Study Guide #2 – for the Midterm Exam Phil 311-01 – Dr. T.

Hoffmann – October 2010

Bold numbers to texts listed on the website: http://faculty.cua.edu/hoffmann/courses/311_1108/311.htm

Just War
• Explain the notions of “prima-facie obligation” and “actual obligation.” (↗ 5.1., p. 430)
• Which prima-facie obligations are in conflict, in a case of war? (↗ 5.1., p. 433)
• What are the classical criteria for a just war? (Learn them all!) (↗ 5.1., p. 428 for a brief list
of the criteria; p. 435–441 for an explanation)
• Explain the notions of “ius ad bellum” and “ius in bello.” (↗ 5.1., p. 428)
• Concerning ius in bello, how does the Principle of Double Effect help to assess the moral
legitimacy of raids that endanger civilians? (↗ 5.2., p. 153; p. 154–56)

Principle (or Doctrine) of Double Effect (PDE)

• Be ready to apply the PDE to specific scenarios. (I might provide you with a specific case, and
your task would be to evaluate its ethical dimensions according to the PDE.)
• What are the four conditions of the PDE that must be met simultaneously in order to justify
actions with good and bad effects? (↗ 6.2.)
• Explain the meaning of the third criterion (that the good effects must not be achieved by
means of the evil effects). (↗ 6.2.)
• Concerning “intentions”:
– Explain the notion of “intention” (↗ 6.3., p. 50, last ¶ – p. 51, first ¶)
– What is the difference between “intention” and “foreseeable consequences”? (↗ 6.3., p.
49; p. 51, last ¶ – p. 52, first ¶; p. 55)
– What is the difference between “intention” and “motive”? (↗ 6.3., p. 50, last ¶; p. 51,
second last ¶; pp. 55–56)
– Explain its role in “specifying” the act, that is, in making an act of a certain kind, such as
an act of killing rather than a act of life-saving, or an act of lying rather than simply an
act of saying something false (↗ 6.3., p. 52, last ¶ – p. 53, 2 nd ¶; ↗ 7.1. + 7.2.)
• Explain why in some cases, but not in others, the PDE can morally justify the use of mor-
phine (↗ 6.3., p. 55)
• Explain how the PDE justifies self-defense (↗ 6.4.)

Lying
• What does lying consist in (1) materially, (2) formally, (3) effectively? (↗ 7.1. + 7.2.)

Conscience
• How does Aquinas explain the notion of conscience? (↗ 8.1., p. 1, lines 4–5)
• Why does an erring conscience bind (i.e., why must one not act contrary to an erring con-
science)? (↗ 8.1., p. 1, lines 13–30; 8.2., p. 1)
• When is a person who acts in accordance with an erring conscience excused and when not?
(↗ 8.1., p. 2; 8.2., pp. 1–2; 8.3.)
• How do involuntary ignorance, indirectly voluntary ignorance, and directly voluntary igno-
rance differ? (↗ 8.2., p. 2)
• What should you do when you have a doubtful conscience? (↗ 8.1., p. 2, lines 32–33)

Euthanasia
• What stance does Rachels take on active euthanasia? (↗ 9.1.)
• In which case is there no moral difference between “killing” and “letting die,” and in which
case is there a difference? (↗ 9.1., p. 78–79, and lecture in class)
• Why, according to the moral criteria learned so far (especially in connection with the PDE),
is passive euthanasia in some cases justifiable, but not active euthanasia? (Notice that this is
not a view shared by Rachels.)