University of Kansas, Fall 2002
Philosophy 672: History of Ethics
Ben Eggleston
Test Questions / Paper Topics—Kant
Your assignment is either to take the test on Kant’s Groundwork of the
Metaphysics of Morals or
to write a paper on that book. Note that, by the end of the semester, you must have
taken tests on two of the four books in the course, and written papers on the
other two. Following are details of the two options for the Groundwork.
I. Test
The test will be given on class on Wednesday, October 16, and will consist
of 100 points’ worth of the following questions. There may also be a bonus
question or two, not listed here.
- (15 points:) Kant aims, in the Groundwork, to articulate and
establish a synthetic principle that is knowable a priori. First, what
does it mean for a principle to be synthetic rather than analytic, and why
does Kant want to establish a principle that is synthetic rather than analytic
(7 points)? Second, what does is mean for a principle to be knowable a
priori rather than a posteriori, and why does Kant insist that
whatever is established be established a priori rather than a posteriori (8 points)?
- (10 points): Kant thinks that common-sense morality is neither seriously
flawed nor entirely adequate as it stands. In what way does Kant approve of
common-sense morality (e.g., in what respect does he think it’s all right, or
on the right track), and yet what important role does he think there is for
moral philosophy to serve?
- (10 points:) Why, according to Kant, is it the case that only a good will
is unqualifiedly or unconditionally good? (Why aren’t things like intelligence
and happiness also unconditionally good?)
- (10 points:) What is the connection between the concept of a good will
and the concept of duty such that an analysis of the latter will
clarify the meaning of the former?
- (15 points:) What is the problem with section I of Kant’s Groundwork
that Herman addresses, and what is the standard purported solution to this
problem? (You don’t have to say what Herman’s objection to the standard
purported solution is, or what her own solution is.)
- (10 points:) What is meant by saying that imperatives, as Kant conceives
of them, are (1) appropriate only for “imperfectly rational” wills and (2)
objectively valid? (To answer the second part of this question you’ll need to
say how imperatives, as Kant conceives of them, are different from
imperatives, as (e.g.) a grammarian would conceive of them.)
- (10 points:) Why is it wrong to say that hypothetical imperatives can be
distinguished from categorical ones by the presence of the word ‘if’ in them
(note: use examples to answer this part of the question), and what is the right way
in which to distinguish hypothetical imperatives from categorical ones?
- (10 points:) What is the reasoning by which the first formulation of the
categorical imperative supposedly disallows making a false promise?
- (15 points:) What are the two kinds of contradiction that Kant says can
arise in connection with the categorical imperative, and what do these two
different kinds of contradiction have to do with the two different kinds of
duties that Kant mentions?
- (10 points:) How might the categorical imperative be made to seem, by
clever formulations of agents’ maxims, to be more permissive than Kant
presumably intended?
- (10 points:) How might the categorical imperative be made to seem, by
consideration of suitably chosen examples, to be unreasonably strict?
- (10 points:) What would Kant say if someone said the following? “Kant’s
theory is flawed because I was thinking about performing a certain action, and
when I tested it against one formulation of the categorical imperative, it
came out o.k., but when I tested it against another formulation, it was
prohibited.”
- (10 points:) What, according to Hill, is the usual understanding of the
phrase ‘humanity in a person’ (as it occurs in one of Kant’s formulations of
the categorical imperative), and what understanding does Hill propose?
II. Paper
The paper option is to write a paper
of not more than 6 pages (double-spaced, 12-point type) on either (1) one of the
following topics or (2) some other topic that you would like to propose to me
(in which case, just let me know, and we can discuss it). Your paper will be due
in class on Wednesday, October 16.
-
Question 2, above (to be answered in a more comprehensive, detailed, and
text-grounded way, of course)
-
Question 8, above, plus: Choose one of Kant’s other three examples of the
application of the first formulation of the categorical imperative and
assess the soundness of Kant’s application of his principle: does it, in the
specific case you choose to examine, yield the verdict he claims it does? In
answering this question you’ll need to consider which of the two kinds of
contradiction Kant says is involved in the case you choose to examine, and
to see whether that kind of contradiction (or not that one but the other
one, or neither) really arises.
-
Question 10, above, plus: How might Kant reply to challenges of this kind?
-
Question 11, above, plus: How might Kant reply to challenges of this kind?
In writing your paper you are
welcome to use resources beyond those used in class, but you do not need to do so. For additional suggestions about writing philosophy papers generally, see my “Guidelines
for Writing a Philosophy Paper.”