1. Explain how the objectivist, relativist, and nihilist would analyze the truth of the moral evaluation “it is wrong to hit young children when they lie to you.”
2. Provide two examples of the evidence for ethical relativism, and explain how this evidence supports the conclusion of ethical relativism.
3. What are the two interpretations of the dependency thesis? Demonstrate your understanding of the difference by explaining the two interpretations using an example moral evaluation.
4. How is the picture of morality that falls out of subjectivism incompatible, or in conflict, with our intuitions about the function and nature of morality?
5. Why isn’t moral progress possible if ethical relativism is true?
6. How is the principle of tolerance derived from the conclusion of ethical relativism, and why is this principle problematic for relativism?
7. Use the doctrine of double effect to analyze the following action (determine its rightness): A basketball coach is preparing his team for a big game, and he tells them that in order for each person to play they need to attend every practice during the week—he makes a promise to the team about the conditions for their participation in the game. The two best players, Max and Joe, both miss Thursday night practice, and therefore are not to play in the game by the coaches own statement at the beginning of the week. The coach knows that the team will not win the big game if Max and Joe both sit out, so he decides to break his promise and let them play, which results in the team winning the big game.
8. Explain how moral principles, or rules, are derived from facts about the teleological nature of the universe in natural law theory.
9. Compare moderate objectivism and natural law theory, focusing on the improvements that are made by moderate objectivism over the weaknesses of natural law theory.
10. Can a moderate objectivist support the idea of a universal human right? How would they make sense of a set of basic human rights?