Chapter 12 Self-Check Questions

* not completed

. You can evaluate the __________________ of a moral IBE using the skills for evaluating Arguments from Principle.

Principle Justification Sub-Argument correct incorrect

Principle Elaboration Sub-Argument correct incorrect

Principle Application Sub-Argument correct incorrect

* not completed

. To raise an objection to premise 1 of the Principle Justification Sub-Argument of a moral IBE, you must try to:

Show we shouldn't accept the author's judgment(s) about the paradigm cases. correct incorrect

Show that the author's proposed principle does not apply to the controversial target case. correct incorrect

Show that the author's proposed principle is subject to counterexamples. correct incorrect

Show that the author's proposed principle does not best explain why the paradigm cases have the moral status they do. correct incorrect

* not completed

. To raise an objection to premise 2 of the Principle Justification Sub-Argument of a moral IBE, you must try to:

Show we shouldn't accept the author's judgment(s) about the paradigm cases. correct incorrect

Show that the author's proposed principle does not apply to the controversial target case. correct incorrect

Show that the author's proposed principle is subject to counterexamples. correct incorrect

Show that the author's proposed principle does not best explain why the paradigm cases have the moral status they do. correct incorrect

* not completed

. To show that the author's proposed principle does not best explain the paradigm cases, you need to give an alternative explanation of the paradigm cases. In order to count as an objection to the argument, the explanation at minimum needs to [pick 2 options]:

Yield a principle that is consistent with the judgments about the paradigm cases. correct incorrect

Yield a principle that is inconsistent with the judgments about the paradigm cases. correct incorrect

Yield a principle that does not imply the same guidance about the controversial target case as the author's proposed principle. correct incorrect

Yield a principle that implies the same guidance about the controversial target case as the author's proposed principle. correct incorrect

* not completed

. When two opposing explanations are both consistent with the paradigm cases, a decisive strategy for deciding which is better is to:

Explain why we should reject one of the paradigm cases. correct incorrect

Identify a new paradigm case that is a counterexample for one paradigm case but not the other. correct incorrect

Figure out which one gives more intuitive guidance about the target case and choose the principle generated by that explanation. correct incorrect

Decide which principle is more commonly accepted. correct incorrect

* not completed

. In cases where you can't find a decisive new paradigm case to choose between two competing explanations, another strategy for determining which is better is to:

Figure out which one gives more intuitive guidance about the target case and choose the principle generated by that explanation. correct incorrect

Decide which principle is more commonly accepted. correct incorrect

Determine if one displays greater explanatory virtue than the other. correct incorrect

Abandon the moral IBE and instead try to identify an Argument from Analogy that can give us guidance on the target case. correct incorrect

* not completed

. Suppose that a moral IBE justifies and applies a principle P. In objection to the argument, a critic offers an alternative opposing principle Q. In order to succeed in undermining the argument, the critic needs to show that:

Principle P is better than Principle Q correct incorrect

Principle Q is better than Principle P. correct incorrect

Principle P is not better than Principle Q. correct incorrect

Principle Q is not better than Principle P. correct incorrect