1. In their piece ‘Enhancement and Cheating’ Caouette and Habib argue for an interpretative approach to understanding cheating in context. How does this approach work and what does it mean for understanding enhancements as cheating?
2. What is the main thesis in ‘Moral Enhancement: Do means Matter Morally?’ Do you agree or disagree with the authors? Please explain your answer in as much detail as you can.
3. What approach do you find best to understanding enhancement as they are described in ‘When is Diminishment a form of Enhancement? Please explain why this approach is better than the others on offer.
4. Do you believe enhancement is cheating? Please detail your answer and consider objections to your view. Why aren’t these objections convincing to you?
5. Don Marquis and Judith Thompson have very different views on abortion. Which do you most agree with and why? Please show that you understand what the author’s are arguing in your answer. What do you find most convincing about each author and what do you find most problematic. Explain in as much detail as possible showing an understanding of both arguments.
6. In “On the Moral Permissibility of Passive Moral Enhancement” Prof. Caouette responds to Focquaert and Schermer’s Moral Enhancement: DO the Means Morally Matter? Do you agree with this response by Caouette? Please explain your answer and show a command of both articles in your answer.
7. John Martin Fischer responded to Judith Jarvis Thompson by calling into question her thought experiments. What is his argument and does the cabin case he presents do a better job to describe what might be right or wrong when a woman decides to abort? Please explain as best you can.