Phil

Reading Questions 1
1. Do either of the following: (A.) Identify something from the text that you don't understand and try to explain
it: (B.) Identify something from the text that you disagree with and explain why you disagree with it; (C.)
Identify something important from the text that you agree with, and explain why it is important.
2. Explain how the distinction between the soul and the body functions in Descartes' argument justifying the
superiority of humans over non-human animals.
3. If we assume a secular standpoint, and thus reject Descartes' religious basis for human superiority, do you
think his conclusion of human superiority has any justification? Explain.
4. Explain Locke's reasoning for why there must be a way to acquire private property. Why does he identify labor
as the key to understanding the nature of private property?
5. Explain the rationale for the limitation on private property based on the rule not to waste.
6. Explain the connection among the second limitation Locke put on private property, the as much and as good
provision, the invention of money, and the expansion of Europeans to America.
7. Explain how Kant distinguishes an end-in-itself and a mere thing.
8. Even though animals are, for Kant, mere things, why is it wrong to harm animals in many instances?
Alternatively, when is it allowable to harm animals?
9. Do you agree with Kant's view that animals are mere things? Explain.

1.I disagree with Descartes notion that animals lack the capacity for thought. It has been
shown that some animals like dolphins, are capable of complex social interactions. That
is impossible if they are not conscious on some level.
2.It is because the bodies of animals are limited and fall short outside their specific area
of expertise, that they are considered inferior. As well as the fact that they lack the
capacity for real thought, rather then expressions of the base instincts that drive them.
Without the soul as a thinking entity, they are simply automatons
3.Not really. His understanding of how animals communicate is flawed, and he doesnt
understand the finer points of animal behavior. He simply concludes that they dont think
because he cant understand them.
4.There must be a way to get property because in order to have something to support our
own individual lives, we must own it and not let others have claim to it. Since no-one has
any right to anothers labor, when one works for something, they mix their labor with it,
thereby making it there property. Cant seek permission from others less we starve)
5. Nothing was made by god for man to destroy. Whatever is beyond what they fixed
their labor to is more then their share, and have no right to waste it. This is so that one

might not take all so that others might have none. If any went to waste, then it should
have gone to someone else.
6.The invention of money, as well as the expansion of Europe, violate the as much and as
good principle. This is because money was created so that one might attain value for
excess food and land that they did not need to use. They went beyond as much as they
needed out of greed. This is also the case in the European expansion. They wanted more
land, more then they needed
7. The worth or things is conditional, depending on their worth to be acquired while
ends in itself, have their own particular value just by existing, such as rational
creatures. Things are substitutable, while ends are irreplaceable. What differentiates
those ends is not only their rationality but also the fact that they can chose and has will.
Things have subjective ends, which are shared by all sufficiently developed biological
entities. Ends-in-themselves, can have objective ends
8.Because the treatment of animals is a reflection of how we treat other humans. If one
treats animals poorly, they are more likely to treat humans poorly. However, it is ok if the
cause is noble (serves humanity), like animal experimentation or for food. (Animals are
tools)
9. No. If animals were mere tools, then each of them would serve mankind. However,
they dont do that. We also understand that animals are capable of communication and
complex social interactions, which mere tools would be incapable of