Contemporary Moral Problems M-F12:00-1:00SAV 264 Instructor: Benjamin Hole Email: bvhole@uw.edu Office Hours: everyday after class

Agenda Discuss the argument... Last thoughts about pornography and censorship? Admin notes and where we are … Assignment 4, conference, final papers Clicker Quiz: Pope John Paul II, “The Unspeakable Crime of Abortion” Discuss the argument...

Week Required Reading Assignment Course Mechanics, Theory Primer, and Philosophical Argumentation 6/23-6/27 Benjamin Hole, Phil 102 Syllabus Lewis Vaughn (posted on website), “How to Read an Argument” Mark Timmons, “Moral Theory Primer” WA1, due 6/27   Philosophical Writing and Ethical Theory 6/30-7/3 (Holiday, 7/4) Mark B. Woodhouse (posted on website), “How to Write Philosophy” James Rachels (posted on website), “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism” Jeremy Bentham (posted on website), “The Principle of Utility” Robert Nozick, “The Experience Machine” (posted on website) None Ethical Theory 7/7-7/11 J.S. Mill (electronic), On Liberty, Chapters 1-2 Immanuel Kant (posted on website), “The Moral Law” WA2, due 7/8 Introduction to Sexual Ethics 7/14-7/18 Thomas Mappes, “A Liberal View of Sexual Morality and the concept of Using Another Person” The Catholic Church, “Vatican Declaration on Some Questions in Sexual Ethics” John Corvino, “A Defense of Homosexuality” Introduction to International Ethics 7/21-7/25 Peter Singer, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” (posted on website) Garrett Hardin, “Lifeboat Ethics” (posted on website) WA3, due 7/22 Introduction to Social and Political Ethics: Censorship and Pornography 7/28-8/1 Ronald Dworkin, “Liberty and Pornography” Judith M. Hill, “Pornography and Degradation” Catharine MacKinnon, “Pornography, Civil Rights, and Speech” Abortion 8/4-8/8 Pope John Paul II, “The Unspeakable Crime of Abortion” Mary Anne Warren, “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion” Don Marquis, “Why Abortion Is Immoral” WA4, due 8/5 Conference for Final Papers 8/11-8/15 Catch-up / review. Conference for Final Papers: presentations and discussion Abortion  8/18-8/22 Judith Jarvis Thomson, “A Defense of Abortion” Rosalind Hursthouse, “Virtue Ethics and Abortion” WA5, due 8/19 Final Paper, due 8/21

Writing Assignment Four Paper Presentations Develop Critical Arguments Self-Assessment of Learning Are you self-regulating your learning? Self-assess your participation.

Common Problems Unclear argumentative structure Failure to understand the text or assignment Proof-reading errors Superfluous language Excessive verbiage Excessive adjectives/adverbs 2-line/2-clause limit Paragraph structure Sentence structure Vague thesis statements Passive voice / awkward locutions http://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/

Citations & Plagiarism Citations. Every descriptive claim about course material must be cited. Failure to cite such claims is a kind of plagiarism. “Plagiarism is defined as the use of creations, ideas or words of publicly available work without formally acknowledging the author or source through appropriate use of quotation marks, references, and the like. Plagiarizing is presenting someone else’s work as one’s own original work or thought. This constitutes plagiarism whether it is intentional or unintentional. The University of Washington takes plagiarism very seriously. Plagiarism may lead to disciplinary action by the University against the student who submitted the work. Any student who is uncertain whether his or her use of the work of others constitutes plagiarism should consult the course instructor for guidance before formally submitting the course work involved.” (Sources: UW Graduate School Style Manual; UW Bothell Catalog; UW Student Conduct Code)

Final paper (outline) questions?

Argumentative Structure For each argument Is each argument valid in form? Does each argument include all the premises necessary for conclusion? Are the premises sufficient for the conclusion? Are there any premises you might have trouble explaining? (Try to identify the confusion.) For the overall paper: Is your thesis a strong and simple statement of your core argument’s conclusion? Are you being as charitable as possible in the exegesis? Does your core argument engage with a premise in the argument from the exegesis? Does your objection engage with a premise from your core argument? Is the objection strong (or a straw man)? Does your response to the objection engage with a specific premise? Does your response treat the objection charitably? Does your paper have broader implications in ethical theory?  

Conference and Journal Calls for Papers https://canvas.uw.e du/courses/884483/d iscussion_topics/1913 311 http://uwphilosophy undergrads.wordpres s.com

Writing Resources Jim Pryor’s Guidelines on Writing a Philosophy Paper Mark Woodhouse’s Writing Philosophy The Odegaard Writing and Research Center

Week Required Reading Assignment Course Mechanics, Theory Primer, and Philosophical Argumentation 6/23-6/27 Benjamin Hole, Phil 102 Syllabus Lewis Vaughn (posted on website), “How to Read an Argument” Mark Timmons, “Moral Theory Primer” WA1, due 6/27   Philosophical Writing and Ethical Theory 6/30-7/3 (Holiday, 7/4) Mark B. Woodhouse (posted on website), “How to Write Philosophy” James Rachels (posted on website), “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism” Jeremy Bentham (posted on website), “The Principle of Utility” Robert Nozick, “The Experience Machine” (posted on website) None Ethical Theory 7/7-7/11 J.S. Mill (electronic), On Liberty, Chapters 1-2 Immanuel Kant (posted on website), “The Moral Law” WA2, due 7/8 Introduction to Sexual Ethics 7/14-7/18 Thomas Mappes, “A Liberal View of Sexual Morality and the concept of Using Another Person” The Catholic Church, “Vatican Declaration on Some Questions in Sexual Ethics” John Corvino, “A Defense of Homosexuality” Introduction to International Ethics 7/21-7/25 Peter Singer, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” (posted on website) Garrett Hardin, “Lifeboat Ethics” (posted on website) WA3, due 7/22 Introduction to Social and Political Ethics: Censorship and Pornography 7/28-8/1 Ronald Dworkin, “Liberty and Pornography” Judith M. Hill, “Pornography and Degradation” Catharine MacKinnon, “Pornography, Civil Rights, and Speech” Abortion 8/4-8/8 Pope John Paul II, “The Unspeakable Crime of Abortion” Mary Anne Warren, “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion” Don Marquis, “Why Abortion Is Immoral” WA4, due 8/5 Conference for Final Papers 8/11-8/15 Catch-up / review. Conference for Final Papers: presentations and discussion Abortion  8/18-8/22 Judith Jarvis Thomson, “A Defense of Abortion” Rosalind Hursthouse, “Virtue Ethics and Abortion” WA5, due 8/19 Final Paper, due 8/21

Review censorship & Pornography Introduction to Social and Political Ethics

Irving Kristol, “Pornography, Obscenity, and the Case for Censorship” best argument? Irving Kristol, “Pornography, Obscenity, and the Case for Censorship” Ronald Dworkin, “Liberty and Pornography” Judith M. Hill, “Pornography and Degradation” Catharine MacKinnon, “Pornography, Civil Rights, and Speech”

Press “Ch”, then “41”, then “Ch” Clicker Quiz Please set your Turning Technology Clicker to channel 41 Press “Ch”, then “41”, then “Ch”

moral personhood or standing By definition, if a person or thing needs to be taken into account in moral decision making (i.e., if it counts morally), then that person or thing has: moral personhood or standing sentience autonomy viability innocence all of the above

Kantian Ethics Feminism Hedonism None of the above Which of the following theories best characterizes Pope John Paul II’s account of moral personhood/standing? Kantian Ethics Feminism Hedonism None of the above

Which of the following best characterizes Pope John Paul II’s argument against abortion? A human fetus has a future like ours, and as such deserves the same moral protections as normal adult human beings A human fetus from conception is an innocent human being, and thus has the same right to life as any other person A human fetus from conception is a sentient creature, and thus has the same right to life as any other sentient creature A human fetus has a divinely immaterial soul seven minutes after conception, and from then on has the same right to life as any other person.

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

Ethical theory NLT: “An action is right if and only if (and because) in performing the action one does not directly violate any of the basic values” (12): Human Life Human Procreation (which includes raising children) Human Knowledge Human Sociability

Pope John Paul II “The Unspeakable Crime of Abortion” Two main components to the abortion debate: Whether a fetus has moral standing. How to treat people and things with moral standing.

a fetus has moral standing Biological membership in the human species Continuity argument: given biological membership, the only place where it makes sense to draw the line is at conception.

How to treat people with moral standing NLT: “An action is right if and only if (and because) in performing the action one does not directly violate any of the basic values” (12): Human Life Human Procreation (which includes raising children) Human Knowledge Human Sociability

Pope John Paul II “The Unspeakable Crime of Abortion” A fetus is a person with the right to life. The human fetus from conception is “an innocent human being.” Therefore, it “is to be respected as a person.” Therefore, it has the same right to life (and in the same degree) as any other person. It is morally wrong to kill a person with the right to life. Therefore, it is morally wrong to kill a fetus. (Abortion is immoral.)

A fetus is a person with the right to life. Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

It is morally wrong to kill a person with the right to life. Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

Mary Anne Warren PREVIEW WARREN, IF WE HAVE TIME “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion”

The genetic-code argument Warren's response: What matters is whether the fetus is a person, not whether it is biologically a human being. Genetic Code Argument: Abortion is wrong because the fetus is, biologically speaking, a human being. The genetic-code argument

The genetic-code argument Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

Warren's five “basic criteria” for personhood: Consciousness Reasoning Self-motivated activity The capacity to communicate The presence of self-concepts Warren's main premise: The fetus lacks all five, so it is definitely not a person. Warren's five “basic criteria” for personhood:

Warren's five “basic criteria” for personhood: Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree