Which of the following is true of all minerals? (2 points)
Which of the following is true of all minerals? (2 points)
Which of the following is true of all minerals? (2 points)
Questions
Which оf the fоllоwing is true of аll minerаls? (2 points)
Midterm Exаm — Science Fictiоn & EthicsFоrmаt: This is а multi-day in-class writing assignment. Yоu will write your essay across two class sessions (Monday and Wednesday, 85 minutes each). This exam is administered through Blackboard using Honorlock screen recording and Browser Guard. You may not access any outside materials, devices, or applications during the exam.Between Sessions: After Day 1, you will be able to view your Day 1 writing, but you will not be able to edit it. Use the time between sessions to think about your argument, consider what you want to revise or expand, and plan how to use your Day 2 session. You will not be able to bring notes with you to Day 2.Day 2: You will receive the full text of your Day 1 writing along with a fresh essay box. You may copy and paste from your Day 1 text to restructure, revise, and continue your work. Your Day 2 submission is what will be graded.Quotation Bank: You have access to the quotation bank you prepared and uploaded in advance if you did so.Target Length: 800–1,500 words (but there is no real maximum/minimum word count). Quality matters more than quantity.Requirements:Present a clear thesis and argue for it.Engage substantively with at least two of our primary sources (Parfit, Siderits, Huemer).Consider at least one serious objection to your position and respond to it.Observe the Forbidden Case Constraint (explained below).The Forbidden Case Constraint:For the purposes of this exam, the judiciary has been thoroughly convinced of both Parfitian Reductionism and the Buddhist Doctrine of No-Self. You may not argue that the clones are straightforwardly different persons from Sam Bell whose independent consent is required. The most obvious objection: that the clones are separate people and this is simply slavery, is not available to you. You must work within the reductionist framework to make your case.Stipulated Facts (unless your scenario modifies them):Sam Bell Prime was aware of the cloning arrangement and consented to it.Sam Bell Prime completed the first authentic three-year contract under the same isolated conditions as the clones.Sam Bell Prime is being compensated for all labor performed by the clones.The clones are designed with a biologically limited lifespan of approximately three years.Each clone experiences only its own three-year stint with no cumulative effects from prior cycles.The clones were never intended to discover the truth. The events of the film represent a malfunction.Robotic or AI-based solutions are not viable alternatives for this operation.The Corporation's Concession: The corporation concedes that the specific events of the film, where two clones discover the truth, represent a failure and a breach of its duty. It owes Sam Bell compensation for this negligence. However, it maintains that the underlying arrangement, when operating as designed, is morally permissible.The Shortened ContractScenario Modification:Suppose that Lunar Industries, responding to ethical review, shortens the clone contract from three years to two years. Each clone is activated, performs two years of mining work, and is then painlessly euthanized while believing it is returning to Earth. The clones still have a biologically limited lifespan (approximately three years), but they serve only two-thirds of it. The remainder — one year of decline and worsening feelings of isolation — is avoided through the early termination. The clones' psychological experience during their two years is substantively similar to the original three-year arrangement, just compressed: they still believe they are the original Sam Bell, they still receive the simulated video messages from Tess, and they still look forward to going home. Sam Bell Prime has consented to this arrangement.Your Task:Does shortening the contract to two years change the moral status of the arrangement? Write an essay in which you argue either that the reduced duration meaningfully mitigates the moral concerns, or that the core moral problems persist regardless of the contract's length. Your argument must operate within the reductionist framework (observe the Forbidden Case Constraint) and engage substantively with at least two of our primary sources.
Dаy 2 InstructiоnsWelcоme tо Dаy 2 of the Midterm Exаm. Below you will find the full text of what you wrote on Day 1. You may copy and paste from it freely as you continue working.Your Day 2 submission is what will be graded. Use this session to:Continue writing where you left off.Revise, restructure, or strengthen your argument.Add engagement with sources you did not address on Day 1.Develop your response to objections more fully.Reminder: Your essay should be 800–1,500 words. All original exam instructions and constraints still apply.A note on your Day 1 essay: Your final paragraph raises an objection based on the claim that the clones "have no soul" and no real connection to Sam Bell. Be careful here, review the Forbidden Case Constraint. Consider whether this objection is available to you under the terms of the exam, and if it is not, replace it with an objection that works within the reductionist framework. Also remember that you are required to engage substantively with at least two of our primary sources.Day 2 Wrinkle: As you continue your essay, consider the following claim from Parfit: the reductionist view does not entail that we should be less concerned about our future welfare rather it entails that we should be more concerned about the welfare of others. How does this claim bear on the argument you are making?Your Day 1 Writing:A clone escaped from Lunar Industries and made it to earth. Lunar Industries after consulting with Sam Bell, has decided to make changes to how their moon base operates. Lunar Industries has decided that it will now shorten the time frame that it uses the clones of Sam Bell in attempt to prevent another situation where a clone could make it back to earth and upset operations on both the Moon and the life of Sam Prime. The reduction of the contract from three to two years does not change the moral status of the arrangement. In fact, the reduced duration mitigates some moral concerns. One of the concerns that can be brought up is the potential for an escape to happen. When a clone escapes to the surface it can cause a disruption to Sam Bell primes life as the clone will believe that he is Sam Bell, just a younger Sam and will act accordingly to what he knows. While Sam prime is psychologically connected to the Sam clones that connectedness is not great as Sam Prime has lived longer and is not that same as the clone is in that way, as the clone is repeating the same three years that Sam did originally. Since they are not one in the same this could lead to the clone lashing out, feeling robbed of his life, and, since they are psychologically identical, making whatever bad decisions Sam is capable of making in order to get what he may perceive as justice. With this chance of escape reduced Sam prime, the Sam clones nor Sam's family will have to suffer from the trauma and confusion that such a situation could cause.With the shortened time frame on the new contract another moral issue that is being lessened is what happens to the Sam clones when they breakdown at the end of the third year. This deterioration of the body leads to physical decline, pain, anxiety and feelings of loneliness and isolation. By shorting the time until ethical euthanasia we reduce the suffering of the Sam clones both physically and psychologically. Allowing the clones to serve the full three-year term of the contact only to start to breakdown and suffer while still requiring them to work is questionable, as we are making the Sam clones suffer and it is this very suffering that caused the incident on the Lunar Industries moon base that brought this entire situation into motion. With this reduction in time by a full year and the early termination of the Sam clones cycle we lessen the problem. There are those that will not agree with this view, that this is not ethical to kill someone, but this is what Sam Bell agreed to with Lunar Industries. Since the clones are Sam Bell, since they share a psychological connectedness with them his decision is what matters here. Even though Sam and his clones are qualitatively identical, exactly alike, they are not numerically identical, or one in the same person. So, Sam may have decided that this (ethical euthanasia) was the best plan for himself if placed in a situation, where rather than suffer he would rather be put down quickly, and painlessly, and this is how the clones should be treated as well since they are Sam. In fact, Lunar Industries and Sam may claim that Sam is getting a better deal than the original deal that Sam agreed to since Sam prime had to do a three-year tour and now the Sam clones are only doing a two-year job.A problem that someone may argue against the entire arrangement is that it is not Sam Bell doing the work. That he is not there that he has no connection to the clones even though they are physically identical they have no soul. This argument is one that would be making the claim on behalf of personal identity and the idea of the cartesionan ego.