In class discussion:

278f. - # 6 - case studies a / b / c

285f. - #'s 2, 3, 4, 6

Summary question: if you find that using some form of utilitarianism results in different ethical conclusions from what you would argue for - what is present in your ethical position that is absent from utilitarianism, so that you land with a different conclusion?

The case of Dax Cowart

a) how would a Benthamite utilitarian respond to Dax's request to be allowed to die?

b) how would a utilitarian following Mill's version of utilitarianism - especially as s/he includes considerations of the quality of pleasure, not simply the quantity of pleasure - respond to Dax's request to be allowed to die?

c) As you attempt to respond to the Dax Cowart case using some version of consequentialism - either ethical egoism and/or some version of utilitarianism -

is there a lack of fit between your personal response to the Dax Cowart case and those suggested by consequentialism?

If so - what seems to be present in your ethical system that is absent from consequentialism that leads you to a different conclusion?

Assignment, Tuesday, March 31, 1998:

Reading: Boss, ch. 8, 286-297

Informal writing:

290, #'s 1, 2, 3

293, #'s 1, 2

297, #'s 1, 2

We will also conclude our reflections on the Dax Cowart case.