Problem
A. What is the general idea behind what the textbook authors call "respect for persons" approaches (i.e., what we called deontological or "duty-based") to moral theorizing? How do such accounts differ from utilitarian approaches with regard to the task of respecting the minority rights?
B. What do the authors of the textbook have in mind when they call about candidate moral rules which turn out to be "self-defeating" (i.e., what we referred to in lecture as "non-universalizable")? Do you take the "self-defeat" test to be an effective one in demarcating permissible from impermissible action? Why or why not?
C. What is what the authors of the textbook call the "golden rule" approach (i.e., concerning what we called in lecture the "reversability test")? What do you take its major strengths and weaknesses to be?
D. Describe the difference between "positive" and "negative" rights. Do you take people to have positive rights? Explain.
E. What, if anything, makes "virtue theory" distinct from utilitarianism and "respect for persons" (i.e., "duty-based") accounts? In what ways are C.S. Lewis a virtue theorist?