36 exam-style questions on Applied ethics — topic ETH.3 of Optional theme: Ethics in the IB Philosophy syllabus — with answers and explanations. Samples below; the full set is free with an account.
A philosopher argues that if a being can suffer, that suffering must be weighed against comparable suffering elsewhere no matter which species the being belongs to. This principle is best described as
Answer: the principle of equal consideration of interests
Singer's principle weighs interests rather than species membership, and it is utilitarian in form. It must not be confused with Regan's subject-of-a-life criterion, which grounds animal rights in an inherent status that no aggregation of interests may override.
Rachels asks us to compare Smith, who drowns his young cousin in the bath, with Jones, who stands ready to do the same but merely watches while his own cousin, in an otherwise identical situation, drowns by accident. The paired cases are designed to test
Answer: whether killing is in itself worse than letting die
Motive, outcome and character are deliberately held constant so that only the killing-or-letting-die difference varies. Rachels concludes that the bare distinction carries no moral weight, which is not the further claim that active euthanasia is permissible.
A legislator argues that a severe sentence is justified because it discourages other people from committing similar offences. This justification of punishment is
Answer: consequentialist, treating punishment as a means to future benefit
Deterrence justifies punishment by its effects and is therefore forward-looking, whereas retributivism is backward-looking and holds that the offender deserves the penalty whether or not anyone is deterred. The two can recommend different sentences in the very same case.
Thomson's case of the unconscious violinist plugged into your circulatory system for nine months is offered as a reply to which claim?
Answer: That a right to life entails a right to the use of another's body
Thomson grants for the sake of argument that the fetus is a person with a right to life and attacks the inference from that right to a duty to provide bodily support. Her argument is therefore not about the criteria of personhood, unlike Warren's, nor about the value of a future, unlike Marquis'.
A competent adult refuses a transfusion that her doctors are confident would save her life, and the hospital complies. In the four-principles framework of biomedical ethics, the decision gives priority to
Answer: respect for autonomy, over beneficence
Beauchamp and Childress attach no fixed ranking to the four principles, so cases are settled by specifying which principle outweighs which here. Autonomy concerns the patient's own authority over her body, while beneficence concerns acting for her good as others judge it.
A retributivist and a deterrence theorist both support punishing a convicted offender. The retributivist's distinctive claim is that
Answer: the punishment is justified by the offender's desert, whatever effect it has on future offending
The classic objection to pure deterrence follows from the contrast: if the justification is the future benefit, punishing a person known to be innocent could in principle be justified where it would deter effectively, which retributivism rules out by tying punishment to what this person did.
That was 6 of 36 Applied ethics questions.
Practise all 36 free36 Applied ethics questions — free with an account. Spaced repetition, streaks and full exam simulations included.
Practise them freeThis platform is independently developed and is not endorsed by, affiliated with, or sponsored by the International Baccalaureate Organization. “International Baccalaureate” and “IB” are registered trademarks of the IBO.