Question Database: Ethics
Rights
Suppose you endorse the Sanctity of Life principle. In that case, which of the following types of killing must you reject as impermissible?
I. Executing a murderer as a form of punishment.
II. Inadvertently killing civilians during warfare.
III. Turning the run-away trolley to save the five.
A. I and II.
B. II only.
C. II and III.
D. III only.
Answer: D
Topic:
rights, sanctity of life
Course Level:
First year, intro. to philosophy.
Notes:
The Sanctity of Life principle referred to in this question is the following:
SANCTITY OF LIFE: It is always wrong knowingly to kill an innocent person.
Thomson's example of the drug and the sick child is an illustration of how rights need not be absolute constraints.
Which of the following hypotheses best explains what Thomson tells us about the drug example?
A. There are no valid property rights in essential medicines.
B. In situations of dire need, rights may be forfeited.
C. In situations of dire need, it might be permissible to infringe a right.
D. The example is inconclusive.
Answer: C
Topic:
rights, Thomson
Course Level:
First year, intro. to philosophy.
Notes:
Reference:
Thomson makes a distinction between infringing a right and violating a right.
INFRINGING Doing something which a person has a right that you not do.
VIOLATING An infringement which is unjustified (wrong, impermissible).
Thomson's example of the sick child is a case where it is justified to infringe a right. What is it that justifies the infringement?
A. The fact that the child will die if we do not take the drug.
B. The fact that the child's right to life is more stringent than the property right of my neighbour.
C. Both.
Answer: A
Topic:
rights, Thomson
Course Level:
First year, intro. to philosophy.
Notes:
From lecture:
Why is (B) not correct?
1. If the child dies, no right is infringed.
2. Justified infringement appeals to bad consequences, and need not refer to other rights.
Suppose one thinks that diverting the trolley is an excusable violation of the right to life. Which of the following statements are compatible with this view?
I. It is morally justified to turn the trolley.
II. It is permissible to turn the trolley.
III. We ought not to criticize those who turn trolleys.
A. I and II only
B. I and III only
C. II and III only
D. III only.
Answer: D
Topic:
Course Level:
First year, intro. to philosophy.
Notes:
Context from lecture slides:
Trolley seems to be a case where we can 'get around' the right to life. How could this be?
1. Gappy rights
2. Excusable violations
3. Justifiable infringements
Suppose that everyone has a liberty-right to clap their hands. I then promise you that I will never clap my hands. Which of the following is true:
I. I lose a liberty-right (the right to clap hands).
II. You obtain a claim-right (that I not clap hands).
A. I only.
B. II only.
C. I and II.
D. Neither.
Answer: C
Topic:
claim rights, liberty rights
Course Level:
First year, intro. to philosophy.
Notes:
Context from lecture:
"Normal' rights are claim-rights. Hobbesian rights are liberty-rights.
(C1) I have a claim-right means you have a duty to me.
(L1) I have a liberty-right means I am not under a duty.
Which of the following is true?
I. My having a liberty right involves my being free of a duty.
II. My having a liberty right involves you being under a duty to leave me alone.
A. I only
B. II only
C. I and II
D. Neither
Answer: A
Topic:
liberty rights
Course Level:
First year, intro. to philosophy.
Notes:
Suppose we find some unowned popcorn so no one appears to have any claim rights to the popcorn. I then promise to you that I won't eat that popcorn. Other things being equal, which of the following statements are true?
I. I have the liberty right to interfere with your eating the popcorn.
II. I now lack the liberty right to eat the popcorn.
A. I only
B. II only
C. I and II
D. Neither
Answer: C
Topic:
liberty rights
Course Level:
First year, intro. to philosophy.