| Phi 213 Spring 2016 |
|
(Site navigation is not working.) |
In preparing for the exam, secure your understanding of each of the concepts, distinctions, and groups of related concepts below. In particular:
• For each item, be able to supply (as appropriate) a short definition, explanation of a distinction, or account of the relation between concepts.
• When related topics are listed for two philosophers, be able to compare their views in connection with these topics.
The exam will consist of essay questions that you can answer on the basis of your understanding of these ideas. Some questions may ask you simply to explain an idea; others will ask you about the relations among two or more ideas, perhaps ideas presented by different philosophers. You can expect some freedom of choice in the questions you answer but not enough to enable you to safely ignore more than a few items on this list.
In formulating this list, I have chosen terms or phrases that appear in the text, but some appear more prominently than others. If, as you are studying, you have any doubt about what I have in mind or where discussions of these ideas appear, I’ll be happy to supply more information.
Topics
|
Hohfeld • “right” in the four senses: claim, liberty (or privilege), power, and immunity • correlatives and opposites to the senses of “right” Rawls • retributive vs. utilitarian view of punishment • practice conception of rules Mill • Mill’s harm principle (though he doesn’t use this label for it) • self-regarding actions Ferzan • deontological vs. consequentialist ethical theories • justification vs. excuse • objective vs. subjective accounts • triggering conditions Fletcher • paradigms of reciprocity and reasonableness • non-reciprocal risk-taking • compulsion and unavoidable ignorance |
Shiffrin and Shavell • performance • expectation damages • efficient breach • hypothetical complete contract Grotius • sociability • natural law, law of nations, and municipal (or civil) law Hart • need for and possibility of organized sanctions in municipal and international law • voluntarist (or autolimitation) theories of international law • international law vs. morality Altman and Wellman • Westphalian conception of sovereignty • supercrime • “widespread or systematic” criterion • ex post facto prosecution • nullum crimen principle |