Write a 1000 to 1500 word (4 to 6 page--1000 to 1500 word) essay on one of the topics below. Your paper should be turned in at the beginning of lecture on Wednesday, October 1.

Please bear in mind in writing that the virtues of a philosophy paper are clarity, depth of analysis and critical questioning, judicious consideration of arguments, and logical organization. Be sensitive to such questions as: Are my claims clear? Are my arguments clear? Am I being fair to opposing views and adequately appreciative of what might be said in response to my claims and arguments? Also, when you make claims about a philosopher we have read, make sure that you support your interpretation with specific references to the text.

Finally, academic integrity requires that you clearly acknowledge and reference ideas you have derived from others (whether from books or from the Internet).  Especially when you take a specific formulation of a point, it is necessary to make that clear with quotation. The College's policy on academic integrity and plagiarism can be found at:

http://www.lsa.umich.edu/lsa/detail/0,2034,24%255Farticle%255F5143,00.htm

If nothing else, please bear in mind that this is an ethics course.

Topics:

1. At one point in Chapter II, Mill says, "utilitarian moralists have gone beyond almost all others in affirming that the motive has nothing to do with the morality of the action, though much with the worth of the agent." (289-90) Discuss the relation of this statement to Mill's overall moral theory (including to the "criterion of right and wrong"), taking account of what Mill says in Chapter I, II, and V. Your essay should also address the role this statement plays in its context, i.e., in the paragraph it appears and surrounding paragraphs.

2. In Chapter V, Mill says: "We do not call anything wrong, unless we mean to imply that a person ought to be punished in some way or other for doing it— if not by law, by the opinion of his fellow-creatures; if not by opinion, by the reproaches of his own conscience. This seems the real turning point of the distinction between morality and simple expediency." (321) Write an essay in which you critically discuss this statement and what reasons you think might lead Mill to make it, how it is to understood in relation to the "criterion of right and wrong" that Mill states in Chapter II, and how, given this statement, what you think determines, in Mill's view, the rightness or wrongness of an action.

3. In Chapter II, Mill argues that all human beings have a "sense of dignity" and that it is "essential" to the happiness of "those in whom it is strong." Critically discuss this claim of Mill's and its role in his theory of what is desirable and, as well, in his theory of right and wrong. How does Mill defend this claim, and how adequate is his defense? How does it fit with Mill's arguments in Chapter V?

4. Critically discuss, with detailed textual support, whether Mill is an ethical naturalist (as defined in Philosophical Ethics, and how the following bear on this question: (a) his contrast between "inductive" and "intuitive" moralists, (b) his "proof" of the principle of utility, and (c) his argument that pleasures admit of qualitative differences in intrinsic value.

5. Critically assess Mill's argument in Chapter III ("Of the Ultimate Sanction of the Principle of Utility") with respect to the question of whether Mill is an ethical naturalist.