This examination counts as twenty percent (20%) of your grade. You will be asked to write two (2) essays, each worth ten (10) points, with a maximum possible of twenty (20) points. At the start of the examination we will list the "names" of at least four (4) questions from which you must choose two (2). Please print out this document, put your name on it, and bring it (without notes written on it) to the examination for reference. It will be collected at the end of the examination.
Be sure to bring a blue book with you to the examination.
1. Naturally no help in answering the questions may be received from anyone (except yourself) during the examination. The work you hand in should be your own work.
2. Undergraduate students: You may bring with you to the examination one (1) 3" x 5" card (crammed as full as you care to make it) of notes to use during the examination. You may use any abbreviations or diagrams on the card you find helpful (as well as English, of course). You may not use any unusual aids (e.g., magnifying glass, microfiche reader) during the examination to read the card. (Your usual spectacles and contact lenses are not "unusual aids.") No other books or notes may be used during the examination. What appears on the card you bring to class should be your own work. Each person should be the "author" of his or her own card. One exception: you may include quotations from the textbook or from any overhead posted on the course website. Everyone who uses such a card must hand it in with the examination with her or his name clearly on it. (The card does not have to be legible otherwise--just so you can read it.) The card will not be used to help determine a grade for the examination. (So on the examination don't say "see point 6a on the card".) We will return these cards to you when we return your graded examination.
| "Name" | Question |
|---|---|
| B-CRIT | William Baxter lays out "ultimate testing criteria" for solutions to environmental problems (and other "problems of human organization"). Explain each of these criteria. Do these seem good criteria to use? Why or why not? Critically discuss. |
| B-IRR | Baxter writes "Damage to penguins, or sugar pines, or geological marvels is, without more, simply irrelevant." (P4 475a) Why does he hold this? What is the force of his qualification "without more?" What are his reasons for holding this view? |
| B-ENDS | Baxter consider the possibility that "polar bears or pine trees or penguins, like men, are to be regarded as ends rather than means ..." (P4 475b) But he finds objections to this. What are his objections? Are they good objections? Critically discuss. |
| B-NAT | Baxter writes "The word `nature' has no normative connotation." (P4 475b) What does he mean by this? Critically discuss. |
| B-OPT | Baxter writes "our objective is not pure air or water but rather some optimal state of pollution." (P4 476a) What does he mean by this? Why does he hold this view? Should he hold this view? Critically discuss. |
| G-WARM | Explain the (purported) phenomenon of global warming. What are the causes of it? To what extent are humans a cause of this trend? Explore potential solutions if there is a problem here. If this does not pose a problem, explain. |
| G-UNCE | Some people argue that we should not act in response to global climate change until there is more scientific certainly about it. How does Stephen Gardiner address this argument? Critically discuss his response. |
| G-REFU | According to Gardiner "many recent skeptics ... claim to accept the reality of human-induced climate change but argue that there is a strong economic rationale for refusing to act." (P5 p.580a) Explain the grounds for this view and Gardiner's response to them. Critically discuss. |
| ET-NON | How are moral considerations to be distinguished from non-moral considerations? What sorts of non-moral considerations might go into making a decision? How do each of these consideration differ from moral considerations? Critically discuss. |
| ET-VARI | In class we explored various ethical theories such as the Golden Rule, the Ten Commandments, the Divine Command Theory, Agapeism, Utilitarianism, and Kantianism. Take three of these ethical theories and carefully show how they can be applied to some issue in environmental ethics (of your choosing). |
| ET-HYP | What is the difference between a categorical imperative and a hypothetical imperative? What kinds of hypothetical imperatives are there, according to Kant? Give examples. |
| ET-MEA | What is it to treat someone as a means? What is it to treat someone as an end? Does Kant say we must never treat someone as a means? Does Kant say that we should always treat people as ends? Critically discuss. |
| ET-CI | State one of Kant's formulations of his categorical imperative and explain why some action is right according to it. Then state a different one of Kant's formulations of the categorical imperative and explain why some action is wrong according to it. Does either of these formulations seem to you to express what we morally should or should not do? Explain. |
| P-HOW | Explain in some detail how human population increase affects the environment. What are the possible problems caused by this? Explore possible solutions. |
| H-FREE | What does Hardin mean when he says "Freedom in a commons brings ruin to all?" Explain his argument for this. Is it correct? Critically discuss. |
| H-COMM | Explain how the tragedy of the commons applies (or argue that it does not apply) to the (pick one) oceans, forest, parking lots, or atmosphere. |
| H-CONS | What does Hardin mean by "conscience is self-eliminating?" Explain his argument for this. Is it correct? Critically discuss. |
| H-COER | Is Hardin in favor of coercion to solve problems of overpopulation? If not, why not? If so, to what extent? Explain. Critically discuss. |
| H-BOAT | Explain Hardin's lifeboat metaphor. What conclusions does he draw from the metaphor (about real situations, not merely about hypothetical situations of really being in a lifeboat)? Is he right to draw those conclusions? Critically discuss (bringing in points from Murdoch and Oaten). |
| H-RATC | Explain the "Ratchet effect" that Hardin discusses. What conclusions does he draw from this? Is he right to draw those conclusions? Critically discuss (bringing in points from Murdoch and Oaten). |
| E-O1 | What is Mylan Engel's claim "O1" in "Hunger, Duty and Ecology" and how does he defend it? Critically discuss. |
| E-POND | Explain Singer's "Pond" example (as discussed by Engel) and what Singer thinks follows from it. What does this have to do with our duties to hungry people. Critically discuss. |
| E-DAY | Explain the "Day Old Bread" example and the argument from it. Apply this to the disproportionate consumption patterns of affluent nations in relation to poorer countries. Is this a good analogy? Argue why or why not. |
| E-GRE | Engel contends that we grow enough food to feed the world five or 6 times over, and that the hunger problem stems from the politics involved in distributing the food to certain parts of the world. What are some other issues that serve as obstacles to the Green Revolution's promise of hunger elimination, an increased global carrying capacity, and increased yield? Explore. |
| K-INDI | Immanuel Kant says that our duties toward animals are "indirect duties." Explain what he means. On Kant's view what duties do we have toward animals and why? Is there anything wrong with Kant's account? If so, what? Explain. |
| PS-SPE | Peter Singer thinks speciesism is analogous to racism. Explain what he means. Is he right? Why or why not? |
| PS-BOU | According to Singer what marks the boundary between beings who should morally be taken into consideration and those that should not? How does he rule out other ways of marking the boundary? Explain. |
| R-CONT | Tom Regan considers and rejects contractarianism as a way of justifying the view that non-human animals do not have moral rights. What is contractarianism? Explain what a contractarian would say about moral duties to non-human animals. Why does Regan reject this? Explain. |
| R-UTIL | According to Tom Regan, "the sort of equality we find in utilitarianism … is not the sort an advocate of animal or human rights should have mind." What objections does Regan offer against utilitarianism? |
| R-GRND | What, according to Regan, is the ground of our rights, and the rights of other animals? Explain his (positive) view. Critically discuss. |
| R-EQU | Both Peter Singer and Tom Regan talk about equality and this notion of equality enters into the arguments for their respective positions. Explain how each appeals to the notion of equality in order to argue for his position on the treatment of animals. Critically discuss. |