Exercises in moral reasoning

I. Identifying the parts of an argument 10. Jan is a student at Harvard. No student at

Harvard has won a Pulitzer prize. Therefore,
A. Underline the conclusion in each paragraph. Jan has not won a Pulitzer.
Some paragraphs have more than one 11. We shouldn’t pay the lawnmower guy so
conclusion. much money because he never completes
1. If John works out at the gym daily, he will be the work, and he will probably just gamble
healthier. He is working out at the gym daily. the money away because he has no self-
So he will be healthier. control.
2. If when you are in a coma you are no longer 12. Either Manny, Mo, or Jack crashed the car.
a person, then giving you a drug to kill you Manny couldn’t have done it because he was
would not be murder. In a coma, you are in sleeping in his room and was observed the
fact not a person. Therefore, giving you the whole time. Mo couldn’t have done it
drug is not murder. because he was out of town at the time and
3. Ghosts do not exist. There is no reliable has witnesses to prove it. So the guy who
evidence showing that any disembodied crashed the car had to be Jack.
persons exist anywhere.
4. If you smoke, your heart will be damaged. If If John works out at the gym daily, he will be
your heart is damaged, your risk of dying due healthier. He is working out at the gym daily.
to heart problems will increase. Therefore, So he will be healthier.
smoking can increase your risk of dying due Conclusion: John will be healthier.
to heart problems. If when you are in a coma you are no longer a
5. The mayor is soft on crime. He cut back on person, then giving you a drug to kill you
misdemeanor enforcement and told the would not be murder. In a coma, you are in
police department to be more lenient on fact not a person. Therefore, giving you the
traffic violators. drug is not murder.
6. Grow accustomed to the belief that death is Conclusions: In a coma, you are not a person;
nothing to us, since every good and evil lie in giving the drug is not murder.
sensation. However, death is the deprivation Ghosts do not exist. There is no reliable evidence
of sensation. Therefore, death is nothing to showing that any disembodied persons exist
us. anywhere.
7. The president is either dishonest or Conclusion: Ghosts do not exist.
incompetent. He’s not incompetent, If you smoke, your heart will be damaged. If your
though, because he’s an expert at getting heart is damaged, your risk of dying due to
self-serving legislation through Congress. I heart problems will increase. Therefore,
guess he’s just dishonest. smoking can increase your risk of dying due to
8. Most Republicans are conservatives, and heart problems.
Kurt is a Republican. Therefore, Kurt is Conclusion: Smoking can increase the risk of dying
probably a conservative. Therefore Kurt is due to heart problems.
probably opposed to increases in welfare The mayor is soft on crime. He cut back on
benefits because most conservatives are misdemeanor enforcement and told the
opposed to increased welfare benefits. police department to be more lenient on
9. Can people without strong religious beliefs traffic violators.
be moral? Countless people have been Conclusion: The mayor is soft on crime.
nonbelievers or nontheists and still behaved Grow accustomed to the belief that death is
according to lofty moral principles; for nothing to us, since every good and evil lie in
example, the Buddhists of Asia and the sensation. However, death is the deprivation
Confucianists of China. Consider also the of sensation. Therefore, death is nothing to
great secular philosophers from the ancient us.
Greeks to the likes of David Hume and Conclusion: Death is nothing to us.
Bertrand Russell. So it’s not true that those The president is either dishonest or incompetent.
without strong religious beliefs cannot be He’s not incompetent, though, because he’s
moral. an expert at getting self-serving legislation
through Congress. I guess he’s just dishonest.
Conclusion: The president is dishonest.
Most Republicans are conservatives, and Kurt is a
1
 Exercises in moral reasoning

Republican. Therefore, Kurt is probably a

conservative. Therefore, Kurt is probably
opposed to increases in welfare benefits
because most conservatives are opposed to
increased welfare benefits.
Conclusions: Kurt is probably a conservative; Kurt
is probably opposed to increases in welfare
benefits.
Can people without strong religious beliefs be
moral? Countless people have been
nonbelievers or nontheists and still behaved
according to lofty moral principles; for
example, the Buddhists of Asia and the
Confucianists of China. Consider also the
great secular philosophers from the ancient
Greeks to the likes of David Hume and
Bertrand Russell. So it’s not true that those
without strong religious beliefs cannot be
moral.
Conclusion: People without strong religious
beliefs can be moral.
Jan is a student at Harvard. No student at Harvard
has won a Pulitzer prize. Therefore, Jan has
not won a Pulitzer.
Conclusion: Jan has not won a Pulitzer.
We shouldn’t pay the lawnmower guy so much
money because he never completes the
work, and he will probably just gamble the
money away because he has no self- control.
Conclusions: The lawnmower guy never
completes the work; he will probably gamble
the money away due to lack of self-control.
Either Manny, Mo, or Jack crashed the car. Manny
couldn’t have done it because he was
sleeping in his room and was observed the
whole time. Mo couldn’t have done it
because he was out of town at the time and
has witnesses to prove it. So the guy who
crashed the car had to be Jack.
Conclusion: Jack crashed the car.

B. Diagram the arguments above. Number all

the statements for identification. In your
diagram, indicating only the number, draw
arrows from the premises to the conclusion.
Join dependent premises by a plus sign.

2
 Exercises in moral reasoning

9. Matt doesn’t wear his blue sweater very

often, because it’s scratchy.
10. If Matt won’t wear the blue sweater, he
ought to give it away to someone who will
appreciate it.

Marina’s car runs terrible; she should get it tuned

up.
Prescriptive: This is a prescriptive claim because it
suggests what Marina ought to do to improve her
car's performance.
Marina chose the most expensive automobile in the
dealer’s lot.
Descriptive: This is a descriptive claim as it describes
a fact without expressing a value judgment.
Ms. Beeson ought not to have embezzled money
from the bank.
Prescriptive: This is a prescriptive claim as it
expresses a moral judgment about Ms. Beeson's
actions.
If Ms. Beeson had wanted to avoid being caught,
she would not have embezzled so much money
from the bank.
Descriptive: This is a descriptive claim as it presents
a hypothetical scenario without necessarily making
a moral judgment.
After the surgery, Nicky’s eyesight improved
considerably.
Descriptive: This is a descriptive claim as it reports a
change in Nicky's eyesight after surgery.
Violence is always wrong.
Prescriptive: This is a prescriptive claim expressing a
II. Recognizing moral statements moral stance on the issue of violence.
Algernon’s answers on his math test are almost
A. Determine which of the following claims are always wrong.
descriptive and which are prescriptive. Descriptive: This is a descriptive claim as it describes
(Remember that not all prescriptive claims a pattern in Algernon's test performance.
are moral claims.) Matt ought to wear that sweater more often; it
1. Marina’s car runs terrible; she should get it looks good on him.
tuned up. Prescriptive: This is a prescriptive claim suggesting
2. Marina chose the most expensive what Matt should do based on the opinion that the
automobile in the dealer’s lot. sweater looks good on him.
3. Ms. Beeson ought not to have embezzled Matt doesn’t wear his blue sweater very often,
money from the bank. because it’s scratchy.
4. If Ms. Beeson had wanted to avoid being Descriptive: This is a descriptive claim explaining
caught, she would not have embezzled so why Matt doesn't wear the sweater often – due to
much money from the bank. its scratchiness.
5. After the surgery, Nicky’s eyesight improved If Matt won’t wear the blue sweater, he ought to
considerably. give it away to someone who will appreciate it.
6. Violence is always wrong. Prescriptive: This is a prescriptive claim advising
7. Algernon’s answers on his math test are Matt on what he should do with the sweater if he
almost always wrong. won't wear it.
8. Matt ought to wear that sweater more
often; it looks good on him.
3
 Exercises in moral reasoning

B. Identify which of the following claims Nonmoral Values: This statement expresses a
express moral values, which express nonmoral value related to the age of Dr.
nonmoral values, and which express no Lopez's dog.
values at all. The last set of essays was much better than the
1. My computer software is really good; it even first set.
corrects my grammar. Nonmoral Values: This statement expresses a
2. “Little Lisa has been very good tonight,” nonmoral value related to the comparative
said the babysitter. quality of the two sets of essays.
3. The judge in this case is a very well- informed Always act in a way that brings about the best
person. consequences for everyone involved.
4. The judge’s decision was clearly the right Moral Values: This statement expresses a moral
one; since they all got just what they value by advocating for actions that lead to
deserved. the best consequences for everyone.
5. The editor couldn’t use my illustrations; she Never do anything you wouldn’t allow others to do
said they were awful. in a similar situation.
6. Wow. That was a tasty meal. Moral Values: This statement expresses a moral
7. Dr. Lopez’s dog is very old. value by presenting a principle related to
8. The last set of essays was much better than fairness and consistency in behavior.
the first set.
9. Always act in a way that brings about the C. In each of the following passages, a moral
best consequences for everyone involved. principle must be added as an extra premise
10. Never do anything you wouldn’t allow to make the argument valid. Supply the
others to do in a similar situation. missing principle.

My computer software is really good; it even Example: Mrs. Montez’s new refrigerator
corrects my grammar. was delivered yesterday, and it stopped
Nonmoral Values: This statement expresses a working altogether. She has followed the
nonmoral value related to the functionality directions carefully but still can’t make it
and features of computer software. work. The people she bought it from should
“Little Lisa has been very good tonight,” said the either come out and make it work or replace
babysitter. it with another one.
Moral Values: This statement expresses a moral Principle: People should make certain that
value by making a judgment about Lisa's the things they sell are in proper working
behavior, implying that she has behaved well. order.
The judge in this case is a very well-informed
person. 1. After borrowing Morey’s car, Leo had an
Nonmoral Values: This statement expresses a accident and crumpled a fender. So, Leo
nonmoral value regarding the judge's level of ought to pay whatever expenses were
information and knowledge. involved in getting Morey’s car fixed.
The judge’s decision was clearly the right one; 2. When Sarah bought the lawn mower from
since they all got just what they deserved. Jean, she promised to pay another fifty
Moral Values: This statement expresses a moral dollars on the first of the month. Since it is
value by making a judgment about the now the first, Sarah should pay Jean the
rightness of the judge's decision and the money.
deserved outcomes. 3. Kevin worked on his sister’s car all weekend.
The editor couldn’t use my illustrations; she said The least she could do is let him borrow the
they were awful. car for his job interview next Thursday.
Nonmoral Values: This statement expresses a
nonmoral value related to the aesthetic
judgment of the illustrations.
Wow. That was a tasty meal.
Nonmoral Values: This statement expresses a
nonmoral value related to the taste or quality
of the meal.
Dr. Lopez’s dog is very old.
4
 Exercises in moral reasoning

4. Harold is obligated to supply ten cords of conduct, and revelations of corruption should
firewood to the lodge by the beginning of lead to resignation.
October, since he signed a contract As a political candidate, Ms. Havenhurst promised
guaranteeing delivery of the wood by that to put an end to crime in the inner city. Now
date. that she is in office, we’d like to see some
5. Since it was revealed yesterday on the results.
11:00 news that Mayor Ahearn has been Principle: Political candidates should make a good
taking bribes, he is expected to step down faith effort to fulfill their campaign promises.
any day now. Use a gun, go to jail.
6. As a political candidate, Ms. Havenhurst Principle: Engaging in criminal activities, such as
promised to put an end to crime in the using a gun unlawfully, should result in legal
inner city. Now that she is in office, we’d consequences.
like to see some results. Laura’s priest has advised Laura and her husband
7. Use a gun, go to jail. not to sign up for the in vitro fertilization
8. Laura’s priest has advised Laura and her program at the hospital because such
husband not to sign up for the in vitro treatments are unnatural.
fertilization program at the hospital Principle: Individuals should follow moral or
because such treatments are unnatural. religious guidance regarding what is
9. Ali has been working overtime a lot lately, considered natural or ethical.
so he should expect to receive a bonus. Ali has been working overtime a lot lately, so he
10. It is true there are more voters in the should expect to receive a bonus.
northern part of the state. But that Principle: Employees who put in extra effort or
shouldn’t allow the north to dictate to the work overtime should be eligible for
south. additional compensation or rewards.
After borrowing Morey’s car, Leo had an accident It is true there are more voters in the northern part
and crumpled a fender. So, Leo ought to pay of the state. But that shouldn’t allow the north
whatever expenses were involved in getting to dictate to the south.
Morey’s car fixed. Principle: Political decisions and governance should
Principle: Individuals are responsible for covering not be solely determined by the numerical
the costs of damages they cause to the superiority of one geographical region over
property of others. another.
When Sarah bought the lawn mower from Jean,
she promised to pay another fifty dollars on III. Evaluating arguments
the first of the month. Since it is now the first,
Sarah should pay Jean the money. A. Consider these sample arguments. Some are
Principle: Individuals should fulfill their promises valid and some are invalid. Reveal the logical
and commitments, including financial structure of each argument by presenting it
agreements. in terms of Ps and Qs and then explain why
Kevin worked on his sister’s car all weekend. The each argument is valid or invalid.
least she could do is let him borrow the car 1. The sun is a star. The earth is a planet.
for his job interview next Thursday. Therefore, the earth is 93 million miles from
Principle: Reciprocity in favors is expected, and the sun.
individuals should reciprocate kindness or 2. If Hillary Clinton is president, then Bill Clinton
assistance. is vice president. Hillary Clinton is president.
Harold is obligated to supply ten cords of Therefore, Bill Clinton is vice president.
firewood to the lodge by the beginning of 3. If water at sea level boils at 212 degrees,
October, since he signed a contract then water at sea level boils at 100 degrees
guaranteeing delivery of the wood by that C. Water at sea level boils at 212 degrees F.
date. Therefore, water at sea level boils at 100
Principle: Individuals should fulfill contractual degrees C.
obligations and agreements. 4. Either God exists or life has no meaning. God
Since it was revealed yesterday on the 11:00 news doesn’t exist. Therefore, life has no meaning.
that Mayor Ahearn has been taking bribes, he 5. If there is an afterlife, then it is wise to be
is expected to step down any day now. moral. There is no afterlife. Therefore, it isn’t
Principle: Public officials should maintain ethical wise to be moral.
5
 Exercises in moral reasoning

6. If I am riding a bike, then I am alive. I am not

riding a bike. Therefore, I am not alive.

6
 Exercises in moral reasoning

7. If fetuses are human beings, then abortion is Conclusion: Bill Clinton is vice president.
immoral. Abortion is immoral. Therefore, Evaluation: Invalid. The argument is based on a
fetuses are human beings. false premise, as the statement "If Hillary
8. If I am a millionaire, then I can afford to buy Clinton is president, then Bill Clinton is vice
a new TV. I can afford to buy a new TV. president" is not true.
Therefore, I am a millionaire. If water at sea level boils at 212 degrees, then
9. If euthanasia is legalized, then this will water at sea level boils at 100 degrees C.
reduce the overall amount of misery in Water at sea level boils at 212 degrees F.
society. If euthanasia reduces the overall Therefore, water at sea level boils at 100
amount of misery in a society, then it is degrees C.
morally acceptable. Therefore, if euthanasia P: Water at sea level boils at 212 degrees F.
is legalized, then it is morally acceptable. Q: Water at sea level boils at 100 degrees C.
10. If animals have rights, then it is wrong to eat Conclusion: Water at sea level boils at 100 degrees
them. It isn’t wrong to eat animals. C.
Therefore, animals don’t have rights. Evaluation: Invalid. The argument is not logically
11. Anti-drug laws are morally legitimate only if sound; the Celsius boiling point is not
paternalistic laws are morally acceptable. established by the given Fahrenheit boiling
Paternalistic laws are morally unacceptable. point.
Therefore, anti-drug laws are not morally Either God exists or life has no meaning. God
legitimate. doesn’t exist. Therefore, life has no meaning.
12. If societies disagree about moral issues, then P: God doesn’t exist.
there is no objective morality. Societies Q: Life has no meaning.
agree about moral issues. Therefore, there is Conclusion: Life has no meaning.
an objective morality. Evaluation: Valid. The argument is logically sound
13. The death penalty is justified only if it gives because it follows the pattern of a disjunctive
criminals their just deserts. The death syllogism.
penalty gives criminals their just deserts. If there is an afterlife, then it is wise to be moral.
Therefore, the death penalty for murderers There is no afterlife. Therefore, it isn’t wise to
is justified. be moral.
14. If you want to succeed in your moral P: There is no afterlife.
reasoning, then you have to master the Q: It isn't wise to be moral.
details of this chapter. If you have to master Conclusion: It isn't wise to be moral.
the details of this chapter, then you should Evaluation: Invalid. The conclusion doesn't
ask your instructor for help if you don’t logically follow from the premises; wisdom
understand any aspect of it. Therefore, if you and morality are not necessarily connected to
want to succeed in your moral reasoning, the existence of an afterlife.
then you should ask your instructor for help If I am riding a bike, then I am alive. I am not riding
if you don’t understand any aspect of this a bike. Therefore, I am not alive.
chapter. P: I am not riding a bike.
Q: I am not alive.
The sun is a star. The earth is a planet. Therefore, Conclusion: I am not alive.
the earth is 93 million miles from the sun. Evaluation: Invalid. The argument is based on the
P: The sun is a star. false assumption that not riding a bike implies
Q: The earth is a planet. not being alive.
Conclusion: The earth is 93 million miles from the Continuing with the analysis:
sun.
Evaluation: Invalid. The conclusion does not If fetuses are human beings, then abortion is
logically follow from the premises. The immoral. Abortion is immoral. Therefore,
distance from the sun is not established by fetuses are human beings.
the given premises. P: Abortion is immoral.
If Hillary Clinton is president, then Bill Clinton is Q: Fetuses are human beings.
vice president. Hillary Clinton is president. Conclusion: Fetuses are human beings.
Therefore, Bill Clinton is vice president. Evaluation: Invalid. The conclusion doesn't
P: Hillary Clinton is president. logically follow from the premises; the
Q: Bill Clinton is vice president. immorality of abortion does not necessarily
7
 Exercises in moral reasoning

establish the nature of fetuses. sound; the agreement or disagreement

If I am a millionaire, then I can afford to buy a new among societies about moral issues does not
TV. I can afford to buy a new TV. Therefore, I necessarily determine the existence of
am a millionaire. objective morality.
P: I can afford to buy a new TV. The death penalty is justified only if it gives
Q: I am a millionaire. criminals their just deserts. The death penalty
Conclusion: I am a millionaire. gives criminals their just deserts. Therefore,
Evaluation: Invalid. The argument is not logically the death penalty for murderers is justified.
sound; affording a new TV doesn't P: The death penalty gives criminals their just
necessarily mean being a millionaire. deserts.
If euthanasia is legalized, then this will reduce the Q: The death penalty for murderers is justified.
overall amount of misery in society. If Conclusion: The death penalty for murderers is
euthanasia reduces the overall amount of justified.
misery in a society, then it is morally Evaluation: Valid. The argument is logically sound,
acceptable. Therefore, if euthanasia is following the pattern of a conditional and its
legalized, then it is morally acceptable. consequent.
P: Euthanasia is legalized. If you want to succeed in your moral reasoning,
Q: Euthanasia reduces the overall amount of then you have to master the details of this
misery in society. chapter. If you have to master the details of
Conclusion: Euthanasia is morally acceptable. this chapter, then you should ask your
Evaluation: Invalid. The conclusion doesn't instructor for help if you don’t understand any
logically follow from the premises; the moral aspect of it. Therefore, if you want to succeed
acceptability of euthanasia is not established in your moral reasoning, then you should ask
by its legalization or its potential to reduce your instructor for help if you don’t
misery. understand any aspect of this chapter.
If animals have rights, then it is wrong to eat P: You have to master the details of this chapter.
them. It isn’t wrong to eat animals. Q: You should ask your instructor for help if you
Therefore, animals don’t have rights. don’t understand any aspect of this chapter.
P: It isn’t wrong to eat animals. Conclusion: You should ask your instructor for help
Q: Animals don’t have rights. if you don’t understand any aspect of this
Conclusion: Animals don’t have rights. chapter.
Evaluation: Invalid. The argument is not logically Evaluation: Valid. The argument is logically sound,
sound; the moral wrongness of eating following the pattern of a conditional and its
animals does not necessarily determine consequent.
whether animals have rights.
Anti-drug laws are morally legitimate only if B. Review the following fallacious arguments
paternalistic laws are morally acceptable. and identify the informal fallacy committed
Paternalistic laws are morally unacceptable. by each.
Therefore, anti-drug laws are not morally 1. The death penalty is an excellent deterrent of
legitimate. crime; after all, sociologists haven’t been able
P: Paternalistic laws are morally unacceptable. to prove that it isn’t.
Q: Anti-drug laws are morally legitimate. 2. Some philosophers argue that we are morally
Conclusion: Anti-drug laws are not morally required to give away most of our earnings to
legitimate. the needy, even if it means devoting less
Evaluation: Valid. The argument is logically sound, money to our loved ones. But in times of
following the pattern of a conditional and a family emergency, these philosophers will
denial of the antecedent. always end up spending money to care for
If societies disagree about moral issues, then their family members.
there is no objective morality. Societies agree
about moral issues. Therefore, there is an
objective morality.
P: Societies agree about moral issues.
Q: There is an objective morality.
Conclusion: There is an objective morality.
Evaluation: Invalid. The argument is not logically
8
 Exercises in moral reasoning

That shows that the rest of us aren’t alternatives means giving illegal immigrants all
morally required to give away most of our the rights and protections of ordinary U.S.
earnings to the needy. citizens.
3. Some corporations have voluntarily taken Informal Fallacy: Circular Reasoning
steps to reduce their emission of Explanation: The argument relies on circular reasoning
greenhouse gases. So we don’t need to by using the priest's opinion as evidence, and then
impose any regulations in order to mitigate using the church's endorsement of the priest as further
the effects of climate change. support. It doesn't provide an external basis for the
4. How would you feel if someone killed a claim that abortion is immoral.
member of your family? Angry, right? That
shows that the death penalty is morally
justified. Sources:
5. Two politicians are engaged in a debate. Moore, Brooke Noel and Richard Parker. Critical
First politician: We should not spend billions Thinking, 6th ed. London and Toronto: Mayfield
of dollars building a border wall; the money Publishing Company, 2001.
saved could be better spent on other types Shafer-Landau, Russ. Living Ethics: An
of immigration enforcement. Second Introduction with Readings. New York and
politician: That might make you feel good, Oford: Oxford University Press, 2019.
but I can’t support giving illegal immigrants Vaugn, Lewis. Doing Ethics: Moral Reasoning and
all the rights and protections of ordinary US Contemporary Issues, 4th ed. New York and
citizens. London: WW Norton and Company, 2016.
6. Abortion is immoral. How do I know that?
Because my priest says so. How do I know I
can trust my priest’s opinions on this
matter? Because my church tells me so.

Informal Fallacy: Appeal to Ignorance

Explanation: This argument erroneously suggests
that the death penalty is an excellent deterrent
simply because sociologists haven't disproven
it. The lack of evidence against a claim does not
automatically make it true.
Informal Fallacy: Ad Hominem
Explanation: The argument attacks the philosophers
personally, claiming that their actions
(spending money on family emergencies)
contradict their moral philosophy. This is an ad
hominem attack rather than addressing the
substance of the moral obligation argument.
Informal Fallacy: Hasty Generalization
Explanation: The argument assumes that because
some corporations have voluntarily reduced
emissions, there is no need for regulations. This
generalization is hasty and doesn't consider the
actions of all corporations or the potential
impact of regulations.
Informal Fallacy: Appeal to Emotion
Explanation: The argument appeals to the emotions
by asking the listener to imagine how they
would feel if a family member were killed. It
doesn't provide a rational basis for the moral
justification of the death penalty.
Informal Fallacy: Straw Man
Explanation: The second politician misrepresents
the first politician's position by suggesting that
supporting immigration enforcement
9