|
Review Questions for Mid-Term Exam
Introduction and Fundamental Questions: Who am I? 1. What does Pope John Paul II say about the importance of “Knowing Thyself”? Why is it important to one's life? Explain. 2. What, according to Viktor Frankl, was necessary for prisoners to survive the horrendous conditions in a Nazi concentration camp such as Auschwitz? How do Frankl's comments relate to what Pope John Paul II says about "knowing oneself"? (What does Frankl say? What does the Pope say? How do they relate?) 3. What, according to Emily Esfahani Smith, is the difference between hedonia and eudaimonia? 4. What, according to Emily Smith, are the four "pillars of meaning": the four things studies show help people to find meaning in their lives? Describe each of the four briefly. 5. What is the point of Walker Percy’s self-examination questions in Lost in the Cosmos? Explain. 6. What are the characteristics of what Michael Sandel calls "the unencumbered self"? 7. How in the modern world do we tend to think about happiness? What would John Paul II Viktor Frankl, Emily Esfahani Smith, and the authors of "The Happiness Trap" want us to realize about happiness? What are the "risks of meaninglessness"? 8. Why, according to Timothy Clydesdale, are college students not asking the "big questions" of meaning that so many college and university educators (like this one) want them to ask? 3. Consumerism: Buying and Selling a Sense of Self 1. According to Christian Smith and his colleagues, are America's emerging adults concerned about "competitive consumption"? What kinds of responses do they generally give when the issue of their buying habits and the buying habits of others comes up? What big questions are they neglecting when they approach consumer behavior this way? 2. According to Walker Percy, why are men and women subject to fashion? How does the "negating" of the person work? 3. How does "identity marketing" work? Why is it effective? 4. What, according to Juliet Schor, are the results of men and women in this country being subject to fashion? Explain. 5. According to John Paul II, what is the main problem with "consumerism"? Explain. 4. The Modern Moral Landscape 1. Christian Smith suggests that many emerging adults espouse a view he describes as “moral individualism.” What is “moral individualism” and how does it differ from “moral relativism”? Has Christian Smith found that emerging adults have strong arguments to defend their moral individualism? Discuss and explain. 2. One of the arguments that emerging adults will sometimes use to defend their moral individualism is that there is a lot of disagreement among different people about morals. What sort of replies does Smith give to this argument? 3. Something else emerging adults seem to feel strongly about is that, when it comes to moral matters, they don’t want to “judge” anyone else. How does Christian Smith respond to this unwillingness to “judge” others? 4. When it comes to the sources of morality, many emerging adults said they simply didn’t know. But there were others who ventured an opinion. Some seemed to think that morality was defined by what other people would think about you. Others thought that what was “good” was what functionally improved people’s situations. Another group argued that the basis for morality was whether it hurts other people. Others suggested a social contract theory of morality. What are the reasons Smith finds each of these options wanting (that is to say, it fails)? 5. When it comes to “absolute” principles in morality, we have to distinguish, claims Christian Smith. By “absolute,” in a moral context, we might mean universally binding, pertaining to all people at all times. But it can also entail a general principle, which applies to all kinds of relevant situations. Which of the two does Christian Smith favor and why? 6. In the final section of this chapter, Christian Smith proposes that “if these emerging adults are lost, it is because the larger culture and society into which they are being inducted is also lost.” What, according to Smith, are the cultural factors that have left so many emerging adults “morally adrift,” unable to think or reason clearly about moral questions? 7. What are the characteristics of what Christian Smith calls "moralistic therapeutic deism"? Why do you suppose this view is so popular among today's young people? 5. The Source of Confusion: A Confusion of Sources 1. How does Alasdair MacIntyre describe the current state of our moral language? 2. Why, according to MacIntyre, are contemporary moral argument “interminable”? 3. Please give examples of the confusion that can arise between Kantians, utilitarians, and proponents of "inalienable rights." 4. One often hears people justify their actions with this excuse: "Why shouldn't I be able to do what I want as long as it doesn't harm anyone else?" This, the so-called "harm principle," goes back to the work On Liberty by John Stuart Mill. What are some of the problems of trying to apply the "harm principle" generally? Moreover, what odd contradiction has arisen in the modern university with the application of Mill's principle? 6. Uncivil Discourse: Simulacra of Arguments in Rhetorical Junkspace 1. Why, according to Alasdair MacIntyre, have disagreements become so intractable today? Why have they become so bitter and harsh? 2. Why, according to MacIntyre, is “unmasking” the supposed hypocrisy of our opponents so much a part of our current moral discourse? 3. In the first section of Habits of the Heart, Robert Bellah and his colleagues describe the lives of four different individuals: Brian Palmer, Joe Gorman, Margaret Oldham, and Wayne Bauer. Please describe each person’s conception of the goals of a good life. 4. Although all of these four people have very different views of the good life, Bellah describes them as “Different Voices in a Common Tradition.” What is that "common tradition"? What affect does that "common tradition" have on the way we think about the goals of the political society and, in particular, what governments are for? 5. Why would these four individuals have a hard time having any kind of discussion about the common good and collective actions of the community, state, or nation? 6. Describe what author Robert Epstein calls "The New Mind Control." How does it work? 7. What, according to Greg Jackson ("Vicious Cycles: Theses on a Philosophy of News"), are the problems with the way we as a society currently think about "news"? 8. Are contemporary social media helping us to have better discussions? Why or why not? 9. Consider for a moment, what if the answer to the previous question is "clearly not." Would coming to this realization cause you to stop using social media? If not, is it your assumption that you are uniquely insulated from the bad effects of social media? Has it every occurred to you that everyone who uses social media likely has this same assumption? 7. Freedom, Success, and Justice 1. How, according to Robert Bellah, do Americans tend to think about success? How do they define it? Why do they define it the way they do? How is their notion of success related to the common notion of "freedom" we encounter in the modern world? 2. According to Robert Bellah, how does our American tradition encourage us to think about justice? What is lacking, however, in this conception of justice? Why do Americans have difficulty conceptualizing any different notion of justice given the views they hold about "success" and "freedom"? 3. What is the common American notion of success? The common American notion of freedom? And the common American notion of justice? Explain how these three are connected. 4. Would "moralistic therapeutic deism" help challenge these American notions of success, freedom, and justice, or merely reinforce them? Explain. 5. Describe Fr. Pinckaers' distinction between "freedom of indifference" and "freedom for excellence"? What are the basic characteristics of each and how do they differ? 6. Explain the differences between having only a notion of freedom as freedom from external constraint as opposed to also adding the notion of freedom for excellence or for the good. What happens to love and commitment if we only have the notion of freedom as freedom from constraint? 8. Humanity and Technology 1. The Second Vatican Council's Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (Gaudium et Spes) describes the situation of man in the modern world as paradoxical. Explain 2. Early during his time in the Shantung Compound, Langdon Gilkey saw no need for religion. Later, his mind changed. Why? What were some of the things that caused him to change his mind? 9. Classical Views of Nature, Human Nature, and Human Flourishing: Western 1. Why, according to Alasdair MacIntyre, did the Enlightenment project of justifying morality fail? (Please describe in terms of the threefold schema that characterized classic moral theory.) 2. Please describe the basic tenets of Stoicism and Epicureanism using the threefold schema: "nature --- rules or disciplines --- human flourishing." 10. Classical Views of Nature, Human Nature, and Human Flourishing: Eastern 1. What is the basic view of the world and of the human person that underlies the Hindu view of the moral life? 2. What is the basic view of the world and of the human person that underlies Buddhist view of the moral life? 3. What is the basic view of the world and of the human person that underlies Confucian view of the moral life? 11. Reflections on Virgil's Aeneid: Free Will, Fate, and the Gods Discuss the relationship between the gods, fate, free will, and obligations to others presupposed in the Aeneid. 12. Reflections on Virgil's Aeneid: What to do about Dido? 1. Aeneas has a very difficult and in many ways painful decision to make when he chooses to leave Carthage and his beloved Dido. Explain how each of the following would have advised Aeneas about what the "wise" choice to make would be. (Please include both their advice and why they would give the advice they give.) a) the Stoic Epictetus2. Please describe the essential elements of what Christian Smith calls "the shadow side of sexual liberation." 13. What is Our Story? 1. When, according to Cardinal Ratzinger, did creation
become
a dominant
theme for the Jewish people? What insight about God
was gained
(that
perhaps could not have been gained elsewhere) 2. According to Cardinal Ratzinger, during this time, the Jewish faith in creation had to find its own contours vis-a-vis what? 3. Why, according to Cardinal Ratzinger, should the Jewish creation account be seen as the decisive “enlightenment” of history and as a breakthrough out of the fears that had oppressed humankind? [NB: Ratzinger mentions this theme as well at the beginning of the present chapter – on page 5, to be precise. Look there for a nice summary of his position.] 4. As Cardinal Ratzinger points out (p. 14), the classic seven-day creation story is not the only creation text in sacred Scripture. The others, it is important to note, do not stick to the same seven-day structure. What conclusion does Ratzinger draw from this fact? 5. Ratzinger notes that the words “God said” appear ten times in the creation account. What does he think this signifies? 6. He also notes that the number of days of creation is seven. What does he think this signifies? 7. Ratzinger says that the profound idea that the universe exists for the sake of worship is frequently misinterpreted. In what way? Explain. Why, according to Ratzinger’s interpretation, did God create the universe? 8. According to Ratzinger, why is it important that the
people
not reject
God’s rest and worship? 14. Creation: Science and Theology 1. What, according to William Carroll (Creation and Science) is the difference between the Christian (especially Thomistic) account of “creation ex nihilo” and what modern natural scientists call “creation”? 2. What, according to Carroll, is the significance of this view with regard to our conception of the relation between natural causality and divine causality? Are they mutually exclusive? Explain why or why not? 3. What is the significance of this view of the relationship between natural and divine causality and modern theories of evolution? 4. What is the significance of this view of the relationship between natural and divine causality for the Christian view of freedom and moral choice? 5. How does the view proposed by Carroll (echoing the ideas of Thomas Aquinas) help us to resist the notion of a “distant” or “deistic” God who “withdraws” from creation to allow human freedom? How does it help us to resist the temptation to look for a “God of the gaps”? 6. How does Carroll’s “Thomistic” account of creation and causality help clear the way for a “sacramental” view of creation? 7. How does Carroll’s “Thomistic” account of creation help us avoid more “fundamentalist” readings of the Genesis creation stories (in Gen 1 and 2) that (a) cause unnecessary conflicts with modern science, and (b) cause us to miss the more fundamental issues (still plenty controversial) about the world, the meaning of history, and human life. 15. Respecting the Created Order 1. According to Oliver O’Donovan, what must serve as the foundation of Christian ethics? 2. According to O’Donovan, what follows from separating faith from morality? 3. According to O’Donovan, Christian ethics depends upon the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. Why? 4. According to O’Donovan, “Since creation, and human nature with it, are reaffirmed in the resurrection, we must firmly reject the idea that Christian ethics is esoteric, opted into by those who so choose, irrelevant to those who do not choose.” Why has this misconception gained favor, and why does O’Donovan believe it is mistaken? 5. Why does O’Donovan reject the Stoic ethics based on “life in accord with nature”? What difficulties does he see with the Stoic position? 6. According to O’Donovan, in proclaiming the resurrection of Christ, the apostles also proclaimed what else? 7. According to O’Donovan, “to speak of the world as ‘created’ is already to speak of an order.” Explain what he means. 8. According to O’Donovan, what is the most fundamental teleological relation in the cosmos? 9. According to O’Donovan, created things are ordered both to God and to one another within in ordered whole (which we do not always discern). He also claims that things “are ordered by kinds and ends.” How is his claim similar to the thesis in Robert Sokolowski’s article “What is Natural Law? Human Purposes and Natural Ends”? 10. Why, according to O’Donovan, can we not speak of the flourishing of any kind without implicitly indicating a wider order which will determine what flourishing and frustration within that kind consists of? Why, when we raise this question, do we also raise the possibility of a “supernatural” end? 11. Why, according to O’Donovan, if we are to give any content to the term “humanity”, we must do so in a context where we can understand it as a kind and relate it to the wider order in terms of its end and the ends of other beings. How does this claim relate to Langdon Gilkey’s conclusions at the end of The Shantung Compound about humanity’s need for a transcendent end whose characteristics owe much to Christian revelation? 12. How and why, according to O’Donovan, does “abstraction from teleology” (that is to say, the kind of teleology he has been arguing for) create a “dangerous misunderstanding of the place of man in the universe”? |