Question

Answer the following questions:

Part One

1. If one person stands up at a ball game, he will get a better view. Therefore, if everyone stands up at a ballgame, everyone will get a better view.

This is an example of:

[ ] A. Fallacy of composition
[ ] B. Fallacy of division
[ ] C. Appeal to popularity
[ ] D. No fallacy


2. We have to take a stand on sex education in junior high schools. If we teach sex education in the eighth grade, then seventh graders will want it, then sixth graders, and before you know it, we will be teaching sex education in kindergarten!

This is an example of:

[ ] A. Red herring
[ ] B. Slippery slope
[ ] C. Straw man
[ ] D. No fallacy


3. Simpson has been a strong advocate for animal rights. Animal rights includes not killing animals for our mere pleasure. But Simpson wears leather shoes. So it must be permissible to kill animals for our mere pleasure.

This is an example of:

[ ] A. Ad hominem
[ ] B. Equivocation
[ ] C. Tu quoque
[ ] D. No fallacy


4. Kant is far too dogmatic to appreciate the nuances of the bluffing argument, so we cannot appeal to his theory to resolve the question.

This is an example of:

[ ] A. Appeal to ignorance
[ ] B. Naturalistic fallacy
[ ] C. Ad hominem
[ ] D. Division


5. The majority of Americans polled recently indicated their disapproval of the way Congress conducts itself, so Congress is clearly operating in an inappropriate manner.

This is an example of:

[ ] A. Appeal to emotion
[ ] B. Appeal to ignorance
[ ] C. Appeal to popularity
[ ] D. No fallacy


6. George has been late to work every Thursday for ten years. Tomorrow is Thursday. So he will be late again tomorrow.

This is an example of:

[ ] A. A strong causal argument
[ ] B. A valid deductive argument
[ ] C. The fallacy of composition
[ ] D. The fallacy of division


7. Six is an odd number of legs for a horse. Odd numbers cannot be divided by two. Therefore six cannot be divided by two.

This is an example of:

[ ] A. Fallacy of division
[ ] B. Fallacy of composition
[ ] C. Appeal to ignorance
[ ] D. Fallacy of equivocation


8. My mother says I should stop smoking, but she smoked until forty, so there’s no need to quit just yet.
This is an example of:
[ ] A. Tu quoque
[ ] B. Appeal to ignorance
[ ] C. Appeal to popularity
[ ] D. Genetic fallacy

9. I know you’re no longer hungry. But finish your dinner anyway. After all, there are millions of starving children in Africa.

This is an example of:


[ ] A. Straw Man
[ ] B. Red Herring
[ ] C. Ad hominem
[ ] D. Slippery slope


10. Employees have the right to take recreational drugs on their own time and at home, so it is right that they do.

This is an example of:

[ ] A. Begging the question
[ ] B. Tu quoque
[ ] C. Equivocation
[ ] D. No fallacy


11. The Senator says he refuses to raise taxes. What he means is: on the rich. Obviously he cares nothing about people who are struggling and trying to make ends meet.

This is an example of:

[ ] A. Straw Man
[ ] B. Red Herring
[ ] C. Ad hominem
[ ] D. Genetic fallacy


12. Only if Smith put more effort into his practice sessions than Jones did, does he win the gold. Since Smith wins the gold, he must have put more effort into his practice sessions than Jones did.

This is an example of:

[ ] A. Modus Ponens
[ ] B. Modus Tollens
[ ] C. Affirming the consequent
[ ] D. Denying the consequent


13. A lot of people think that football players are stupid and boorish. That’s a crock! Anyone who saw that fantastic game last Saturday, with three touchdowns before half-­‐time, would know this is just untrue.

This is an example of:

[ ] A. Straw Man
[ ] B. Red Herring
[ ] C. Ad hominem
[ ] D. Composition

14. An argument with one or more fallacies cannot be valid. [ ] True [ ] False

15. Exorbitant CEO pay makes people miserable. Therefore, exorbitant CEO pay is impermissible on utilitarian grounds.

This is an example of:

A. [ ] A valid argument
B. [ ] A potentially valid argument with a hidden assumption.
C. [ ] An invalid argument incorporating the appeal to popularity


16. We should not adopt this new marketing strategy. It will significantly cut into our profits. Maximizing profits remains our highest priority.

This is an example of:

A. [ ] A valid argument
B. [ ] A potentially valid argument with a hidden assumption.
C. [ ] An invalid argument incorporating a red herring.


17. Smith: I can’t accept the plan. We’d be causing too much environmental damage. And given that our product is, in fact, not essential, such damage is not ethically justified.

Jones: But if we don’t cut down those trees, someone else will, you know that.

This is an example of:

[ ] A. A red herring
[ ] B. A straw man
[ ] C. A circular argument
[ ] D. No fallacy


18. The question “Did Jones take money in secret from the company?” is an example of:
[ ] A. A conceptual question
[ ] B. An empirical question
[ ] C. An evaluative question


19. The question “Is taking money in secret from the company morally impermissible?” is an example of:

[ ] A. A conceptual question
[ ] B. An empirical question
[ ] C. An evaluative question

20. The question “What strategy is most likely to keep people from taking money in secret from the company?” is an example of:

[ ] A. A conceptual question
[ ] B. An empirical question
[ ] C. An evaluative question

21. Evaluative questions are generally independent of empirical questions.
[ ] True
[ ] False

22. Moral obligation entails moral permissibility.
[ ] True
[ ] False


23. If I hold it to be morally permissible to turn the trolley, causing the death of only one person instead of five, and precisely for that reason, then I should hold it to be morally permissible to harvest the healthy organs of a single patient, killing him, in order to save the lives of five in need.
This is an example of which of the following requirements of moral reasoning:
[ ] A. Accuracy
[ ] B. Consistency
[ ] C. Logic
[ ] D. Relevance


24. “Wendy ran a marathon.” “Nobody may be in the lounge this evening.” “Visiting professors can be boring.” “I often have my friends for dinner.”

These are examples of which of the following linguistic pitfalls:

[ ] A. Ambiguity
[ ] B. Distortion
[ ] C. Empty content
[ ] D. Vagueness

25. In order to refute an argument, one need only prove that the conclusion is false.
[ ] True
[ ] False


26. When reading (or listening to) an argument, the word “because” tells you that the statement following is likely to be:

[ ] A. A conclusion
[ ] B. A premise


27. If the premises of an argument are all true, we can say the following about the conclusion:

[ ] A. It will also be true
[ ] B. It will logically follow from the premises
[ ] C. Both of these
[ ] D. Neither of these

28. An argument with false premises and a false conclusion may be:
[ ] A. True
[ ] B. Valid
[ ] C. Sound
[ ] D. All of these
[ ] E. None of these


29. The objective of an inductive argument is to establish the necessary truth of its conclusion, using analogies and empirical evidence to do so.

[ ] True [ ] False


Questions 30 – 31 refer to the following argument:

“All Republicans are conservatives. Jones is a conservative. Therefore, Jones is a Republican.”

30. This is argument is

[ ] A. Valid
[ ] B. Invalid


31. The argument above is an example of:

[ ] A. Modus ponens
[ ] B. Modus tollens
[ ] C. Affirming the antecedent
[ ] D. Affirming the consequent


32. “Some animals have four legs. Some four legged animals are dogs. Therefore, some animals are dogs.

[ ] A. Valid
[ ] B. Invalid


33. Either Trump will run in the Iowa primary, or he will not. If Trump runs, then Bush will not; but Rubio will, and he will lose. If Trump does not run, then Bush and Rubio will both run and Bush will lose. If Bush loses in Iowa, then he will not run in New Hampshire; but if he does not run in Iowa, he will run in New Hampshire. Whoever wins in Iowa will run in New Hampshire. Bush will always lose to Rubio, but not to Trump. Whoever wins both Iowa and New Hampshire will be the Republican nominee. Therefore, Rubio will be the Republican nominee.

This is an example of:

[ ] A. A dilemma
[ ] B. A disjunctive syllogism
[ ] C. A hypothetical syllogism
[ ] D. A series of modus ponens arguments [ ] E. An invalid argument


34. “The French are snobby and rude. Every time I have ridden in a Paris taxicab I have been treated brusquely and with condescension.”

This is an example of:

[ ] A. A strong analogical argument
[ ] B. A strong enumerative argument
[ ] C. A weak analogical argument
[ ] D. A weak enumerative argument


35. The expression “think horses not zebras” illustrates a principle of:

[ ] A. Good analogical arguments
[ ] B. Good arguments using inference to the best explanation
[ ] C. Good enumerative arguments
[ ] D. Ockham’s Razor


36. “We should never give security clearances to homosexuals, because they can be blackmailed into revealing classified information. Homosexuals are prone to blackmail because we will revoke their security clearances if we find out that they are gay.”

This is an example of:

[ ] A. A circular argument
[ ] B. A red herring
[ ] C. A straw man
[ ] D. Tu quoque


37. The principle of non-­‐contradiction is best expressed by:

[ ] A. P = P
[ ] B. ¬(P and ¬P)
[ ] C. Either P or ¬P


38. “If you are having problems with your phone, then call us at 617-­‐375-­‐0200.” This is an example of:
[ ] A. A declarative statement
[ ] B.   An inconsistent statement
[ ] C. An impertinent statement
[ ] D. A self-­‐defeating statement


39. Ronald Reagan, a critic of pro-­‐choice activists, once remarked, “The problem I have with all the pro-­‐choice arguments I’ve heard is that all the people asserting them have already been born.”

This is an example of:

[ ] A. A red herring
[ ] B. Ad hominem
[ ] C. Appeal to ignorance
[ ] D. Tu quoque


40. Asserting the strengths of deontology is [ ? ] for arguing that deontology is superior to consequentialism.

[ ] A. Necessary
[ ] B. Sufficient
[ ] C. Both necessary and sufficient
[ ] D. Neither necessary nor sufficient

41. Being 18 years of age or older is [ ? ] for being able to vote in federal elections.
[ ] A. Necessary
[ ] B. Sufficient
[ ] C. Both necessary and sufficient
[ ] D. Neither necessary nor sufficient

42. The moral justification of “everyone’s doing it” appears to commit the fallacy of: [ ] A. Ad hominem
[ ] B. Composition
[ ] C. Equivocation
[ ] D. Popularity


For questions 43 – 50, identify the theory that is best illustrated by the statements given. Each theory will appear only once as the correct answer.


[ ] A. Moral relativism
[ ] B. Ethical egoism
[ ] C. Act utilitarianism
[ ] D. Rule utilitarianism
[ ] E. Kantian ethics
[ ] F. Consequentialism
[ ] G. Rights based moral theory
[ ] H. Virtue ethics

43. The moral worth of an action is to be found entirely in the motive of the individual acting.


44. It is always unethical to violate a company’s code of ethics.


45. It is morally impermissible to deny an employee full enjoyment of his earned vacation time.


46. It is morally required to falsify financial information if that is the only way to save the company.

47. It is morally impermissible to falsify financial information if doing so is likely to result in jail time.


48. The right action is the one that is in accord with a consistent disposition to respond reasonably to our emotions under the given circumstances.


49. It is morally required that I vote, even when I will be late for dinner and cause great inconvenience to my family.


50. It is morally impermissible to lie because doing so diminishes human knowledge.


Part Two


1. Why is it seldom the case that a utilitarian will properly judge an act to be morally permissible? Is this one of the defects of the theory or one of its benefits for the businessperson?


2. Howard Gardner contrasts “good work” and “compromised work.” What exactly is being compromised? How is “compromised’ work different from merely “poor” work?


3. Many have argued that there is no practical difference between Kant’s categorical imperative and the theory of rule utilitarianism. But there is a significant theoretical difference. How are these theories different and how might those differences lead to contradictory moral judgments in the workplace?


4. Consider the major arguments offered by J. R. Lucas in The Responsibilities of a Businessman (Week 2). Would these be consistent or inconsistent with the views of the moral relativist? Give at least three reasons for your position.

Solution Preview

This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.

Part Two

1. Utilitarians can rarely judge acts as morally permissible, because in so many of the cases one arrives at such a judgment, it thereby follows, according to the doctrine, that many of the actions one must consequently take are at strong odds with common moral intuitions. For example, consider a scenario in which a surgeon has three very sick 18 year olds of extremely high intelligence, character, financial success, and any other number of desirable qualities and dispositions at hand other than their health. These teens need transplants to move on with their highly successful lives as normal, and are medically compatible with an old, retired, homeless man who has no job, savings, skills, attributes, or characteristics of any kind to contribute to himself and society. His extensive criminal record shows he often makes irresponsible, dangerous decisions compared to even the average human....

This is only a preview of the solution. Please use the purchase button to see the entire solution

Related Homework Solutions

Reasoning, Business Ethics and Decision Making
Homework Solution
$38.00
Philosophy
Ethics
Reasoning
Arguments
Deduction
Induction
Statements
Analogy
Sentences
Counterexample
Mill's Method of Difference
Mill's Method of Agreement
Mill's Method of Concomitant Variation
Premises
Relations
Get help from a qualified tutor
Live Chats