Begin by stating what Singer ultimately concludes is morally impermissible and what is
morally obligatory. (1 paragraph minimum, 10 points)
2. Next, describe the trolley problem that Singer invokes in his argument, and explain how
it is central to Singer’s argument. Why think that the trolley problem is an accurate
metaphor for actual choices we make all the time – what do Fred, his Bugatti, the train,
the baby, and the lever controlling the train track all symbolize? Describe a situation
from real life that is supposedly morally analogous to the trolley problem example. (2
paragraphs minimum, 20 points)
3. In his article, Singer says “ Bob’s conduct, most of us will immediately respond, was
gravely wrong. But we, too, have opportunities to save the lives of children…If you still
think that it was very wrong of Bob not to throw the switch that would have diverted the
train and saved the child’s life, then it is hard to see how you could deny that it is also
very wrong not to send money to [a charity that saves lives]. Unless, that is, there is some
morally important difference between the two situations that I have overlooked.”
We can paraphrase these comments as the following premises:
1. If Bob makes the immoral choice when he chooses his own luxury over the life of a
child, then we also make the immoral choice when we choose our own luxury over
the life of a child, or there is some morally relevant difference between Bob’s choice
and ours.
2. Bob makes the immoral choice when he chooses his own luxury over the life of a
child.
3. So, we also make the immoral choice when we choose our own luxury over the life of
a child, or there is some morally relevant difference between Bob’s choice and ours.
After some consideration, Singer decides that none of differences between our everyday
situations and Bob’s situation are morally relevant, and therefore we are just as bad as
Bob when we spend our disposable income on our own luxury. We can paraphrase these
comments in the following premise and conclusion.
4. There is no morally relevant difference between Bob’s choice and ours.
5. Therefore, we make are making an immoral choice when we choose our own luxury
over the life of a child.
Put these premises and the conclusion into a valid deductive form, identify the
combination of valid logical forms being used, and explain what it means that the
argument is valid. You have permission to copy 1-5 word for word without citing this
prompt. (10 points)
*Validity is an important concept from logic; it means that an argument’s conclusion
must be true if all of its premises are true. We haven’t discussed this concept yet, so for
this step, all you have to do is say “Here is a formalized version of Singer’s argument:”
then copy/paste 1-5 into your essay, and then say that the argument is valid because its
conclusion must be true if all of its premises are true. You can use the example paper on
Blackboard as a model (that paper does a lot of things wrong, but it does an excellent job
on this step).
4. Explain what Peter Singer means when he calls himself a utilitarian. Singer’s argument
depends on the concept of “opportunity costs” (although he doesn’t use those exact
words). What does “opportunity cost” mean, and what, according to Peter Singer, is the
opportunity cost associated with one’s decision to purchase a luxury items one doesn’t
really need? (2 paragraphs minimum, 20 points)
5. Then, describe two objections to his argument Singer considers in his essay, and explain
what his response is to each. (2 paragraphs minimum, 30 points)
6. Although he himself does not explicitly identify what would be supererogatory on his
view, identify the kind of act that you think Singer would most likely say is
supererogatory and explain why you think this is. (“Supererogatory” is defined in the
Blackboard vocabulary section). (1 paragraph minimum, 20 points)
7. Explain whether or not you accept Singer’s conclusion. If you do, what changes in your
beliefs and/or actions do you need to make, if any? If you reject his conclusion, you must
also reject at least one of his premises. Which premise(s) do you reject and why? (Be sure
your reader knows that you are presenting your own original thoughts in this section. It’s
okay to use personal pronouns.) (1 paragraphs minimum, 20 points)
Criteria for Success
Your paper must be in a double-spaced, professional 12-point font. The text must be left-aligned.
Give it an appropriate title and bold and/or underline the title. Make sure your name and date
are on it, but don’t put the name of the professor.
• Every step of the task is completed, and in the proper order.
• Every step is written primarily in your own words. If you quote the course material or
readings, be sure to properly cite the work. (If you quote my PowerPoints directly, you
can simply include my last name in parentheses, along with the date of the lecture).
• The paper does not contain any “filler,” i.e. sentences unrelated to the prompt or their
paragraph’s main idea.
• The paper is turned in on time.
• The paper has the proper typesetting spelling, grammar, paragraph structure and
editing.
• Correctly following these criteria is worth 20 points. Begin by stating what Singer ultimately concludes is morally impermissible and what is
morally obligatory. (1 paragraph minimum, 10 points)
2. Next, describe the trolley problem that Singer invokes in his argument, and explain how
it is central to Singer’s argument. Why think that the trolley problem is an accurate
metaphor for actual choices we make all the time – what do Fred, his Bugatti, the train,
the baby, and the lever controlling the train track all symbolize? Describe a situation
from real life that is supposedly morally analogous to the trolley problem example. (2
paragraphs minimum, 20 points)
3. In his article, Singer says “ Bob’s conduct, most of us will immediately respond, was
gravely wrong. But we, too, have opportunities to save the lives of children…If you still
think that it was very wrong of Bob not to throw the switch that would have diverted the
train and saved the child’s life, then it is hard to see how you could deny that it is also
very wrong not to send money to [a charity that saves lives]. Unless, that is, there is some
morally important difference between the two situations that I have overlooked.”
We can paraphrase these comments as the following premises:
1. If Bob makes the immoral choice when he chooses his own luxury over the life of a
child, then we also make the immoral choice when we choose our own luxury over
the life of a child, or there is some morally relevant difference between Bob’s choice
and ours.
2. Bob makes the immoral choice when he chooses his own luxury over the life of a
child.
3. So, we also make the immoral choice when we choose our own luxury over the life of
a child, or there is some morally relevant difference between Bob’s choice and ours.
After some consideration, Singer decides that none of differences between our everyday
situations and Bob’s situation are morally relevant, and therefore we are just as bad as
Bob when we spend our disposable income on our own luxury. We can paraphrase these
comments in the following premise and conclusion.
4. There is no morally relevant difference between Bob’s choice and ours.
5. Therefore, we make are making an immoral choice when we choose our own luxury
over the life of a child.
Put these premises and the conclusion into a valid deductive form, identify the
combination of valid logical forms being used, and explain what it means that the
argument is valid. You have permission to copy 1-5 word for word without citing this
prompt. (10 points)
*Validity is an important concept from logic; it means that an argument’s conclusion
must be true if all of its premises are true. We haven’t discussed this concept yet, so for
this step, all you have to do is say “Here is a formalized version of Singer’s argument:”
then copy/paste 1-5 into your essay, and then say that the argument is valid because its
conclusion must be true if all of its premises are true. You can use the example paper on
Blackboard as a model (that paper does a lot of things wrong, but it does an excellent job
on this step).
4. Explain what Peter Singer means when he calls himself a utilitarian. Singer’s argument
depends on the concept of “opportunity costs” (although he doesn’t use those exact
words). What does “opportunity cost” mean, and what, according to Peter Singer, is the
opportunity cost associated with one’s decision to purchase a luxury items one doesn’t
really need? (2 paragraphs minimum, 20 points)
5. Then, describe two objections to his argument Singer considers in his essay, and explain
what his response is to each. (2 paragraphs minimum, 30 points)
6. Although he himself does not explicitly identify what would be supererogatory on his
view, identify the kind of act that you think Singer would most likely say is
supererogatory and explain why you think this is. (“Supererogatory” is defined in the
Blackboard vocabulary section). (1 paragraph minimum, 20 points)
7. Explain whether or not you accept Singer’s conclusion. If you do, what changes in your
beliefs and/or actions do you need to make, if any? If you reject his conclusion, you must
also reject at least one of his premises. Which premise(s) do you reject and why? (Be sure
your reader knows that you are presenting your own original thoughts in this section. It’s
okay to use personal pronouns.) (1 paragraphs minimum, 20 points)
Criteria for Success
Your paper must be in a double-spaced, professional 12-point font. The text must be left-aligned.
Give it an appropriate title and bold and/or underline the title. Make sure your name and date
are on it, but don’t put the name of the professor.
• Every step of the task is completed, and in the proper order.
• Every step is written primarily in your own words. If you quote the course material or
readings, be sure to properly cite the work. (If you quote my PowerPoints directly, you
can simply include my last name in parentheses, along with the date of the lecture).
• The paper does not contain any “filler,” i.e. sentences unrelated to the prompt or their
paragraph’s main idea.
• The paper is turned in on time.
• The paper has the proper typesetting spelling, grammar, paragraph structure and
editing.
• Correctly following these criteria is worth 20 points.
