University of Kansas, Spring 2003
Philosophy 555: Justice and Economic Systems
Ben Egglestoneggleston@ku.edu

Paper Topics / Test Questions—Unger

Your assignment is either to write a paper or to take a test on Unger’s Living High and Letting Die: Our Illusion of Innocence. You have to do the analogue of whichever option you didn’t pick for the Nozick assignment, so that, when the course is over, you’ll have written two papers (one on Rawls and one on Nozick or Unger) and taken two test (one on Rawls and one on Nozick or Unger).

I. Paper

If you recall the paper assignment for Anarchy, State, and Utopia, this one will come as no surprise. Like that book, Living High and Letting Die is rich in contentious claims—some of them directly relevant to the author’s overall aims, others confessedly tangential. The paper assignment is to write a paper of not more than six pages (of double-spaced, 12-point type) focusing on one of Unger’s significant claims and developing the most effective objection to it that you can. In order to succeed on this assignment, you must understand that you will be graded not only on the effectiveness of your objection, but also on the significance of the claim to which you offer your objection. In choosing a claim to critique, then, you must strike a balance between (1) choosing a claim that is easy to refute, but that is also quite trivial, and (2) choosing a claim that is undeniably significant, but that is also very hard to refute.

In order to fulfill the two main requirements of this assignment, you might well want to structure your paper in the following way.

  1. First, describe the claim that Unger makes that will be the object of your critique. This could probably be done in a short opening paragraph.
  2. Second, explain why this claim is significant to Unger’s theory.
  3. Third, explain why the claim you have identified, and whose significance for Unger’s theory you have established, is objectionable. This will require arguments, and should occupy the bulk of your paper.

One mistake to avoid is attempting a general criticism of Unger’s theory. For although such a paper would obviously have no trouble with the “significance” criterion, it would surely falter on the “effectiveness” criterion, since Unger’s theory is is too broad and multifaceted to be dealt with effectively in a six-page paper. (That is why I say to pick a narrower claim as the object of your critique, and then explain how that narrower claim is an essential, or at least necessary, element in Unger’s theory). The opposite sort of mistake, of course, is to offer a criticism of something so minute or peripheral that it lacks significance. The demands of significance and effectiveness tend to oppose each other; so, as I said above, part of your job is to strike a balance between the two.

There are two due dates for this paper:

  1. The first due date is for peer commenting on papers. On Wednesday, May 7, you will meet with two of your classmates, and the three of you will read and comment on each other’s papers. (You will do this during class, unless your group agrees on another time, and at a place to be chosen by your group—except not in our classroom, since some of your classmates will be taking the test then, as described below.) You should have your classmates read as final and polished a version of your paper as you can manage, so that you can get feedback on your best work.
  2. The second due date is for turning in the final version of your paper to me. Final copies of papers will be due in my office on Monday, May 12. Be sure to indicate, on your paper, which of your classmates commented on it.

In writing your paper you are welcome to use resources beyond those used in class, but you do not need to do so. For additional suggestions about writing philosophy papers generally, see my “Guidelines for Writing a Philosophy Paper.”

If you want me to mail your paper to you after I grade it, give me an envelope with your address on it. If you don’t turn in an envelope to me, you can pick up your graded test from me any time until the end of May.

II. Test

The test will be given in class on Wednesday, May 7, and will consist of 100 points’ worth of the following questions. There may also be a bonus question or two, not listed here. Please bring a blue book.

  1. (20 points:) Summarize Living High and Letting Die. Keep this brief—no more than, say, one sentence per chapter or two, presented so that collectively your paragraph (or maybe two) describes the overall trajectory (not necessarily many of the details) of the whole book.
  2. (10 points:) What, according to Unger, is the relationship among (1) the truth about morality, (2) our Basic Moral Values, and (3) our intuitive moral judgments about particular cases?
  3. (20 points:) How do Preservationism and Liberationism differ in regard to (1) the relationship they posit between our Basic Moral Values and our intuitive moral judgments about particular cases and (2) the the substantive moral views they assert?
  4. (20 points:) What is Unger’s two-part method for examining the moral significance of a factor that a Preservationist might claim dispels a particular puzzle? Integrate, into your explanation of Unger’s method, an example—use one of the nine factors that Unger lists on pp. 53–54.
  5. (10 points:) What is a negative subjective factor? I’m asking for an explanation of the concept, not just an example, although an example might complement your explanation of the concept.)
  6. (10 points:) What is projective separating?
  7. (10 points:) What is an example of a puzzle that projective separating helps to explain?
  8. (10 points:) What is the method of several options?
  9. (10 points:) What is the method of combining?
  10. (20 points:) What is the purpose of the method of several options and the method of combining? In other words, what use does Unger think these methods have, both in our thinking about morality and in his writing about morality?
  11. (20 points:) What are the Liberation Hypothesis and the Fanaticism Hypothesis?
  12. (10 points:) How are the Phenomenon of No Threshold and the Phenomenon of Near-Tiebreaker in conflict?
  13. (10 points:) What are some of the non-material costs that, according to Unger, are among the costs of a morally decent life?
  14. (20 points:) What does Unger mean by “a selectively flexible semantics”?

If you want me to mail your test to you after I grade it, give me an envelope with your address on it. If you don’t turn in an envelope to me, you can pick up your graded test from me any time until the end of May.