Mill's Philosophy on Liberation of Women

Philosophy 104 Short Paper
Due at 11:59 PM Monday, May 17, 2021. Upload a .doc, .docx, or .pdf file to the Assignments page of the Blackboard site.
Write 4-5 double-spaced, 12-pt. pages on one (1) of the following topics.
1. Plato and John Stuart Mill evidently think that morality is objective rather than subjective. How can this be? What, according to each, is the objective moral reality? That is, what, according to each thinker, are the things that make moral beliefs true? How, according to Plato and Mill, do we learn or come to know about that reality or those things? According to each thinker, are there other beliefs besides moral ones that we develop in the same way?
What do you think of Plato’s and Mill’s moral pictures? Pick your favorite and criticize the other, or criticize both from your own standpoint. Make a convincing argument against one or both thinkers.
2. A very harsh criticism people sometimes make is to say of someone: “For him, the end justifies the means.” What does this mean? Is it true of Mill? How would he respond to this criticism? Is this a good response?
3. How will Mill deal with the parable of the utilitarian sheriff? He is defending a lone prisoner from a lynch mob threatening to kill hundreds if they don’t get their hands on the prisoner. Is this like the trolley problem? What do you think of Mill’s solution to these problems?
4. Mill argues that the liberation of women will produce justice in society. But he also claims that it will produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number. How are these ideas connected, in Mill’s view? What do you think and why?
5. Why might you expect a utilitarian to embrace Mill’s “harm principle”? Why might you not expect that? What do you think of the principle? Is it the same as Libertarianism?
6. Explain Judith Jarvis Thompson’s argument involving the violinist. What is she trying to prove, exactly? Criticize her argument. How might someone try to show that she has not really proven the moral acceptability of any abortions? Can she respond to this challenge?
7. Rosalind Hursthouse thinks that guilt is sometimes appropriate for an abortion, even if the abortion is the right thing to do! Why? What is her final conclusion about the wrongness or rightness of abortion? What do you think of her arguments, especially her idea that “personhood” is irrelevant to the rightness or wrongness of abortion?
8. In “The Wrong of Abortion,” Lee and George argue the following:
Translate this into more ordinary English and respond. Do you agree? If not, why not? If you do agree, why might somebody disagree, and why would that person be wrong?
9. Singer argues that “speciesism” is like racism:
Translate this passage. What do you think of it? What’s wrong with it, if anything? Or, why might someone disagree, and how can this claim be defended against a critic?
10. Come up with your own topic, and pass it by the instructor.