Construct one argument whose conclusion is that he should, and construct one argument whose conclusion is that he should not. Be sure to spell out clearly any moral principles in the arguments.

Q: Answer the question in the following paragraph from one of the perspectives described in the textAn employer who is considering hiring Eva has asked Donna, Eva's former supervisor, for a report on Eva. In truth, Eva's work for Donna has been only average. However, (a) Eva is Donna's friend, and Donna knows that Eva probably will not get the job if she says anything negative about Eva, and Donna knows that Eva desperately needs the job. Further, (b) Donna knows that if the situation were reversed, she would not want Eva to mention her deficiencies. Nevertheless, (c) it has been Donna's policy to reveal the deficiencies of employees when she has been asked for references by employers, and she knows that some of Eva's faults may be bothersome to this particular employer. Finally, (d) this employer has leveled with Donna in the past when Donna has asked for a report on people who have worked for him. Should Donna reveal deficiencies in Eva's past performance?

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Although she doesn't believe in stealing, Marina uses the office copy machine for personal business and makes person-to-person long-distance calls to fictitious persons as a code to avoid paying for the calls.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina votes against a tax increase for maintenance of her city park even though she uses the park and plans to continue using it whether or not the measure passes.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina's twins, Mary and Myron, have different aspirations. Mary wants to be an engineer. She's good at mathematics and has a good chance of winning a scholarship to a good college. Myron is both inept and uninterested in such matters. He shows signs of artistic talent and wants to study painting. For their seventeenth birthdays, Marina got them a computer.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina watches a viewer-supported public television station, but she does not make contributions to it.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina is usually a careful shopper, looking for bargains and buying generic products when she's at the market. But she has a weakness for gloves and handbags, and she owns a closet full of elegant and expensive examples.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina says she believes in equality, but she tells lots of ethnic and racial jokes.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.The company that Marina owns allows the secretarial staff to accumulate one vacation day per month, but managers at the company accumulate 1.5 days per month.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina criticizes the Japanese for killing and eating whales, but she eats beef.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina opposes tyrannical despots in several countries in the world. But even though the government of Almeria is equally tyrannical, she is not inclined to oppose it because she has a friend who works in the Almerian foreign ministry.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.At election time, Marina votes for the candidate she thinks will do the best jobin every election except one. In that race, she votes for her second choice, because she is certain that the best person for the job has no chance of winning and that her second choice is still better than any of the rest of the candidates.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina offers her daughter's fianc a job in the company she owns, but it never occurs to her to do the same for her son's fiance.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina tells her children not to smoke, but she smokes herself.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina tells her children to tell the truth, but she claims deductions on her income tax return to which she knows she is not legally entitled.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina instructs her children to always be truthful but lies to her young daughter when the daughter asks if her (the daughter's) illness is running up large medical bills.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina's automobile is a large, gas-guzzling, luxury car, but in some circumstances (such as cocktail parties when she is among strangers), she will make it a point to criticize people who drive such cars.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina criticizes her brother for expressing racist views but does not criticize Mr. Durban, a business associate, who holds similar views.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina calls it to the clerk's attention when she is overcharged but not when she is undercharged.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina is the principal source of financial support for one of her sons at college; the other son won a large scholarship, and Marina sends him a much smaller amount.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina leaves large tips at a posh restaurant, where meals are quite expensive, but she leaves much smaller tips at another, much plainer and less expensive restaurant, even though the service is as good and the waiters work just as hard.

Q: In the following, discuss whether Marina is treating relevantly similar cases in sufficiently similar fashions; identify instances in which the cases are not relevantly similar.Marina's will stipulates that her son by birth will receive substantially more of her estate than will her adopted son, even though both sons love her equally, have treated her with similar regard, and have lived with her for about the same amount of time.

Q: Evaluate the issue of human cloning from the viewpoint of a virtue ethicist.

Q: Evaluate the issue of human cloning from the viewpoint of a deontologist (duty theorist).

Q: Evaluate the issue of human cloning from the utilitarian consequentialist viewpoint.

Q: State whether the reason given here is relevant according to any one of the aesthetic principles; and if it is relevant, identify the principle that makes it so.Ruben's nudes are a terrific advertisement for Weightwatchers.

Q: State whether the reason given here is relevant according to any one of the aesthetic principles; and if it is relevant, identify the principle that makes it so.As Mimi sang her last aria, the audience was submerged in sadness.

Q: State whether the reason given here is relevant according to any one of the aesthetic principles; and if it is relevant, identify the principle that makes it so.Rostropovich's virtuosity on the cello sends waves of delight up and down my spine.

Q: State whether the reason given here is relevant according to any one of the aesthetic principles; and if it is relevant, identify the principle that makes it so.Ruben's nudes are so sensuous that this exhibit of them will make Manhattan society reject the dangerous motto, "Never too rich or too thin."

Q: State whether the reason given here is relevant according to any one of the aesthetic principles; and if it is relevant, identify the principle that makes it so.Raphael's painting is so illuminating because it manifests the Renaissance conviction that the realms of heaven and earth can be merged.

Q: Suppose that the following pair of statements appears in a review of the same work of art. Identify which of the aesthetic principles referred to in the text each statement in the pair appeals to. Then state whether the principles are compatible and thus form the basis for a consistent review, or whether they are incompatible and cannot both be used in a consistent review. a. Art that misleads us about reality is dangerous. b. The great virtue of F. Scott Fitzgerald's novels is that they evoke a desire for a way of life that is extinctindeed, a kind of life that likely never was.

Q: Suppose that the following pair of statements appears in a review of the same work of art. Identify which of the aesthetic principles referred to in the text each statement in the pair appeals to. Then state whether the principles are compatible and thus form the basis for a consistent review, or whether they are incompatible and cannot both be used in a consistent review. a. By the end of the nineteenth century, Bierstadt's painting was condemned as grandiose and sentimental; this is an example of the corruption of critical judgment by retrogressive political interests. b. We must accept that the correctness of aesthetic taste is always an effect of the times.

Q: Suppose that the following pair of statements appears in a review of the same work of art. Identify which of the aesthetic principles referred to in the text each statement in the pair appeals to. Then state whether the principles are compatible and thus form the basis for a consistent review, or whether they are incompatible and cannot both be used in a consistent review. a. Bierstadt's monumental western landscapes are effective; we can be sure of this because they romanticized, and thus promoted, the American migration to the western areas of the country. b. The scenes he painted of the Rocky Mountains make us understand viscerally what it is like to experience the sublime.

Q: Suppose that the following pair of statements appears in a review of the same work of art. Identify which of the aesthetic principles referred to in the text each statement in the pair appeals to. Then state whether the principles are compatible and thus form the basis for a consistent review, or whether they are incompatible and cannot both be used in a consistent review. a. Phillis Wheatley's poetry is important art because it convinced her eighteenth-century contemporaries of the artistic abilities of Africans and contributed to the antislavery movement. b. Phillis Wheatley's poems are exemplary expressions of Christian values.

Q: Suppose that the following pair of statements appears in a review of the same work of art. Identify which of the aesthetic principles referred to in the text each statement in the pair appeals to. Then state whether the principles are compatible and thus form the basis for a consistent review, or whether they are incompatible and cannot both be used in a consistent review. a. A poem should not mean but be. b. To appreciate Paradise Lost, it is essential to determine whether Milton meant Satan as a figure of evil, or as a liberated and thus attractively heroic figure.

Q: Given the following position on abortion, identify which of the three major ethical theories discussed in the textutilitarianism, duty theory, or virtue ethicsit follows. Note that each theory may encompass several possible viewpoints on an issue.

Q: Given the following position on abortion, identify which of the three major ethical theories discussed in the textutilitarianism, duty theory, or virtue ethicsit follows. Note that each theory may encompass several possible viewpoints on an issue.

Q: Given the following position on abortion, identify which of the three major ethical theories discussed in the textutilitarianism, duty theory, or virtue ethicsit follows. Note that each theory may encompass several possible viewpoints on an issue.

Q: Given the following position on euthanasia (doctor-assisted suicide), identify which of the three major ethical theories discussed in the textutilitarianism, duty theory, or virtue ethicsit follows. Note that each theory may encompass several possible viewpoints on an issue.

Q: Given the following position on euthanasia (doctor-assisted suicide), identify which of the three major ethical theories discussed in the textutilitarianism, duty theory, or virtue ethicsit follows. Note that each theory may encompass several possible viewpoints on an issue. Active euthanasia should not be allowed. One might opt for euthanasia because one believes it might be to one's advantage, but could one truly imagine this access being available to everyone, as a universal law? Besides, one would be using the poor doctor as merely a means to an end, without any regard for his or her professional integrity.

Q: Given the following position on euthanasia (doctor-assisted suicide), identify which of the three major ethical theories discussed in the textutilitarianism, duty theory, or virtue ethicsit follows. Note that each theory may encompass several possible viewpoints on an issue. If we can trust doctors and relatives of the patient to be morally responsible people, then active euthanasia could become an option. However, it may be abused by people with a bad character. And we should not forget that the character of the patients themselves may be important: Are they serious in their request, or are they going to change their minds at the last minute? Above all, let us be certain that the decision is right for the patient in his or her special situation, that the manner of euthanasia is appropriate, and that the situation is viewed with a balanced mind-set.

Q: Given the following position on euthanasia (doctor-assisted suicide), identify which of the three major ethical theories discussed in the textutilitarianism, duty theory, or virtue ethicsit follows. Note that each theory may encompass several possible viewpoints on an issue. Active euthanasia should not be legalized; it is much too dangerous. The consequences could be devastating to our society. If we allow terminally ill people access to euthanasia, what guarantees do we have that such access won't be abused? It would be easy to imagine greedy relatives insisting that it is better for Grandma to die sooner than linger in pain, or to imagine Grandma choosing to die sooner so she won't cost the family a lot of money. Overall, access to euthanasia may cause terrible unhappiness.

Q: Given the following position on euthanasia (doctor-assisted suicide), identify which of the three major ethical theories discussed in the textutilitarianism, duty theory, or virtue ethicsit follows. Note that each theory may encompass several possible viewpoints on an issue. Active euthanasia should be legalized. After all, what are the overall consequences in terms of happiness or unhappiness? Euthanasia may not make the patient who wants to die happy, but at least it can end his or her misery. And although the relatives may feel unhappy at the assisted suicide, they too have suffered, and they will grieve whether the patient dies assisted or unassisted. As a matter of fact, they may grieve less if they know the patient has been spared a substantial amount of suffering.

Q: Identify the moral perspective at work here: Taffy is a university lab chimpanzee; the university has lost its animal research grant and has to decide what to do with Taffy.

Q: Identify the moral perspective at work here: Taffy is a university lab chimpanzee; the university has lost its animal research grant and has to decide what to do with Taffy.

Q: Identify the moral perspective at work here: Taffy is a university lab chimpanzee; the university has lost its animal research grant and has to decide what to do with Taffy.