Fоr the lаst twо questiоns of the exаm: Pleаse pick JUST TWO of the 'Free Choice' question sets from the list below. Copy and paste the whole question set into the answer box, then respond to each part of that question set. Each is worth 100 points, or 1/3 of your midterm grade. You will enter your answers into text boxes below. Free Choice Question Set One When discussing how to create moral arguments, I claimed that all moral arguments must have a moral bridging principle. I also suggested that most moral arguments you will find ‘in the wild’ (that is, in online discussion forums, editorials, political speeches, casual conversations, etc) will lack a moral bridging principle. In your own words: Describe what a moral bridging principle is, and Give an example. Explain, as fully as you can, why a moral argument that lacks a bridging principle cannot be sound. Explain how a bridging principle fixes the problem you described in (3) Given that bridging principles are so important, why might a person nevertheless decide to leave the bridging principle unstated when giving their moral argument? Free Choice Question Set Two A view that is very popular with students, Cultural Relativism, has been taken by some to show that no moral arguments can ever be sound. Our discussion of Cultural Relativism focused on several counterintuitive consequences that accepting the view would commit us to (by ‘counterintuitive’ I mean that these consequences conflict with things we probably already believe to be true). I argued that because Cultural Relativism has these consequences, and because they are counterintuitive, we should not accept Cultural Relativism. In your own words: Describe what Cultural Relativism is and how it differs from Moral Objectivism. Explain why someone might think that if Cultural Relativism were true, it would mean that no moral argument can ever be sound. Give an example of one of the allegedly counterintuitive consequences to which acceptance of Cultural Relativism would commit us. Be sure to explain why Cultural Relativism commits us to that counterintuitive consequence, and explain what it is exactly that makes that consequence counterintuitive. Does that line of reasoning convince you that we should not be Cultural Relativists? Why or why not? Free Choice Question Set Three When considering the relation of God to morality, we focused on a moral theory called Divine Command Theory that was first put forward by a young man named Euthyphro in a conversation he had with Socrates. In your own words: Describe Divine Command Theory State the two-sided question that Socrates asked Euthyphro when he first presented the view (a question that has since been called “The Euthyphro Dilemma”). For each of the two 'sides' presented in Socrates’ question, explain as fully as you can what that side of the dilemma entails. That is, what does that option mean? For each of the two 'sides' presented in Socrates' question, explain as fully as you can one reason why a Divine Command Theorist would not want to accept that option. Free Choice Question Set Four The first historically and philosophically significant moral theory we discussed was a view called “Classical Utilitarianism” -- or sometimes, just 'Utilitarianism'. In your own words: Explain the moral theory of Utilitarianism. What is it? What does it say? Describe and explain one of the features of Utilitarianism that makes it an attractive moral theory. Describe and explain one of the features of Utilitarianism that makes it an unattractive moral theory. Which of those reasons do you find more compelling and why? Free Choice Question Set Five In his article, “Why Abortion is Immoral,” Don Marquis argues that that abortion is ‘prima facie seriously wrong’. His argument for this claim is quite inventive. Instead of getting bogged down in the hard question of when the developing fetus becomes a person, he focuses his attention on a different question that he thinks can help us answer the question of the ethics of abortion. In your own words: Explain Marquis' argumentative strategy: What question does he focuses on instead of the question of the personhood of the fetus? Describe and fully explain the answer he gives to the question you described in (1). Explain how he uses his answer to that question in forming his argument on the ethics of abortion. Note: This will require you to describe and explain his argument, as well as connect it to your answer in (2). I chose this article to illustrate Consequentialist moral thinking. In what ways does the argument you just described utilize Consequentialist thinking?