Lecture (LEC)

• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inq

• TOPIC:Moral Theory and its Critics
• Formerly PHIL-P 140 Introduction to Ethics at IUB
• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inquiry credit

Consider ordinary, moral disagreements: you and I disagree about whether it's okay to eat meat, whether Jamie was disrespectful, whether Quincy is viciously self-centered, whether some outcome was just, or about whether the nurse is morally responsible. In such cases, we don't merely disagree -- we exchange reasons and defend our positions. To that extent, we regularly (perhaps implicitly) invoke and evaluate moral theory. Yet, some are skeptical about this practice: they argue that there are no objective moral truths about which to theorize, that moral theorizing is somehow undermined by science, or that it's too idealized. This course invites students 1) to critically examine such challenges to moral theorizing, 2) to carefully assess purported theories of rightness, value, respect, virtue, justice, and responsibility, 3) to build upon and challenge their own moral outlooks by borrowing and repurposing insights from these theories, and 4) to morally evaluate specific practices, including protest, punishment, and the eating of nonhuman animals. Emphasis is given to cultivating the widely applicable skills of constructing, presenting, developing, evaluating, and revising arguments.

Discussion (DIS)

• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inq

• Formerly PHIL-P 140 Introduction to Ethics at IUB
• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inquiry credit

Consider ordinary, moral disagreements: you and I disagree about whether it's okay to eat meat, whether Jamie was disrespectful, whether Quincy is viciously self-centered, whether some outcome was just, or about whether the nurse is morally responsible. In such cases, we don't merely disagree -- we exchange reasons and defend our positions. To that extent, we regularly (perhaps implicitly) invoke and evaluate moral theory. Yet, some are skeptical about this practice: they argue that there are no objective moral truths about which to theorize, that moral theorizing is somehow undermined by science, or that it's too idealized. This course invites students 1) to critically examine such challenges to moral theorizing, 2) to carefully assess purported theories of rightness, value, respect, virtue, justice, and responsibility, 3) to build upon and challenge their own moral outlooks by borrowing and repurposing insights from these theories, and 4) to morally evaluate specific practices, including protest, punishment, and the eating of nonhuman animals. Emphasis is given to cultivating the widely applicable skills of constructing, presenting, developing, evaluating, and revising arguments.

Discussion (DIS)

• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inq

• Formerly PHIL-P 140 Introduction to Ethics at IUB
• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inquiry credit

Consider ordinary, moral disagreements: you and I disagree about whether it's okay to eat meat, whether Jamie was disrespectful, whether Quincy is viciously self-centered, whether some outcome was just, or about whether the nurse is morally responsible. In such cases, we don't merely disagree -- we exchange reasons and defend our positions. To that extent, we regularly (perhaps implicitly) invoke and evaluate moral theory. Yet, some are skeptical about this practice: they argue that there are no objective moral truths about which to theorize, that moral theorizing is somehow undermined by science, or that it's too idealized. This course invites students 1) to critically examine such challenges to moral theorizing, 2) to carefully assess purported theories of rightness, value, respect, virtue, justice, and responsibility, 3) to build upon and challenge their own moral outlooks by borrowing and repurposing insights from these theories, and 4) to morally evaluate specific practices, including protest, punishment, and the eating of nonhuman animals. Emphasis is given to cultivating the widely applicable skills of constructing, presenting, developing, evaluating, and revising arguments.

Discussion (DIS)

• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inq

• Formerly PHIL-P 140 Introduction to Ethics at IUB
• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inquiry credit

Consider ordinary, moral disagreements: you and I disagree about whether it's okay to eat meat, whether Jamie was disrespectful, whether Quincy is viciously self-centered, whether some outcome was just, or about whether the nurse is morally responsible. In such cases, we don't merely disagree -- we exchange reasons and defend our positions. To that extent, we regularly (perhaps implicitly) invoke and evaluate moral theory. Yet, some are skeptical about this practice: they argue that there are no objective moral truths about which to theorize, that moral theorizing is somehow undermined by science, or that it's too idealized. This course invites students 1) to critically examine such challenges to moral theorizing, 2) to carefully assess purported theories of rightness, value, respect, virtue, justice, and responsibility, 3) to build upon and challenge their own moral outlooks by borrowing and repurposing insights from these theories, and 4) to morally evaluate specific practices, including protest, punishment, and the eating of nonhuman animals. Emphasis is given to cultivating the widely applicable skills of constructing, presenting, developing, evaluating, and revising arguments.

Discussion (DIS)

• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inq

• Formerly PHIL-P 140 Introduction to Ethics at IUB
• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inquiry credit

Consider ordinary, moral disagreements: you and I disagree about whether it's okay to eat meat, whether Jamie was disrespectful, whether Quincy is viciously self-centered, whether some outcome was just, or about whether the nurse is morally responsible. In such cases, we don't merely disagree -- we exchange reasons and defend our positions. To that extent, we regularly (perhaps implicitly) invoke and evaluate moral theory. Yet, some are skeptical about this practice: they argue that there are no objective moral truths about which to theorize, that moral theorizing is somehow undermined by science, or that it's too idealized. This course invites students 1) to critically examine such challenges to moral theorizing, 2) to carefully assess purported theories of rightness, value, respect, virtue, justice, and responsibility, 3) to build upon and challenge their own moral outlooks by borrowing and repurposing insights from these theories, and 4) to morally evaluate specific practices, including protest, punishment, and the eating of nonhuman animals. Emphasis is given to cultivating the widely applicable skills of constructing, presenting, developing, evaluating, and revising arguments.

Lecture (LEC)

• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inq

• Formerly PHIL-P 140 Introduction to Ethics at IUB
• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inquiry credit

This class will consider what fundamentally makes an act morally obligatory or morally wrong. Are there moral concerns that don't boil down to helping or hurting others (such as desert, equality, fairness, or dignity)? Am I equally responsible for what I do and what I allow to happen? Is there any kind of act that that it always wrong to do, regardless of context or consequences? Do we have moral obligations to all and only other human beings (do I have obligations to animals? to living things generally? to myself?). We will first look at some philosophical theories that try to give systematic answers to these questions, and then see how far such approaches help us with such difficult issues such as abortion, punishment, animal experimentation, torture, and reparations for past injustices.

Discussion (DIS)

• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inq
• IUB GenEd A&H credit

• Formerly PHIL-P 140 Introduction to Ethics at IUB
• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inquiry credit

This class will consider what fundamentally makes an act morally obligatory or morally wrong. Are there moral concerns that don't boil down to helping or hurting others (such as desert, equality, fairness, or dignity)? Am I equally responsible for what I do and what I allow to happen? Is there any kind of act that that it always wrong to do, regardless of context or consequences? Do we have moral obligations to all and only other human beings (do I have obligations to animals? to living things generally? to myself?). We will first look at some philosophical theories that try to give systematic answers to these questions, and then see how far such approaches help us with such difficult issues such as abortion, punishment, animal experimentation, torture, and reparations for past injustices.

Discussion (DIS)

• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inq

• Formerly PHIL-P 140 Introduction to Ethics at IUB
• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inquiry credit

This class will consider what fundamentally makes an act morally obligatory or morally wrong. Are there moral concerns that don't boil down to helping or hurting others (such as desert, equality, fairness, or dignity)? Am I equally responsible for what I do and what I allow to happen? Is there any kind of act that that it always wrong to do, regardless of context or consequences? Do we have moral obligations to all and only other human beings (do I have obligations to animals? to living things generally? to myself?). We will first look at some philosophical theories that try to give systematic answers to these questions, and then see how far such approaches help us with such difficult issues such as abortion, punishment, animal experimentation, torture, and reparations for past injustices.

Discussion (DIS)

• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inq
• IUB GenEd A&H credit

• Formerly PHIL-P 140 Introduction to Ethics at IUB
• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inquiry credit

This class will consider what fundamentally makes an act morally obligatory or morally wrong. Are there moral concerns that don't boil down to helping or hurting others (such as desert, equality, fairness, or dignity)? Am I equally responsible for what I do and what I allow to happen? Is there any kind of act that that it always wrong to do, regardless of context or consequences? Do we have moral obligations to all and only other human beings (do I have obligations to animals? to living things generally? to myself?). We will first look at some philosophical theories that try to give systematic answers to these questions, and then see how far such approaches help us with such difficult issues such as abortion, punishment, animal experimentation, torture, and reparations for past injustices.

Discussion (DIS)

• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inq
• IUB GenEd A&H credit

• Formerly PHIL-P 140 Introduction to Ethics at IUB
• IUB GenEd A&H credit
• COLL (CASE) A&H Breadth of Inquiry credit

This class will consider what fundamentally makes an act morally obligatory or morally wrong. Are there moral concerns that don't boil down to helping or hurting others (such as desert, equality, fairness, or dignity)? Am I equally responsible for what I do and what I allow to happen? Is there any kind of act that that it always wrong to do, regardless of context or consequences? Do we have moral obligations to all and only other human beings (do I have obligations to animals? to living things generally? to myself?). We will first look at some philosophical theories that try to give systematic answers to these questions, and then see how far such approaches help us with such difficult issues such as abortion, punishment, animal experimentation, torture, and reparations for past injustices.