Aaron Tan Reader CMP

8/14/2019 Aaron Tan Reader CMP

1/60

Contemporary Moral Problems: Chapter 1

Book Reviews Page 1

qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfgh

klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqweryuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas

dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio

pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty

uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc

Contemporary MoralProblems

Book Review

By Aaron James L. Tan

This work is licensed under a

Creative Commons Attribution-Non-commercial-Share Alike 3.0 Philippines License.


2/60


Book Reviews Page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTSPreface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

Dedication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

Contemporary Moral Problems

Egoism and Moral Scepticism by James Rachels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 01

Religion, Morality, and Conscience by John Arthur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 04

Master and Slave Morality by Friedrich Nietzsche . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 06

Trying Out Ones New Sound by Mary Midgley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 08

Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

The Debate over Utilitarianism by James Rachels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

The Categorical Imperative by Immanuel Kant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Happiness and Virtue by Aristotle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

The Nature and Value of Rights by Joel Feinberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Taking Rights Seriously by Ronald Dworkin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Theory of Justice by John Rawls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

The Need for More Than Justice by Annette Baier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26


3/60


Book Reviews Page 3

PREFACE

HI,

IVE WORKED HARD TO BE ABLE TO ACC OMPLISH THISACHIEVEMENT. THIS IS MY SECOND BOOK EVER AND IT INCLUDES

MY BOOK REVIEWS IN MY ITETHIC (INFORMATION TECHNOLOGYETHIC CLASS). IT TOOK TIME BEFORE I WAS ABLE TO MAKE IT. ISACRIFICED A LOT SO THAT I CO ULD BE ABLE TO DO THIS. YET ITWAS FUN.

NOW THAT HERE IT COMES AND THE END OF JOURNEY ISHERE. SEVEN WEEKS OF HARDSHIP IS DONE AND I FIND THIS AS ASUCCESSFUL GIFT.

I HOPE AS YOU READ THIS THAT YOUD LIKE IT AS THE WAY IDO.


4/60


Book Reviews Page 4

DEDICATION

I DEDICATE THIS TO MY

FAMILY,

FRIENDS,

AND PROFESSOR AND

TO GOD.


5/60


Book Reviews Page 5

Name of the book: Contemporary Moral Problems

Book Review Chapter: Chapter 1.1: Egoism and Moral Skepticism

Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/Contemporary-Moral-Problems-James-White/dp/0534584306/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1233793391&sr=8-1

Quote:

Our Ordinary Thinking about morality is full of assumption that we almost never question.

-James Rachels

Learning Expectation:

What I expect to learn from this chapter is who is James Rachel and what does he have todo with egoism and moral skepticism. I also want to know what moral skepticism is

Review:

The writer of this chapter, which is James Rachels, is a University Professor of Philosophy at the University of Alabama in Birmingham. He also wrote many books aboutphilosophy like The End of Life: Euthanasia and Morality in 1986, Created from Animals: TheMoral Implications of Darwinism in 1990, and the Elements of Moral Philosophy . He also

attacked the conventional Morality via psychological egoism and ethical egoism.

This chapter tackles what egoism and moral skepticism is. Egoism is now then divided intotwo parts, the psychological egoism and ethical egoism. Psychological egoism is somethingthat people do to other for them to get what they want. People who are like this thinks thatwhen they help other people they know that they get something in return as well and or inother words they will get personal gain when they do good things to other people.Meanwhile, Ethical egoism is something alike psychological egoism but it is not totally alike.Ethical egoism just like James Rachels said that it only endorses selfishness but it doesntendorse foolishness. This means that Ethical egoism can go only as far as going after whatone wants the most but still thinking of what is right and what is wrong.

Lessons Learned:

The chapter explained to me what the difference between psychological egoismwherein men is capable of doing selfish things that they only do help others for their self interest and ethical egoism is wherein it is the other way around in which man is indeedselfish but still do abide by the rules of ethics. It also explained to me what the differentmoral skepticism is.

Integrative Questions:

1. Who is James Rachels?


6/60


Book Reviews Page 6

2. What is Egoism?

3. What is Moral Scepticism?

4. What is psychological egoism?

5. What is Ethical egoism?

Review Questions:

1. Explain the legend of Gyges. What questions about morality are raised by thestory?

- Gyges of Lydia is a son of shepherds where in they are in service to the king of Lydia. Then one day an earthquake came and a cave was revealed. He enteredand saw a golden ring from a corpse and stole it. The ring had magical powerswhich he used to seduce the queen and kill the king.

- Is it right to steal from the dead? And is it right to kill your king at the sametime seduce the queen? It is right to use the power for you own interest?

2. Distinguish between psychological and ethical egoism.

- the difference between psychological egoism wherein men is capable of doingselfish things that they only do help others for their self interest and ethicalegoism is wherein it is the other way around in which man is indeed selfish butstill do abide by the rules of ethics

3. Rachels discusses two arguments for psychological egoism. What are thesearguments, and how does he reply to them?

- The first argument is that the agent is merely doing what he most wants to doand the second argument says that Since so-called unselfish actions alwaysproduce a sense of self-satisfaction in the agent where in the 2 nd argument ismuch better in a way that since it is consciously done and but is can only bringself interest to oneself more than to other while in the first argument is a selfishact since he does whatever he want to do.

4. What three commonplace confusions does Rachels detect in the thesis of psychological egoism?

- The first confusion is the confusion of selfishness with self interest. The secondconfusion is the assumption that every action is done either from self-interest orfrom other-regarding motives. And the third confusion is the common but falseassumption that a concern for ones own welfare is incompatible with anygenuine concern for the welfare of others.

5. State the arguments for saying that ethical egoism is inconsistent. Why doesntRachels accept this argument?


7/60


Book Reviews Page 7

- The argument is To say that any action or policy of action is right (or that itought to be adopted) entails that it is right for anyone in the same sort of circumstances.

- Rachels thinks that this argument would be unwarranted

6. According to Rachels, why shouldnt we hurt others, and why we should helpothers? How can egoist reply?

- This is because it is not right to harm other people. We must do good things toothers without thinking of that we will gain self interest. We must value thewelfare and interest of other people.

Discussion Questions:

1. Has Rachels answered the question raised by Glaucon, namely, Why be moral? If so, what exactly is his answer?

- No he did not answer the question of Galucon. He just stated that the majorityof mankind is grossly deceived about what is, or ought to be, the case, wheremorals are concerned wherein he just said that most of the people should beconcerned of being moral.

2. Are genuine egoists rare, as Rachels claims? Is it a fact that most people care aboutothers, even people they dont know?

- I do believe that genuine egoist is rare. I also believe that it is a fact that mostpeople care about other people even if they dont know especially in the Filipinomentality which is being hospitable.

3. Suppose we define ethical altruism as the view that one should always act for thebenefit of others and never in ones own self-interest. Is such a view immoral ornot?

- I believe that morality cannot be defined. Thus no matter how selfless the actis, it can still be moral or immoral depending on the situation or the reason forthe actions is.


8/60


Book Reviews Page 8


Book Review Chapter: Chapter 1.2: Religion, Morality, and Conscience

Amazon:


Quote:

One possible role which religion might play in morality relates to motives people have.

-John Arthur


What I expect to learn from this chapter is what the relationship between religion, moralityand conscience is.

Review:

The writer of this chapter is John Arthur. He was a leading figure in the field of applied philosophy in which philosophical research is applied to practical matters, such asmedical ethics and the environment. He also wrote many books such as A Hundred Years of Philosophy in 1957 which is his best work. He is also a professor of philosophy and directorof the Program in Philosophy, Politics and LAW AT Binghampton University.

It is about morality and comparing and relating it with both religion and conscience.Included also here is about the moral conscience and social moral code. Arthur alsodiscussed here about the religious motivation and guidance which tackles what can be thepossible roles of religion have to do with morality. Discussed also here in this chapter is theDivine Command Theory in which what is right are those that what God says or commandsand that others will not be right anymore. There is also a dialogue here concerning Socratesand Euthyphro wherein they talked about holiness.

Lessons Learned:

I have learned about the divine command theory and the relationship between thereligion and morality and at the same time the relationship between morality andconscience.


1. Who is John Arthur?2. What is Religion?3. What is Morality?4. What is Conscience?5. What is the relationship between Religion, morality and conscience?

Review Questions:

1. According to Arthur, how are morality and religion different?


9/60


Book Reviews Page 9

- Morality tells whether a person is right or wrong depending on ones conscienceor guilt. But for religion, what is right and what is wrong depends on the God ora supreme being that they worship for whatever that supreme being says is right.

2. Why isnt religion necessary for moral motivation?- You dont need to have a religion to know what the right and the wrong is. Your

conscience is enough to know whether or not an act is moral or immoral.

3. Why isnt religion necessary as a source of moral knowledge- Religion is not necessary as a source of moral knowledge since it is not really a

guide to morality; it only becomes one when we go to it for guidance and thelike.

4. What is the divine command theory? Why does Arthur reject this theory?- Divine Command Theory states that what is right are those that what God says

or commands and that others will not be right anymore. Aarthur rejects thistheory because whatever the Supreme Being doesnt command then it will bewrong which is wrong.

5. According to Arthur, how are morality and religion connected?- Religion influences people to do what is right and not do what is wrong. It helps

people to be moral as well. Through religion, morality is being improved in thepeople everywhere. It helps guide them to what is right and take them awayfrom what is wrong.

6. Dewey says that morality is social. What does this mean, according to Arthur?- Arthur explains morality is social in 4 ways. First is that the existence of

morality assumes that we possess a socially required language with in which we

think about our choices and alternatives we ought to follow. Another explanationis that morality is social in that it governs relationships among people, definingour responsibilities to others and us to theirs. The third explanation is thatmorality is social in a sense that we are, in fact, subject to criticism by others of our actions. The last explanation is that the idea depends on that appreciatingthe fact that to think from the moral point of view.


1. Has Arthur refuted the divine command theory? If not, how can it be defended?- He explained what he think why he does not support this theory because Arthur isagainst the theory.

2. If morality is social, as Dewey says, then how can we have any obligations tononhuman animals?- We should respect it.

3. What does Dewey mean by moral education? Does a college ethics class count asmoral education?- A moral education teaches us how to act morally in accordance to the common

law.


10/60


Book Reviews Page 10


Book Review Chapter: Chapter 1.3: Master and Slave Morality

Amazon:


Quote:

A last fundamental difference: the desire for freedom, the instinct for happiness and therefinements of the feeling of liberty belong as necessarly to slave morals and morality.

-Friedrich Nietzsche


What I expect to learn from this chapter is what the morality is in a master and slaverelationship. I also want to know whether or not the having a slave is moral.

Review:

The author of this chapter is Friedrich Nietzsche who is a German philosopher andpoet who is often viewed as a source of modern existentialism and deconstructionalism. Hehas worked on several books on philosophy as well such as The Birth of Tragedy in 1872 ,and Thus Spake Zarathustra in 1891. He says that a healthy society should allow superiorindividuals to exercise their will to power and dominate and exploit the inferior. The superiorperson follows a master-0 slave morality wherein it emphasizes power, strength, egoism,and freedom.

This part talks about the master and slave mentality in which the masters are thosepeople who are strong and powerful and the slaves are those who are not powerful, poor, orhas no freedom. It is stated in this chapter that all that is right and good is that of what isbeing done in by the superior beings or the higher beings and that all that is wrong is beingdone by slaves.

Lessons Learned:

I learned what master - slave morality is wherein what the superior is always correctand is inferior is always wrong.


1. Who is Friedrich Nietzsche?2. What is a master and Slave morality?3. Is there morality if you enslave someone?4. What is Corruption

Review Questions

1. How does Nietzsche characterize a good and healthy society?- The society allows superior individuals to exercise their will to power, their

drive toward domination and exploitation of the inferior.


11/60



2. What is Nietzsches view of injury, violence, and exploitation?- It leads us away from the sense of good moral conduct

3. Distinguish between master-morality and slave-morality.- Master morality is the value creator. Slave morality illustrates the virtue of

sympathy, kindness and humility.

4. Explain the Will to Power.- It is the will to life which can be achieved through creative activity.


1. Some people view Nietzsches writings as harmful and even dangerous. For example,some have charged Nietzsche with inspiring Nazism. Are these charges justified ornot? Why or why not?- Nietzsches only explained a healthy society with this master slave morality.

Exercising the will to power is a key to obtain one.

2. What does it mean to be a creator of value?- The one who knows that it is he himself only who confers honor on things


12/60




Book Review Chapter: Chapter 1.4: Trying Out Ones New Sword

Amazon:


Quote:

It is a fundamental belief of all aristocrats that the common people are unfaithful.

-Mary Midgley


What I expect to learn from this chapter is the meaning of trying out ones sword is and is itmoral to do such a thing.

Review:

The author of this chapter is Mary Midgley. She has taught philosophy at theUniversity of Newcastle-upon-Tyne in England for twenty years bit is retired now. She has

also made different books like the cluding Anumals and Why They Matter in 1984, Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature in 1995, Cant We Make Moral Judgments? in 1993,Science and Poetry in 2001 and many more.

The chapter talks about moral isolationism which is about the view of anthropologistsand other that we cannot criticize cultures that we do not understand. She says that it is adoctrine of immoralism and that it forbids any moral reasoning. It is assumed that culturesare separate and unmixed wherein it is the other way around and that it is formed out of many influences.

Lessons Learned:

I learned the meaning of trying out ones new sword is and I also learned about themoral isolationism which is about cultures and that we should not criticize other culturesthat are apart from ours.


1. Who is Mary Midgley?

2. What does it mean to try out ones sword?

3. Is it right to try out ones sword?


13/60



4. What is moral isolationism?

5. What is tsujigiri?

Review Questions:

1. What is moral isolationism?- It is a view of anthropologists and other that we cannot criticize cultures that

we do not understand.- that it is a doctrine of immoralism and that it forbids any moral reasoning

2. Explain the Japanese customer of tsujigiri. What questions does Midgley ask aboutthis custom?- It is a practice wherein Japanese samurais try out their new swords on a chance

wayfarer.- It is quite immoral and that a little bit cruel towards other people but since it is

the culture of Japanese samurais then they do believe that it is moral to do it

3. What is wrong with moral isolationism, according to Midgley?- Moral Isolationalism forbids any moral reasoning since it assumes that cultures

are separate and unmixed.

4. What does Midgley think is the basis for criticizing other cultures?- The basis for criticizing other cultures is that if that culture defies good moral

teachings.


1. Midgley says that Nietzsche is an immoralist. Is that an accurate and fair assessmentof Nietzsche? Why or why not?- It is not a fair assessment on the part of Nietzshe since he also has his own idea

on what is ethical or not but in someways it is indeed immoral based on mymorals since I believe that all people are equal and that no one is above usexcept a supreme being.

2. Do you agree with Midgleys claim that the idea of separate and unmixed cultures isunreal? Explain your answer.- Yes, because there are still cultures out there that we do no t know of and that

we can everywhere that culture is one of the reason for racial discrimination.


14/60




Book Review Chapter: Chapter 1.5: Utilitarianism

Amazon:


Quote:

What was once desired as an instrument for the attainment of happiness, has come to bedesired for its own sake.

-John Stuart Mill


What I expect to learn from this chapter is the meaning of Utilitarianism. I also want toknow Utilitarianism has to do with morality.

Review:

The writer of this part of the chapter is John Stuart Mill. He lived from 1806 up to1873. He is considered as one of the most important and influential British philosophers. Hehas also made different books about ethics such as On Liberty in 1859 and Utilitarianism in1861 which is the topic for this chapter. Mill has set forth the basic principle of utilitarianism, and at the same time the principle of utility or the greatest happinessprinciple and also the hedonistic principle that states that happiness is pleasure.

Mill explains the theory here by replying to different objections and proves theprinciple of Utility. It is discussed in this part about the epicureans and the doctrine of swine. It is also included in this part a discussion about on how to attain happiness.

Lessons Learned:

I learned the meaning of Utilitarianism is and at the same time the principle of Utility. I also learned about the epicureans and the doctrine of swine.


1. Who is John Stuart Mill?2. What is Epicureanism?3. What is utilitarianism?4. What is the principle of utility?5. How can you attain happiness?

Review Questions:

1. State and explain the Principle of Utility. Show how it could be used to justify actionsthat are conventionally viewed as wrong, such as lying and stealing.- The principle of Utility states that what we want most or the reason for our

existence is to be far from pain or to stay away from pain for us to be happy.Thus being happy is the sign of have morals. If you steal and lie and if it only


15/60



brings harm at sadness to other than it will go back to oneself and then will beunhappy as well.

2. How does Mill reply to the objection that Epicureanism is a doctrine worthy only of swine?- He said that if the sources of pleasure of people and a swine are the same then

the rule of life is good enough for the one would be good enough for the other.The Epicurean life which is being compared to a beast is demeaning because thepleasure that an animal or a beast gets is different or is not the same as of to thehappiness or pleasure of people.

3. How does Mill distinguish between higher and lower pleasures?- It is stated here that a being of higher faculties requires more to make him

happy, is capable probably of more acute suffering, and certainly accessible to itat more point than one of an inferior type which means that the higher youbecome the higher or harder it is to attain pleasure.

4. According to Mill, whose happiness must be considered?- A utilitarian standard is not the agents own greatest happiness, but the

greatest happiness altogether which means that we should only consider thehappiness of all the people. If even a single person is not happy with it thencannot become happiness.

5. Carefully reconstruct Mills proof of the Principle of Utility.


1. Is happiness nothing more than pleasure, and the absence of pain? What do you

think?- No, I do believe that you can attain happiness from other sources as well suchas love.

2. Does Mill convince you that the so-called higher pleasures are better than the lowerones?- No, since no matter what, pleasure can only be self bound. Pleasure for others

may not be the same as for the pleasure for one self.

3. Mill says, In the golden rule of Jesus of Nazareth, we read the complete spirit of theethics of utility. Is this true or not?- Not.

4. Many commentators have thought that Mills proof of the Principle of Utility isdefective. Do you agree? If so, then what mistake or mistakes does he make? Isthere any way to reformulate the proof so that it is not defective?- Mill's principle of utility is okay


16/60




Book Review Chapter: Chapter 1.6: The Debate over Utilitarianism

Amazon:


Quote:

Actions are to be judged right or wrong solely in virtue of their consequences. Nothing else

matters.

-James Rachels


What I expect to learn from this chapter are the debates regarding Utilitarianism. I alsowant to know why there are even debates regarding Utilitarianism. I want to know if thereare really false information about Utilitarianism that it has to be debated.

Review:

The writer of this chapter, which is James Rachels, is a University Professor of Philosophy at the University of Alabama in Birmingham. He also wrote many books aboutphilosophy like The End of Life: Euthanasia and Morality in 1986, Created from Animals: TheMoral Implications of Darwinism in 1990, and the Elements of Moral Philosophy .

In this part of the chapter, he discusses about utilitarianism and at the same timesome debates regarding it. He says here that he thinks that utilitarianism is correct in tellingpeople what to consider in a consequence of actions but it is still incorrect since it ignoresother important moral considerations as well. This chapter also discusses the classicalutilitarianism and that it is being defended by Bentham and Mill which can be summarized into three propositions. This chapter also answers the question is happiness andconsequences the only things that matter? Thus in defense to Utilitarianism, they put upthree line of defense. It is also discussed here what is correct and is not in utilitarianism.

Lessons Learned:

I learned the in this part of the chapter the meaning of classical utilitarianism. I alsolearned about the debate between the two sides of Utilitarianism and I understood somepoint about what is correct and incorrect in utilitarianism.


1. Who is James Rachel?


17/60



2. What is Classical Utilitarianism?

3. What is utilitarianism?

4. Who is Bentham?

5. Is happiness the only thing that matters?

Review Questions:

1. Rachels says that classical utilitarianism can be summed up in three propositions.What are they?- Actions are judged right or wrong solely in virtue of their consequences- In assessing consequences, the only thing that matters is the amount of

happiness or unhappiness that caused.- In calculating happiness or unhappiness that will be caused, no ones happiness

is to be counted as more important than anyone else.

2. Explain the problem with hedonism. How do defenders of utilitarianism respond tothis problem?- Hedonism is the philosophy in which pleasure is the most important thing in the

world.- We must be able to utilize all our resources and do good things to other people

for us to be happy.

3. What are the objections about justice, rights, and promises?- The objection about justice is about unfair justice while the objection about

rights is that rights are not being followed or enforced. And lastly the objectionfor promises is that promises are always broken.

4. Distinguish between rule- and act- utilitarianism. How does rule-utilitarianism replyto the objections?- Rule utilitarianism is a form of utilitarianism which states that moral actions are

those which conform to the rules which lead to the greatest good.- Act utilitarianism is a utilitarian theory of ethics which states that the right

action is the one which produces the greatest amount of happiness or pleasurefor the greatest number of people.

5. What is the third line of defense?

- The 3rd

line of defense is called Act-Utilitarianism.


1. Smarts defense of utilitarianism is to reject common moral beliefs when they conflictwith utilitarianism. Is this acceptable to you or not? Explain your answer- No it is not acceptable for we to have our own morals and at the same time our

culture and customsto follow

2. A utilitarian is supposed to give moral consideration to all concerned. Who must beconsidered? What about nonhuman animals? How about lakes and streams?


18/60



- The one who should be considered are those people in the streets who aredoing immoral things.

3. Rachels claims that merit should be given moral consideration independent of utility.Do you agree?-Yes, I agree


19/60




Book Review Chapter: Chapter 1.7: The Categorical Imperative

Amazon:


Quote:

Power, wealth, honor, even health and that complete well-being and contentment withones state which goes by the name of happiness produce boldness...

-Immanuel Kant


What I expect to learn from this chapter is the meaning of Categorical Imperative and whatare some of the examples for Categorical Imperative.

Review:

The writer of this chapter of the book is Immanuel Kant. He is a Germanphilosopher who is considered as one if the most important philosophers of all time. He hascontributed to philosophy in many different ways and that he has already made differentbooks regarding philosophy such as the Critique of Pure Reason, Prolegomena to All FutureMetaphysics, Critique of Practical Reason, Critique of Judgment, and the Metaphysics of Morals.

In this chapter Kant discusses good will and the results that you can get in doinggood will. It is stated here that good will is not good because of what you can accomplishbut it is good just for its willing alone. The eagerness to do well is what that makes it good.Kant also discusses here the relationship of Good will to duty that states that helping otherif we are able to help them is our duty and at the same time, we must not think of self interest whenever we do help other people. Kant also discusses here about the CategoricalImperative and that he compared it hypothetical imperative. He said the in a hypotheticalimperative you cannot or you not be able to know what will contain or what will happenedbut if you imagine something in an categorical imperative way then you will be able to knowimmediately what it contains for it only contains what are those that are necessary. Thus,he said that there is only one categorical imperative which is Act only on that Maximthrough which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. He saidthat all imperatives of duty should be guided by this quote. Lastly, Kant also discusses heresome duties such as duties towards self, duties towards other and perfect and imperfectduties.

Lessons Learned:

I learned in this chapter the meaning of categorical imperative is and at the sametime the meaning of hypothetical imperative is. I also learned on this chapter what youmean by good will and its effects or results and also the duties as well.



20/60



1. Who is Immanuel Kant ?2. What is Categorical Imperative?3. What do you mean by good will?4. What is hypothetical imperative?5. What are some of the duties, towards self duties towards others and perfect and

imperfect duties.

Review Questions:

1. Explain Kants account of the good will.- It is impossible to conceive anything at all in the world or even out if it, which

can be taken as good without qualification, except goodwill

2. Distinguish between hypothetical and categorical imperatives.- Hypothetical imperative requires a certain action is a given situation while a

categorical imperative you should do what you must or need to do.

3. State the first formulation of the categorical imperative (using the notion of auniverse law), and explain how Kant uses this rule to derive some specific dutiestoward self and others.- Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it

should become a universal law

4. State the second version of the categorical imperative (using the language of meansand ends). And explain it.- The end justifies the mean

Discussion Questions: 1. Are the two versions of the categorical imperative just different expressions of one

basic rule, or are they tow different rules? Defend your view.- It shares the same concept, the concept of good will.

2. Kant claims that an action that is not done from the motive of duty has no moralworth. Do you agree or not? If not, give some counterexamples.- It is common for us to do things that are not are duty and I believe that we

dont consider these things immoral.

3. Some commentators think that the categorical imperative (particularly the firstformulation) can be used to justify nonmoral actions. Is this a good criticism?- Yes


21/60




Book Review Chapter: Chapter 1.8: Happiness and Virtue

Amazon:


Quote:

Each man judges the things he knows, and of these he is a good judge.

-Aristotle


What I expect to learn from this chapter is the meaning of happiness and virtue. And also Iwant to know how to attain happiness and the relationship between happiness and virtue.

Review:

The author of this chapter is Aristotle. He has already made many importantcontributions to all areas of philosophy and the formulation of traditional logic. He is also

known as 1 of the founders of the Western Philosophy together with Plato.

This chapter of the book discusses happiness and virtue. It is stated here thathappiness is what all people want to achieve. But happiness cannot be related withpleasure, honor or wealth but instead it is an action from the soul that is done according tovirtue. This is true since there are many people out there that are rich and powerful and yetthey still long for something. They still believe that they still to do something sincesomething is not complete in them. They are not happy. But in order to be happy they needto know about virtue first. There are two kinds of virtue, the intellectual virtue and themoral virtue. Moral virtue is a virtue that comes from training and habit and that it generallystates in a character that it is a mean between the excess and deficiency. An example givenhere is that of the virtue of courage where in the extremes are the rashness which is theexcess and cowardice which is the deficiency. While intellectual virtue is able to produce themost perfect happiness and can only be found in an activity of reason or meditation.

Lessons Learned:

I learned how to differentiate what is good and what is wrong depending on thetheory of Aristotle which is what the means is that is correct and what the extremes is thatwhat is wrong.


1. Who is Aristotle?


22/60



2. What is the mean?

3. What are the extremes?

4. How can you know if something is morally good in Aristotles theory?

5. What is Virtue?

Review Questions

1. What is happiness according to Aristotle? How is it related to virtue? How is itrelated to pleasure?

- Happiness according to Aristotle is not pleasure, honor or wealth but an activityof the soul in accordance with virtue. The relation of happiness and virtue is thatyou can only attain happiness if you act in sync with virtue. For most people,they can find happiness through pleasure and others

2. . How does Aristotle explain moral virtue? Give some examples.

- Moral Virtue comes from training and habit and generally is a state of characterthat is mean between the vices of excess and deficiency. An example given inthis reading material is that courage which is said here is the means betweenrashness and cowardice where in rashness is the excess and cowardice is thedeficiency. Another example that I can think of is Love. It is the means betweenobsession, the excess, and insensitivity, the deficiency.

3. Is it possible for everyone in our society to be happy, as Aristotle explains it? If not,who cannot be happy?

- According to the explanation of happiness by Aristotle, then not everyone insociety can be happy. It is said here that boys cannot be happy for they cannotact in accordance with virtue.


1. Aristotle characterizes a life of pleasure as suitable for beasts. But what, if anything, is wrong with a life of pleasure?

- It is said here that it you live a life of pleasure then youll see and identify goodand happiness as pleasure. What is wrong in this is that if you live like that thenyou are acting as if in just plain instinct and you wont know what you wantanymore as if you are not thinking anymore which is what a beast or an animalis. The reason why we are living and the difference between us and beasts is thatwe are able to think. If you take that away then we are no different to a plainmonkey. And of course we dont want that.

2. Aristotle claims that the philosopher will be happier than anyone else. Why is this?Do you agree or not?


23/60



- He said that philosophers will be happier than anyone else for they are able tothink and live in the means. They are able to think rationally and they know howhuman act so they are able to think in accordance with virtue. They themselvesare able to live in a contemplative life. I dont believe that they will be happierthan anyone else for as long one is able to live a contemplative life and able tothink and act in accordance with virtue then you will be happy. It is just thatphilosophers are able to do those things much quicker and easier.


24/60




Book Review Chapter: Chapter 1.9: The Nature and Value of Rights

Amazon:


Quote:

A master or lord was under no obligation to reward his for especially good service.

-Joel Feinberg


What I expect to learn from this chapter is the nature and value of rights. I also want toknow how Joel Feinberg is related to this theory.

Review:

The writer of this chapter is Joel Feinberg who is a professor at the University of Arizona. He is the author of different books related to philosophy like the Doing and Deserving in 1970, Social Philosophy in 1973, the Moral Limits of the Criminal Law in 1984-1989 in four volumes, and Freedom and Fulfillment in 1994.

In this chapter, Feinberg discusses that rights are morally important. He also

discuses here the idea of Nowheresville which is a world just like ours but people does nothave rights. People in this world cannot make moral claims they are treated unjustly. Theycannot demand or claim just treatment, and so they are deprived of self-respect and humandignity. He also discussed in this chapter the doctrine of the logical correlativity of rightsand duties. Also included in this chapter is the concept of personal desert and the notion of a sovereign right monopoly. He also discussed here are the different claim rights. He alsodiscussed the nature and value of rights wherein rights are those that we can do or mustdo.

Lessons Learned:

I learned in this chapter are the concepts of Nowheresville, the concept of personaldesert, the notion of a sovereign right monopoly and the nature and right and value of rights.


1. Who is Joel Feinberg ?2. What is Nowheresville?3. What is the doctrine of the logical correlativity of rights and duties?4. What is the concept of personal desert5. What is the notion of a sovereign right monopoly?

Review Questions:

1. Describe Nowheresville. How is this world different from our world?


25/60



- Nowheresville is a world like our own except that people do not have rightswhile in ours we can.

2. Explain the doctrine of the logical correlativity of right and duties. What is Feinbergsposition on this doctrine?- All duties entail other peoples rights

- All rights entail other peoples duties

3. How does Feinberg explain the concept of personal desert? How would personaldesert work in Nowheresville?- Personal Desert means when a person deserves something good from us what

is meant in parts is that there would be a certain proprietary in our giving thatgood thing to him in virtue of the kind of person he is.

4. Explain the notion of a sovereign right-monopoly. How would this work inNowheresville according to Feinberg?- Introducing rights of a sort into Nowheresville, but they are not personal rights.

The sovereign has a monopoly on all rights

5. What are claim-rights? Why does Feinberg think they are morally important?- Right is a kind of claim, and claim is an assertion of rights.

Discussion Questions: 1. Does Feinberg make a convincing case for the importance of rights? Why or why not?

- Yes

2. Can you give a noncircular definition of claim-right?

- No


26/60




Book Review Chapter: Chapter 1.10: Taking Rights Seriously

Amazon:


Quote:

The constitution fuse legal and moral issues by making validity of a law depend on theanswer to complex moral problems

-Ronald Dworkin


What I expect to learn from this chapter is what are the different rights that we shouldcarefully know of and that why we should take them seriously.

Review:

The writer of this book is Ronald Dworkin who is a University professor of Jurisprudence, Oxford University and professor of law, New York University. He has alreadyworked and published on many books such as the A Matter of Principle in 1985,LawsEmpire in 1986, A bill of Rights for Britainin 1990, Freedoms Law: The Moral Readingof the American Constitution in 1997, Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice Equality in2000 and Taking Rights Seriously in 1978 .

Dworkin discussed here some of the rights that we should know and acknowledge.He said here that people have the right to do something and that other people has no rightto interfere what that person want to do. For example is if one wants to learn and listen tothe professors lecture then the one seated near him has no right to disturb him/ her fromlistening to the lecture. The idea of Dworkin came from the Kantian idea in which you musttreat people with dignity since he or she is a member of the moral community. Also includedin this chapter is a discussion about the right of citizens in which philosophers believe herethat citizens have rights apart from the law gives them. He also discusses here the right tobreak the law. When I first heard of this I was shocked since I never thought there would beright that you can break the law. He also discusses here why we should take rightsseriously.

Lessons Learned:

What I learned in this chapter are the rights should be taken seriously and thatrights are very important and that they should be remembered and acknowledged.


1. Who is Ronald Dworkin ?2. How can you take rights seriously?3. Why should we take right seriously?4. What are our rights?


27/60



5. What rights should be take seriously?

Review Questions:

1. What does Dworkin mean by right in the strong sense? What rights in this sense areprotected by the U.S. Constitution?- If a people have the right to do something, then it is wrong to interfere with them.

2. Distinguish between legal and moral right. Give some example of legal rights thatare not moral right, and moral right that are not legal rights.- Legal right is the right of a citizen protected by a constitution. Moral right is

right of a person according to his morality and conscience.

3. What are the two models of how a government might define the rights of its citizens?Which does Dworkin find more attractive?- The first model recommends striking a balance between rights of the individual

and the demands of society

- The second one is that the government inflates a right.

4. According to Dworkin, what two important ideas are behind the institution or rights?- Act of faith by the Majorities and Minorities

Discussion Questions: 1. Does a person have a right to break the law? Why or why not?

- It depends on how are we going to exercise our rights

2. Are rights in the strong sense compatible with Mills utilitarianism?- yes

3. Do you think that Kant would accept right in the strong sense or not?- no


28/60




Book Review Chapter: Chapter 1.11: A Theory of Justice

Amazon:


Quote:

Injustice, then, is simply inequalities that are not to the benefit of all .

-John Rawls


What I expect to learn from this chapter is what the theory of justice is and what justice is.I also want to know of the theory of justice is being followed in out everyday lives.

Review:

The writer of this chapter is John Rawls. He is a professor of philosophy at HarvardUniversity. He is also the author of many philosophical books like Justice As Fairness: ARestatement in 2001 and The Law of Peoples in 2001 as well and A Theory of Justice in1971.

In this chapter, Rawls explains and discusses the theory of Justice. He discusses here

what justice is about. He said here that there are two principles of Justice. The first principleis about equal basic liberty and the second principle is about the arrangements of social andeconomic inequalities. These principles are said to free and rationalize people and that theycan accept the hypothetical position. He also discusses here the two principle of Justice. Thefirst principle applies to the basic structure of the society and it is tasked to govern theassignment of rights and duties and to regulate the distribution of social and economicadvantages. While the second principle, applies to the distribution of income and wealth andto the design of organizations that make use of differences in authority, responsibility andchains of command.

Lessons Learned:

What I learned from this chapter is the concept of justice. At the same time I alsolearned about the theory of justice by John Rawls and that there are two principlesconcerned in justice in which the 1 st states that all people have the equal right to basicliberty and that the 2 nd principle insists that each person can benefit from tolerableinequalities in the basic structure.


1. Who is John Rawls ?2. What is the theory of Justice?

Review Questions:

1. Carefully explain Rawlss conception of the original position.


29/60



- No one knows his position in the society.2. State and explain Rawlss first principle of justice.

- - Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic libertycompatible with a similar liberty for others

3. State and explain the second principle. Which principle has priority such that itcannot be sacrificed?- Reasonably expected to be to everyones advantage

- Attached to positions and offices open to all.

Discussion Questions: 1. On the first principle, each person has an equal right to the most extensive basic

liberty as long as this does not interfere with a similar liberty for others. What doesthis allow people to do? Does it mean, for example, that people have right to engagein homosexual activities as long as they dont interfere with others? Can peopleproduce and view pornography if it does not restrict anyones freedom? Are peopleallowed to take drugs in the privacy of their homes?- we can exercise the equality of our right

2. Is it possible for free and rational persons in the original position to agree upondifferent principles than give by Rawls? For example, why wouldnt they agree to anequal distribution of wealth and income rather than an unequal distribution? That is,why wouldnt they adopt socialism rather than capitalism? Isnt socialism just asrational as capitalism?- Yes


30/60




Book Review Chapter: Chapter 1.12: The Need for More Than Justice

Amazon:


Quote:

What we need now is a marriage of the old male and the newly articulate female insights.

- Gilligan Learning Expectation:

What I expect to learn from this chapter is the reason for why there is a need for more than justice. And I want to know also what those that are needed are.

Review:

The writer of this chapter IS Annette C. Baier. She teaches philosophy at theUniversity of Pittsburg. She has also written different materials regarding philosophy suchas A Progress of Sentiments: Reflection on Humes Treatise in 1991 and Moral Prejudices:Essays on Ethics in 1995.

What Baier does is that she differentiates between justice perspective of philosophersand the care perspective in which Giligan found in her studies of the moral development of women. She has here an argument that justice perspectives itself is inadequate as a moraltheory. This is because it overlooks inequalities between people. She said that it has anunrealistic view of freedom of freedom of choice, and that it also ignores the importance of moral emotions like love. She said here that the best moral theory is the one thatharmonizes or is able to put together both justice and care. He also discusses here threereasons why women have not to be content to pursue their own values within theframework of the liberal morality. The first is the dubious records or doubtful records. Thesecond is its inattention to relations of inequality and the third is its exaggeration of thescope of choice, or its inattention to unchosen relations. She distinguishes here thedifference between justice and care perspective. She also mentioned here the Kohlbergtheory of moral development in which was criticized by Gilligan and Baier.

Lessons Learned:

What I learned from this chapter is the need for more than a justice. I also learnedhere the difference between justice and care perspective and I also learned who Gilligan is.


1. Who is Annette C. Baier ?2. Why is there a need for more justice?3. What is Justice?

Review Questions:


31/60



1. Distinguish between the justice and care perspectives. According to Gilligan, how dothese perspectives develop?- Gilligan claims that woman are most unlikely to take only justice perspective, sincethe care perspective is a womens natural role

2. Explain Kohlbergs theory of moral development. What criticisms do Gilligan andBaier make of this theory?- Kohlbergs version of moral maturity did not seem shared by many young men

3. Baier says there are three important differences between Kantian liberals and theircritics. What are these differences?- The relative weight put on relationships between equal

- The relative weight put on freedom of choice

- The authority of intellect over emotions

4. Why does Baier attack the Kantian view that the reason should control unrulypassions?- we should never forget the facts of history

Discussion Questions: 1. What does Baier mean when she speaks of the need to transvalue the values of our

patriarchal past? Do new values replace the old ones? If so, then do we abandonthe old values of justice, freedom, and right?- improving our values.

2. What is wrong with the Kantian view that extends equal rights to all rational beings,including women and minorities? What would Baier say? What do you think?- There is nothing wrong with the Kantians view.

3. Baier seems to reject the Kantian emphasis on freedom of choice. Granted, we donot choose our parent, but still dont we have freedom of choice about many things,and isnt this very important?- Freedom of choice is important


32/60



USE

CASE

(EXISTING)


33/60




34/60



Identification Summary (mandatory)

Title: Apply for Copyright

Summary: This use case shows how the person applies for the copyright of a published or anunpublished work.

Actors: Applicant Copyright Officer

Creation Date: February 28, 2009

Version: 01

Date Update:

Person in Charge:

Copyright officer

Flow of Events (mandatory)

Preconditions:

1. The applicant must go first to the National Library to go to the copyright office to get a form

2. The applicant can also go online and get an application form and download it to get a form.

3. The applicant has something to copyright.

Main Success Scenario:

1. The applicant has successfully filled up all the fields in the form and is ready to besubmitted for processing.

Alternative Sequences:

1. The applicant can reapply again if there is something wrong on the process. 2. The office where application form can be get is closed.

Error Sequences:

1. The applicant misspelled on the form. 2. The applicant wasnt able to produce enough copies of the application form.

Post Conditions:

1. The applicant will be able to apply to copyright his or her work.


35/60




Title: Notarize Application Form

Summary: This use case shows how the applicant notarizes his/her application form to completethe requirements

Actors: Copyright officer & Applicant


Version: 1

Date Update:

Person in Charge:

Applicant


Preconditions:

1. Look for a notary public.


1. The form has been complete notarized and signed by the attorney.2. The applicant has paid the attorney of all his or her bills for the service.


1. NA

Error Sequences:

1. The Stamp has no ink.

Post Conditions:

1. The form is ready to be submitted.


36/60




Title: Pay Application Free

Summary: This use case shows how the applicant pays the fee for the copyright to beaccomplished.

Actors: Applicant, Cashier


Version: 01

Date Update:

Person in Charge:

Cashier


Preconditions:

1. The applicant should have enough money 2. The applicant should go to the Cashier office to pay.


1. The applicant has completely paid his or her bills.

2. The cashier has given the receipt.


1. The cashier has return back the change to the applicant

Error Sequences:

1. The cashier has no change for the applicant.

Post Conditions:

1. The application fee has been paid.


37/60




Title: Get Stamp

Summary: This use case shows how the gets the stamp that is needed by the

Actors: Applicant and Stamp seller


Version: 01

Date Update:

Person in Charge:

Stamp seller


Preconditions:

1. The applicant should go to the cafeteria.2. The applicant should have enough money to pay for the stamp.


1. The applicant has paid the stamp. 2. The seller has given the stamp to the applicant.


1. NA

Error Sequences:

1. There is no stamp available.

Post Conditions:

1. The applicant is able to pass his requirements.


38/60




Title: Process Requirements

Summary: This use case shows how the application gets process.



Version: 01

Date Update:

Person in Charge:

Copyright officer


Preconditions:

1. The requirements should be complete.


1. The copyright officer processes the application together with the other requirements.

2. The work has been copyrighted.


1. There is something wrong with the application.

Error Sequences:

1. The application got loss.

Post Conditions:

1. The applicant works has been copyrighted.


39/60



ACTIVITY

DIAGRAM

(EXISTING)


40/60




41/60




42/60




43/60




44/60




45/60



USE

CASE

(PROPOSED)


46/60




47/60




Title: Get application form

Summary: This use case shows how the applicant gets the application form online.

Actors: Applicant


Version: 01

Date Update:

Person in Charge:

Applicant


Preconditions:

1. Have an internet connection.


1. The applicant goes to the website where he/she can fill up and print the application form.


1. The website is down.

Error Sequences:

1. The system was not able to process the application form.

Post Conditions:

1. The applicant is able to properly fill out the form and print it.


48/60




Title: Notarize Application Form

Summary: This use case shows how the applicant notarizes his/her application form to completethe requirements



Version: 1

Date Update:

Person in Charge:

Applicant


Preconditions:

1. Look for a notary public.


1. The form has been complete notarized and signed by the attorney.

2. The applicant has paid the attorney of all his or her bills for the service.


1. NA

Error Sequences:

1. The Stamp has no ink.

Post Conditions:

1. The form is ready to be submitted.


49/60




Title: Pay Application Free

Summary: This use case shows how the applicant pays the fee for the copyright to beaccomplished.

Actors: Applicant, Bank


Version: 01

Date Update:

Person in Charge:

Bank


Preconditions:

1. The applicant should have enough money


1. The applicant has completely paid his or her bills in the bank.

2. The applicant gets the deposit slip from the bank.


1. The bank is closed.

Error Sequences:

1. There is no bank account.

Post Conditions:

1. The application fee has been paid.


50/60




Title: Submit Requirements

Summary: This use case shows how the application form and other requirements is transferred and submitted from the applicant to the copyright office.

Actors: Applicant and Post Office


Version: 01

Date Update:

Person in Charge:

Post Office


Preconditions:

1. The applicant requirements should be complete.2. The applicant should have paid the application fee.


1. The applicant sends the form to the post office. 2. The post office processes the package and sends it to the copyright office.


1. The package got loss.

Error Sequences:

1. The package got damage.

Post Conditions:

1. The package has been received by the copyright officer .


51/60


52/60



ACTIVITY

DIAGRAM

(PROPOSED)


53/60




54/60




55/60




56/60




57/60




58/60



COPYRIGHT

RECEIPT


59/60




60/60


Documents

Aaron Tan Reader CMP