1. What is the aim of moral theory? What is a fundamental, fully general ethical principle? How can we distinguish the fundamental principle from a set of moral principles? How do... 1. What is the aim of moral theory? What is a fundamental, fully general ethical principle? How can we distinguish the fundamental principle from a set of moral principles? How do we derive particular moral judgements using fundamental moral principles? What is reflective equilibrium and how does it work? What is consequentialism? How does consequentialism relate to axiology? What is the difference between a normative principle and an axiological principle? What is the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value? What makes maximizing consequentialism attractive? What is utilitarianism? What is deontology? What is the difference between a moral rule and a right? Is a rights violation always morally worse than a mere moral violation? Why can’t deontology be consequentialist? What is a virtue? What is a character trait? What distinction would a virtue ethicist draw between being honest and being an honest person? What is eudemonist virtue ethics? 2. What is moral relativism? What is the difference between cultural relativism and subjectivism? Does moral relativism mean that each person should get to do what they want with their bodies? What are the two arguments we discussed in favor of moral relativism, and why do they fail? What is the tolerance objection to moral relativism? What is the big problem for moral relativism? What is the infallibility problem? The disagreement problem? 3. What is the view that we only have indirect duties to animals? What’s the difference between a direct and an indirect duty? What is the burden of proof for harms principle? How is that principle related to the view that we only have indirect duties to animals? What is the argument from marginal cases, and how is it related to the burden of proof for harms principle? What are the two things you need to know to use the argument from marginal cases to evaluate an attempt to satisfy the principle? What is the rationality defense of the indirect duties view? What is the problem of marginal cases for the indirect duties view? Which kinds of views will the argument be most effective against? What is Singer’s equal consideration argument? What does Singer mean by ‘equal consideration of equal interests’? Why does Singer think that equal consideration must mean equal consideration of equal interests? What are Singer’s views on our obligations to animals, and how does that relate to his views on vegetarianism and animal experimentation? Why does Singer think that speciesism is equally morally bad as racism, and how might one resist his view? What is the autonomy view of rights? What does Regan’s view have in common with the autonomy view of rights, and what does it have in common with Singer’s view? What is the tea cup argument? How does Regan use the case of Aunt Bea, and why is it a poor argument for his view? What is it to treat something as a mere means? What is Regan’s view? How is a rights view different from Singer’s view? Why might someone think animals are not ends in themselves? What is the first argument against the idea that animals have rights? What is the second argument? What are some troubling implications of the view that animals don’t have rights? Of the view that they do? Does denying the claim that animals do not have rights mean that they are not entitled to any consideration? 4. What is an argument from analogy? How do arguments from analogy work? What are the relevant respects in an argument from analogy relevant to? Why think animals are conscious? Extracting Cocomo from puppies is like what according to Norcross? What does Norcross think is the absurd thing that follows from the claim that factory farming is justified? When the conclusion of a valid argument is absurd or implausible, what does that mean for the argument’s premises? What is the relation between the absurdity of a conclusion and the plausibility of the premises? Does Norcross’ argument entail that we morally ought to be vegetarian? Vegan? Why or why not? Know the objections to Norcross’ argument from analogy and how Norcross responds. What does ‘the texan’ say in response to Norcross’ argument? How does that relate to the problem of marginal cases? What are the objections that we discussed to Norcross’ use of the problem of marginal cases, and how does Norcross respond? 5. What distinguishes asking about the ethics of hunting from asking about the ethics of vegetarianism? What is the dignity and respect argument and what are its weaknesses? What is the humans evolved to hunt argument and what are its weaknesses? What is the virtue argument and what are its weaknesses? What is the utilitarian argument and what are its weaknesses? What is the deontological argument and what are its weaknesses? 6. What is The Anthropocene, and what are some of its distinguishing features? What criteria can we use for evaluating whether we would be justified in designating this a new geological era, and calling it the Anthropocene? How does Angus think each of these criteria are satisfied? What is the argument for calling this era ‘The Anthropocene’? What are some objections to the argument, and how does Angus respond? What is Brannen’s “the Anthropocene is anthropocentric” objection, and what are some responses? What are the capitalocene objections, and what are some responses? Read more