Answer four (4) questions. All key terms, theories, and named objections must be explained. You have 1,500 words.
Please do not answer any option that is closely related to the topic of your final paper.
Answer one question from 1-2. (Desire Satisfactionism)
1. Explain Parfit's suggestion, in response to the "Stranger on the Train" objection, for how desire-satisfactionism should restrict the desires that count toward our welfare.
(This question does not ask for evaluation.)
2. Explain Overvold's suggestion, in response to the "Stranger on the Train" objection, for how desire-satisfactionism should restrict the desires that count toward our welfare. (See: Carson pp.74-5)
(This question does not ask for evaluation.)
Answer one question from 3-4. (Happiness)
3. Evaluate the claim that the prudentially good life just is the exemplary human life.
(This question requires evaluation.)
4. Sumner argues that well-being is authentic happiness. By happiness he means life-satisfaction. What is this? Is it summative or global? Evaluate the happiness component of Sumner's theory of well-being. For instance, you might ask if it gives too much weight to retrospective evaluation? Don't worry about the authenticity component of the theory.
(This question requires evaluation.)
Answer one question from 5-6. (Limits of Well-being)
5. Explain Kagan's argument for the claim that what is of ultimate benefit for a person must involve changes in the intrinsic properties of that person.
(This question does not ask for evaluation.)
6. It seems that if mental statism were correct, deception would be morally permissible as long as the deceived person doesn't find out. Kagan does not agree. Explain why. Hint: Kagan seems to reject welfarism.
(This question does not ask for evaluation.)
Answer one question from 7-8. (Meaning of Life)
7. Evaluate Wolf's claim that meaning arises when "subjective attraction meets objective attractiveness." Why does she think that fulfillment through active engagement is enough? Why do we have to be actively engaged in projects of objective worth? Why isn't merely thinking that our project are of worth sufficient? Alternatively, you might ask if Wolf's theory is vulnerable to objections from Absurdity?
(This question requires evaluation.)
8. Evaluate Taylor's theory of the meaning of life.
(This question requires evaluation.)
Note: In order to evaluate a theory, you must first explain the theory. When explaining a counter-example to a definition, you need to specify whether the example shows that a proposed condition is not necessary, not sufficient, or neither. If you are evaluating an argument, you need to build up the argument and then show where it might go wrong. To build up an argument, you must do more than merely offer a formalization. You must explain the argument. Typically, showing where an argument goes wrong will require arguing that one of the premises is false. Be sure to consider obvious, compelling replies to your objections. If you think an argument is good, then you will need to defend it against the strongest objections that you can think of.
Due Date
5/10/2009 (Sunday)
Length
The exam should be in total no more than 1,500 words. This is approximately 5 pages double-spaced with Arial 12 point font.
Format
The paper must be typed. It should be double spaced. It should have one inch margins. You should use a 12 point font. I prefer Arial, since it is easy to read. Please follow the general paper and exam instructions under the "course documents / writing" section on Blackboard.
Procedure
I do not need a hard copy. You must submit the paper through Safe Assign via Blackboard by 11:59 pm on the due date. Safe Assign is a plagiarism detection tool. It will compare your paper against others available online, in journals, submitted in this class, Temple, and from all other universities that use the software.
Note: Plagiarism will result in a failing grade in the class, not just on this assignment.
Grading:
Your paper should be clearly written, well-structured, and free of grammatical and spelling errors. It is practically impossible to get higher than a C if you start writing the night before the paper is due. The grading scale is as follows:
A = excellent
B = good
C = meets minimal expectations
D = bad
F = awful