Philosophy Exam 2|35 Questions with Answer,100% CORRECT

Document Content and Description Below

Philosophy Exam 2|35 Questions with Verified Answers The 3 steps of the survival lottery - CORRECT ANSWER 1. give everyone a number 2. If there are two or more people who are going to die w/o ... organs randomly pick one of the #'s 3. If a person's number is picked, kill that person and give their organs to the 2 or more people that need them BillyNeeds a heart SuzyNeeds a pair of lungs Randomly pick a number. Suppose that it is 517. Suppose that Tom's number is 517. Kill Tom and give his heart to Billy and his lungs to Suzy. What is this an example of? - CORRECT ANSWER The Survival Lottery What are two benefits to adopting the survival lottery? - CORRECT ANSWER -The number of people who die each year will be cut by at least half -Each person's chance of living a long and healthy life will be greatly increased Suppose that each year 2 billion people die from organ failure. If we adopt the survival lottery, then only 1 billion people would die each year. What is this an example of? - CORRECT ANSWER The benefit to the survival lottery that people who die each year will be cut by at least half Suppose that 1 out of every 1,000 people have a failed organ each year. If we adopt the survival lottery, then 1 out of every 2,000 people will have their number picked each year. So each of us would trade having a 1 out of 1,000 chance of dying from organ failure for a 1 out of 2,000 chance of dying from having our number picked What is this an example of? - CORRECT ANSWER The benefit to the survival lottery that people's chance of living a long and healthy life will be greatly increased What will happen if we adopt the survival lottery according to its benefits? (premises and conclusion) - CORRECT ANSWER Not only will the survival lottery save more people than our current system does, it will give them more of a chance of living a long and healthy life, therefore we should abandon the current system and adopt the SL. The Argument from the Difference Between Killing and Letting Die (SL... 123) - CORRECT ANSWER 1) we should only save a dying person when doing so doesn't kill an innocent person 2) if we adopt the SL then we will be killing an innocent person in order to save a dying person 3) Therefore, we should NOT adopt the SL What are 2 replies to The Argument from the Difference between killing and letting die? (SL) - CORRECT ANSWER - Deny premise (1) that we should only save dying people if it does not involve killing an innocent person. If we have a healthy person and two people dying with diseased organs there is no relevant difference between these people. Someone dying has no less right to live than that innocent healthy person, so if we don't adopt SL then we will be KILLING those diseased people -(bomb example, train example, large man example) If you have the option to save 1 billion people vs saving 1 innocent person, it is OK to save the 1 billion rather than saving the 1 innocent person... saving MORE lives is more important. This example supports what? A runaway trolley is speeding down a track. If you do nothing, the trolley will hit five people. If you pull a lever, the trolley will be diverted onto another track and hit just one person. - CORRECT ANSWER The reply to the argument from the difference b/w killing and letting die We should choose the option that saves MORE people What are the premises and conclusion for the Argument from Bad Side Effects (SL) - CORRECT ANSWER (1) if we adopt the SL, we will have a lot of bad side effects (2) if (1) true, we should not adopt the SL (3) so, we should not adopt the SL What are two motivations to the bad side effects argument of the Survival Lottery - CORRECT ANSWER -People will be afraid that they themselves or their loved ones will have their number picked which causes a lot of constant emotional distress - all of the added sufferings outweighs the lives saved What is the reply to the bad side effects argument of the Survival Lottery - CORRECT ANSWER Deny premise (2) that if its true we will have a lot of bad side effects we should not adopt the SL, because the bad side effects are outweighed by the large amount of lives saved - There is a slim chance that there are a number of ways I could die so I don't worry about it all the time.. the SL isn't any different. - Also its true people who are picked will suffer, but way more people suffer (those w/ diseased organs and their loved ones) under the current system than if the SL were adopted... it would cut in half Suppose that Abe only eats chicken wings and cake. Suppose that he never exercises. This behavior is likely to cause heart problems. Suppose Bert eats only healthy food. Suppose that he exercises all the time. This behavior is likely to prevent heart problems What is this an example of? - CORRECT ANSWER The argument from Overall Lowered Life Expectancy (SL) The premises and conclusion to the argument from overall lowered life expectancy? (SL) - CORRECT ANSWER (1)If we adopt the SL then Abes life expectancy is greater than or equal to Bert's/someone who is not exercising and practicing bad eating habits life expectancy is greater than or equal to someone who has a healthy lifestyle (2)If (1) we should not adopt the survival lottery (3) So we should not adopt the survival lottery What is a motivation to Abe(diseased individ.) having a greater than or equal life expectancy as Bert (healthy imdivid.)/argument for overall lowered life expectancy? - CORRECT ANSWER -Motivation for (1) if abe continues to eat chicken wings and cake then he will have a bad heart and someone's number will be picked to give him a new heart. If someone else gets a bad heart abe will likely be skipped over, but healthy bert will definitely be used for his heart if his number is picked... therefore Abe has a greater than or equal life expectancy What is a motivation to not adopt the SL according to argument from overall lowered life expectancy? - CORRECT ANSWER -Motivation for (2) It is unfair to the person eating healthy and will encourage people to not care about their health simply bc they can take organs from the healthy if they need them and overall life expectancy will go down What are two replies to the argument from overall lowered life expectancy? - CORRECT ANSWER -don't let people who contribute their own need for an organ be eligible for the lottery -it's impossible to sort out those who have contributed to their own health probs and those who have not What is the Ageist principle? - CORRECT ANSWER Younger people should be saved before older people What is the motivation of the Ageist Principle? - CORRECT ANSWER If two people need a heart transplant and one is 17, and the other is 97, it seems like the 17 year old should What are the premises and conclusion of the Argument from Desire (Ageist Principle)? - CORRECT ANSWER (1) any two people who have an equally strong desire to be saved should be given an equal chance of being saved (2)If the Ageist principle is true then (1) is not true (3) So the Ageist principle is NOT true What is the motivation for the argument of desire (ageist principle)? - CORRECT ANSWER Even if an older person has less time to live they may still desire to live that short time they have left just as the younger person would. If we don't give the older person that chance to live then they face two misfortunes: one being that they only have a short time to live and the other being they don't even get the chance to be saved and live out that short time. What is this an example of? 40 Students are trapped in a burning building.Only 20 can be saved.Each is in their mid 20's - CORRECT ANSWER The Close in Age argument against the Ageist Principle premises and conclusion of the Close in Age Argument? 40 Students are trapped in a burning building.Only 20 can be saved.Each is in their mid 20's - CORRECT ANSWER (1) If the ageist principle is true we must save the 20 youngest students (2) But we do not have to save the 20 youngest (3) so the ageist principle is false SHOWS THERE ARE GRAY AREAS What is Ageist principle number 3? - CORRECT ANSWER someone that rational people would judge to be young should be saved before someone a rational group of people would judge to be old What does QUALY stand for? - CORRECT ANSWER quality adjusted life year How do you determine the number of QUALYs a person receives in a year? - CORRECT ANSWER 1. make a checklist of health related factors that detract from a person's quality of life 2. assign numbers to each factor. If it seems like it would detract a lot then assign a larger number and if it seems like it would only detract a little from the quality of life assign it a smaller number 3. consider a year that the person is alive then add all of the numbers that the person experienced that year 4. The number of QUALYs that person gets for a year is 1 minus the sum of the checklist items What is the QUALY value of a treatment? - CORRECT ANSWER The QUALY value of the treatment is the number of QUALYs that person would get with treatment minus the number of QUALYs a person would get without treatment Define QUALYism - CORRECT ANSWER allocate medical resources in a way that maximizes QUALYs (those with the higher QUALY or the higher QUALY achieved by one person should receive that treatment) premises and conclusion of the small difference argument (QUALYism) - CORRECT ANSWER (1) If QUALYism is true we give the treatment to the person with the higher QUALY (2) But we don't give the treatment to the person with higher QUALY (3) so QUALYism is NOT true What is this an example of and who would get treatment according to QUALYism? Greg checked boxes sum=0 will live 5 years w/ treatment will live 0 years w/o QUALY value: 5-0=5 Helena checked boxes sum=.0001 will live 5 years w/ treatment will live 0 years w/o QUALY value: 4.9995-0= 4.9995 - CORRECT ANSWER Greg would receive the treatment The small difference argument against QUALYism premises and conclusion for the arthritis argument plus its example - CORRECT ANSWER Fry has arthritis w/ treatment he lives 60 years w/o treatment he lives 60 years with arthritis QUALY value= 60- 60 (1-.1)= 6 Linda needs a heart transplant w/ treatments she lives 5 years w/o treatment she lives 0 years QUALY value= 5-0=5 (1) If QUALYism true then we would have to cure Fry's arthritis at the expense of Linda's heart transplant (2) But we should give Linda a heart instead (3) so QUALYism is false premises and conclusion for the argument from arbitrariness (QUALYism) - CORRECT ANSWER (1)There is no single correct way to assign numbers to the checklist (2) if (1) then QUALYism is false (3) so QUALYism is false What is the motivation when considering these two checklists and what argument/premise does it support against QUALYism? Checklist 1 arthritis .002 headaches .001 Checklist 2 arthritis .001 headaches .002 - CORRECT ANSWER The Argument from Arbitrariness Premise (1): no single correct way to assign numbers Both checklists seem to be equally good and there's no reason to prefer one over the other What is the motivation when considering these two checklists and what argument/premise do they support against QUALYism? Checklist 1 arthritis .002 headaches .001 Checklist 2 arthritis .001 headaches .002 Palin has arthritis needs heart transplantw/ transplant 5 years w/o 0 years Fey has headaches needs heart transplantw/ transplant 5 years w/o 0 years Suppose you go with checklist 1, then Palin gets the heart transplant.Palin: 5 (.999) Fey: 5 (.998) Suppose you go with checklist 2, then Fey gets the heart transplant. Palin: 5 (.998) Fey: 5 (.999) - CORRECT ANSWER The argument from arbitrariness premise (2): if (1) then QUALYism is false Either way you go, one of them could justifiably complain. If Palin gets the transplant, then Fey could complain that checklist 2 is just as good. So its not fair for Palin to get the heart transplant. If Fey gets the hear transplant, then Palin could complain that checklist 1 is just as good. what is QUALYism 2 - CORRECT ANSWER Consider all non-crazy checklists. If QUALY value of treating person A is higher than the QUALY value of treating person B for all non-crazy checklists then choose treatment of person A. otherwise do it randomly [Show More]

Last updated: 6 months ago

Preview 1 out of 8 pages