According to Rachels, _____________ is at the heart of Ethical Subjectivism. A Respect for Autonomy A Respect for Morality Nihilism Care and Compassion
Added by Jes-S T.
Close
Step 1
Step 1: Ethical subjectivism is a meta-ethical theory that holds that moral judgments are subjective, meaning that they are based on individual opinions or feelings rather than objective facts. Show more…
Show all steps
Your feedback will help us improve your experience
Rachel Gore and 92 other Psychology educators are ready to help you.
Ask a new question
Labs
Want to see this concept in action?
Explore this concept interactively to see how it behaves as you change inputs.
Key Concepts
Recommended Videos
The determinist's claim that every event has a sufficient explanation seems hard to disagree with because: a) it implies that negative freedom is possible. b) it implies that positive freedom is possible. c) it appears to be a basic presupposition of knowledge. d) it appears to be true. 2. Nietzsche's ethical relativism grows out of his conviction that: a) strong, creative people are harmed by obedience to moral rules intended to protect the weak. b) political revolution is needed before suffering peoples can lead the good life. c) it is always the dominant economic power that determines what is right and wrong. d) people in Western countries no longer believe in God. 3. It can be argued that we recognize thoughts only because: a) we have the words and concepts of our language that allow us to do so. b) those thoughts arise from a core, essential self. c) we exist as individuals prior to our social context. d) there is no self. 4. Kant argues that the laws of God are justified: a) because they are from God, who is perfect. b) whenever they agree with our beliefs about right and wrong. c) by the authority of reason. d) because, as Kierkegaard says, they transcend ethics. 5. Aristotle's virtues seem to share the common thread of being: a) concerned with the sexual mores of individuals. b) absolute duties. c) concerned with the flourishing of a person in a community. d) concerned with maximizing happiness for the greatest number.
Rachel G.
14. According to Hill, the reasons we foreground for being indignant about a person's indifference to uprooting the non-sentient natural environment include: - That it robs the present and future generations of its use and enjoyment - That animals depend on the environment - That plants are needed to replenish the atmosphere - All of the above - None of the above 15. According to Hill, if the environment is for some just a resource, what reasons might we try to put forward for being morally dissatisfied with one who treats it with indifference (i.e., as a mere resource)? - We might appeal to the rights of plants and animals and object to their violation - We might appeal to nature as God's creation and so insist that it is not ours to manhandle at will - We might appeal to the intuitive intrinsic goodness of nature - All of the above - Only two of the above 16. According to Hill, if we cannot find an adequate reason for morally condemning acts of indifference, why should we focus instead on the character of the actor committing such acts? In order to see if such a person lacks human traits we admire and regard as morally important - if the ideal of care for non-sentient nature is connected to other virtues or human excellences - if indifference to non-sentient nature is necessarily connected to moral vice - All of the above - A and B only 17. According to Hill, what on the whole might an indifference to non-sentient nature signal a lack of? - Knowledge - Self-acceptance - A sense of one's place in the order of things - An aesthetic sense - A sense of gratitude - All of the above - A, C, and D only 18. According to Hill, what is the logical status of his proposed connection between an indifference to non-sentient nature and the lack of human traits and evaluative attitudes that we admire? - There is a necessary connection - There is an empirical connection - Both A and B - Neither A nor B
Akash M.
___ and ___ are the two criteria for determining whether or not an action was done out of a sense of duty. a) self-interest…avoiding negative consequences b) principle/maxim…generating positive consequences c) principle/maxim…universalization of that principle/maxim without contradiction or incoherence d) none of the above
Recommended Textbooks
Psychology Openstax
Myers' Psychology for AP
Psychology
Transcript
18,000,000+
Students on Numerade
Trusted by students at 8,000+ universities
Watch the video solution with this free unlock.
EMAIL
PASSWORD