Divine Command Theory:

What are the two possible interpretations for “God commands what is good?”  What role does human reason play for either possibility?

H. L. A. Hart:

1. Why does possessing a right require justification for restricting the freedom of another?

2. Are rights the same as duties?

3. Do duties imply rights?

4. Do codes of behavior grant rights?

5. What examples of moral justification does Hart offer for the creation of a special right?

6. What is characteristic of general rights?

7. What does Hart’s account do for the relationship between positive and negative rights?

Finnis:

Chapter 1

1. What does Finnis claim as a difference between the natural sciences and the social sciences?

2. What aspects of individuals does Finnis think a social science must take into account?  Explain how Bentham and Kelsen fail to do this.

3. How does the perspective of practical reason overcome Hart and Raz’s deficient perspectives in determining what the legal point of view is?  How does this conflict exemplify the differences between natural law theorists and positive law theorists?

4. Apply Raz’s approach to the legal point of view to the problem of deciding what friendship is.  How does the perspective of practical reason apply to both cases?

5. Why can't Hart and Raz’s approach account for the transition from pre-legal to the legal order?

Chapter 2

1. How does Finnis characterize the perspective of practical reason?

2. Why does Finnis claim that his account of natural law will not violate the is/ought gap?

3. Explain how the is/ought gap applies to Clarke and some examples of natural law theory.  How does Finnis propose to overcome these difficulties?

4.  Explain the two interpretations of Hume’s criticism of Clarke.  How do both interpretations of the criticism relate to natural law theory?  How does Finnis propose to overcome these problems?

Chapter 3

1. What does Finnis mean by self-evident?  Give some examples.

2. How does Finnis argue that rational though depends upon a premise like “knowledge is a good”?

3. What does Finnis mean by a self-defeating belief?  Give some examples.  Explain how Finnis thinks anyone who seriously believes that “knowledge is not a good” holds a self-defeating belief.

Chapter 4

1.  How does Finnis propose to understand what our basic values are?  What is the point of undertaking this investigation?  Is this investigation a scientific investigation?  Then how can anthropology help in this investigation?

2. Why can't and urge be a basic value?  intelligence?  survival?

3. What are the seven basic values?  Give an example of each.

4. Show how a value like courage is really a combination of the seven basic values.

5. What does Finnis mean in saying that all of the values are equally basic?  How do we determine which value is the most important?  How can a value be the most important?

6. What does one do to the seven basic values when choosing a life-plan?  What does it mean to choose a life-plan?

7. Why isn’t pleasure on the list of most basic values?

Chapter 5.

1. Why must we choose a life-plan?  How does practical reason adjudicate this task?  Consider:
a. The kinds of goals one can pursue.
b. The preference among values.
c. Preference among persons/favoring one’s self.
d. Detachment.
e. Commitment.
f. Efficacy to the task at hand.
g. Respect for every basic value.  (What does this relate to?  The task for the course???)
h. The common good.
i. Following one’s conscience.

2. What is the relationship between these basic requirements for practical reason and various ‘ethical theories’?  What does Finnis think one does when one gives a ‘theory of ethics’?  How does Finnis think he has overcome these shortcomings?

Chapter 6

1. What is the difference between reasonableness and self-interest?  What distinction is Finnis concerned with?

2. State and explain the four types of unifying relationships.   Which relationship is political order concerned with?

3. What are the two usual types of relationships/friendships?  What kind of relationship overcomes the shortcomings of these two limited relationships?

4. What does Plato do to friendship in making an organized society?  What does Finnis think the role of friendship should be in society?

5. What is the relationship of family to friendships?  What are the differences between a family and a friendship?  Does Finnis simply mean ‘blood relationship’ for family?

6. Is a family self-sufficient?  What level of community do we need after family?

7. How does political community share three characteristics of friendship.?

8. What are the boundaries of political community?

9. How can one pick out a political community?  Is it a scientific enterprise?  Why not?

10. What is the common good?  Why must we be careful in articulating the common good?  How does it relate to utilitarian concerns?

Finnis, Chapter 7

1. What is justice?  What three elements does justice embrace?

2. Justice requires fostering the common good in one’s community.  What does this mean?  How should we do this?  What distinctions in justice does this require?

3. In distributive justice, what is the concern?  How many ways are there to do this?  What do we need to keep in mind when undertaking this task?

4. How does private property help the cause of justice?  (Two ways)  Are there different ways to decide which goods should be private and which goods should be public?  Is private property unconditionally just?

5. What is Nozick’s conception of property rights?  How does Finnis criticize Nozick?  What does Finnis think Nozick has missed out on?  How could Nozick respond?  Who is correct?  Why?
 

Chapter 8

1.  What does Finnish say virtually everything in his book has been about?  (hint--title of the chapter)  How does these relate to practical reasonableness?

2.  What is the conflict between the 2-term and 3-term interpretations of rights talk?  What kinds of rights do 3-term interpretations exclude?  Which is more basic, 3-term interpretations or beneficial rights?  How does Finnis resolve this dispute?

3.  If we look at the history of duties and rights, what conclusions can we draw?  Do the different uses of the terms 'rights' and 'duties' cast doubt on Finnis' account?  Why?

4.  What limitations does the UN Declaration of Human Rights contain?  What could general welfare mean?  Is this limitation justified?  How does this limitation differ from the limitations imposed by public morality and public order?

5.  What problems arise from specifying rights in the cases of public order and public morality?  How does this give rise to paternalism?  Is paternalism justified?

6.  Suppose someone asserts that negative rights should take precedence over any state paternalism.  How would Finnis respond?  How does his response show  his problem with articulating a theory of rights and using that theory to adjudicate every case of conflict between negative and positive rights?  What role does Finnis think practical reasonableness plays in this conflict?

7.  What does Finnis say about someone who asserts "liberalism must not make any judgments about the good life; instead, liberalism must simply secure our negative rights so we are free to pursue our individual conceptions of the good life"?  How does this relate to Finnis' discussion of practical reasonableness?

8.  What does Finnis say about absolute rights?  How could absolute rights be justified?  Is this a legitimate move?  Why?