Final Exam Review Sheet Philosophy 230, Spring Term 2003
The exam will take place from 10:30am – 1 pm on Monday, May 5th, in Textor 101.
The format of the exam is as follows: 10-15 true/false questions; 6-8 short answer questions; 2 case
summaries (from a choice of 3); 2 essay questions (answerable in around 5 sides of blue-book
pages), from a choice of 3 on the exam (see the end of this review sheet for sample essay questions).
Important Cases
Trisha Marshall, Marion Ploch, Tony Bland, Nancy Cruzan, Karen Quinlan, Dr. Shann’s dilemma,
Peggy Stinson’s puzzle, Baby Doe, the experience with euthanasia in the Netherlands, the Oregon
experience with physician assisted suicide, Dax Cowart, Dolly the sheep
The following are important concepts, positions, principles, objections, arguments, etc. that you
should review before the final.
A. Moral Principles
Nonmaleficence, benevolence, utility, autonomy ( + necessary conditions for autonomy), nature,
sanctity of human life. The Hippocratic Oath (content as well as criticism of it).
B. Paternalism and Patient Autonomy
Definition of paternalism, examples of paternalism, the disagreement between Cowart and Burt,
Drane’s three standards for informed consent, Gawande’s skepticism regarding the overriding
value of autonomy, reasons for withholding truth (patient’s inability to understand it, risk it will
inspire destructive behavior, the placebo effect), reasons against withholding the truth (respect
for autonomy, it is easy to underestimate the benefits of truth and overestimate benefits of
deception).
C. Defining Death + Organ Transplants
Cardiac-oriented definition of death, Harvard Brain Death Committee, Uniform Determination of
Death Act, whole-brain-oriented definition of death (reason for shift to this + problems with
this), higher-brain-oriented definition of death (+ strengths and weaknesses of this), Cohen’s
defense of a “presumed consent” system of organ donation.
D. Abortion
Prenatal development (zygote, blastocyst, embryo, fetus, syngamy, twinning, chimerism), the
main arguments against abortion and possible rebuttals of these, possible answers to the question
of when life begins, questions regarding the “adoption option,” Pope John Paul II’s sanctity of
life argument against abortion, Thomson’s violinist analogy and how this is used to support a
pro-choice argument based on the right to bodily control, the difference between unjust behavior
and indecent behavior, Marquis’s future-like-ours argument against abortion, Norman’s respect-
for-life account of the wrongness of killing (distinction between “being alive” and “living a
life”). (Note: Read too the handout “Decision Scenarios and Theories of Abortion” posted on
the coursepage in the “Handouts” section. This describes how I think Thomson, Marquis, and
Norman would reason about the abortion cases you discussed as part of the Moral Conversation
Project.)
E. Impaired Infants
Spina bifida, anencephaly, Down syndrome, Koop’s idea that non-treatment is OK only for the
“irretrievably dying,” arguments for selective non-treatment ( + Robertson’s rebuttals): the non-
person argument, the “life not worth living” argument (of which Weir’s “infant’s best interest”
standard for selective non-treatment is a version), the “cost to others” arguments,.
F. Euthanasia
Killing / letting die distinction (is it coherent? is it morally significant?), Rachels’s
Smith/Jones/bathtub thought experiment, Sullivan’s argument for the moral significance of the
kill/let die distinction, types of euthanasia (active/passive; voluntary/non-voluntary/involuntary;
other-administered/self-administered), Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act, Ashcroft’s challenge to
this, potential good effects of legalized euthanasia, potential bad effects (Brock’s rebuttals to
these + Callahan’s defense), Callahan against the self-determination argument
(alienable/inalienable right to life).
G. New/Old Ethics
Humans at the center of the ethical universe in old, threats to this view, “speciesism”, Singer’s
old/new ethical commandments.
H. Cloning / Stem Cell Research
The process of cloning (somatic cell nuclear research), germ cells vs. somatic cells, reproductive
vs. therapeautic/research cloning, arguments for reproductive cloning (the possible uses of it),
arguments against reproductive cloning (rights-based arguments + arguments alleging that
harms—personal, familial, societal—will result from it + arguments based on the alleged
unnaturalness of cloning), stem cells (definition of, source of, potential healing powers of),
therapeutic cloning’s advantage as regards tissue rejection, possible policy positions regarding
stem cell research/therapeutic cloning, arguments for and against it (Krauthammer vs. Lanza, et.
al.), President Bush’s federal funding decision, the President’s Council on Bioethics
recommendations regarding cloning.
Sample Essay Questions
Three of these questions will appear on the final exam. You will be required to answer two of
them. Be sure to answer all parts of the question. Answers are to be written in essay form (that
is, don’t just write a numbered list of short answers to the sub-questions).
1. One ethical question raised by severely impaired infants is this: In what cases are doctors
morally obliged to provide life-saving medical treatment to impaired infants, and in what cases
are they morally permitted to forgo life-saving medical treatment? We examined competing
answers to this question. Write an essay in which you (i) compare and contrast two of the
proposed answers to this question, and (ii) explain which of the two answers, in your judgment,
is the best (describe your reasons for thinking as you do).
2. Bioethicists distinguish, on the one hand, between (a) active and passive euthanasia, and on the
other hand, between (b) voluntary, involuntary, and non-voluntary euthanasia. (i) Write an
essay in which you explain these distinctions.
Much of the current debate concerns whether voluntary active euthanasia should be
legalized. (ii) Continue your essay by explaining what, in your judgment, are the two strongest
points in favor of legalizing voluntary active euthanasia, and the two strongest points against
legalizing voluntary active euthanasia. (iii) Conclude by explaining which side, in your
judgment, has the stronger case. Describe your reasons for thinking as you do.
3. Judith Jarvis Thomson argues in favor of the moral permissibility of early abortions. Don
Marquis argues against the moral permissibility of abortions of (healthy) fetuses at any stage of
pregnancy. Write an essay in which you (i) briefly explain the main ideas of their arguments;
(ii) note a possible strength and weakness of each argument; and (iii) conclude by explaining
which side in your judgment has the stronger case overall, and why.
4. Stem Cell research is recently in the news. It is often connected with the issue of human
cloning. Write an essay in which you (i) explain what stem cell research is and what relevance
cloning has to it; (ii) explain the U.S. government response has been so far regarding the issues
of stem-cell-research-related cloning and federal funding of stem cell research; (iii) evaluate the
government response, justifying your position.
5. Doctor X keeps secret from her patient the fact that he (the patient) will surely die within two
months from cancer; instead X tells her patient that with chemotherapy there is a decent chance
he may beat the disease. X defends this deception on the grounds that the patient will have a
happier final two months not knowing of his death sentence. Physical therapist Y keeps secret
from his patient the fact that there are only very slim odds of her walking without assistance
again; instead Y tells her that with hard work there is a good chance of complete recovery. Y
defends this deception on the grounds that the patient is likely to be very motivated by the hope
of a complete recovery, and so end up more able than she otherwise would have been.
Write an essay in which you evaluate the behavior of X and Y. What morally might be said
in favor of their actions? What morally might be said against their actions? In your judgment,
did either of them act in a morally acceptable fashion, all things considered? Why or why not?
(If you don’t think there is enough information to determine this, say what additional sorts of
information would be needed to determine this.)