--- tags: CCHU9005 --- # CCHU9005 Problem set #1 Sept 2022. Version 1.02. **Instructions** 1. Answer all questions. 1. Submit your answers in a word document to Moodle. An upload link will be posted to Moodle before the deadline. 2. Make sure you include your name, the name of your tutor, your tutorial group, and HKU student ID number in your document. There is **no need** to copy the questions or the instructions into your document. 4. Deadline: **5pm 26 Sept 2022**. 5. Late submission: -25% within the first 24 hours after the deadline, -50% within the next 24 hour, etc. 6. You are strongly advised to submit early and not wait until the last minute. Computer problem is not an acceptable reason to be late. 7. Plagiarism: This is the unacknowledged use of the work of others as your own. It is a serious offence at HKU. In some cases you might get expelled from the university. See <http://www.rss.hku.hk/plagiarism>. **Do not** copy the answers from others or allow your answers to be copied. 8. If you have any question about this problem set, post your question to the course forum on Moodle. 9. Remember to check for grammatical and spelling mistakes before submitting. --- For the first three questions, provide your arguments in the standard format. (1) [5%] Give an example of a **valid** argument related to food. The argument should have three premises and one conclusion. The argument should cease to be valid if any of the premises is removed. All three premises have to be true. (2) [5%] Give another example of a **valid** argument related to food. The argument should have exactly two false premises but a true conclusion. (3) [5%] Give an example of an argument related to food that is **not valid**. It should have two true premises and also a true conclusion. The next two questions relate to the required readings. (4) [25%] Read through Dan Lowe's article. Suppose his criticisms of the three arguments were correct. Does it show that it is morally wrong to kill and eat animals? Why or why not? Use not more than 50 words in your answer. (5) [60%] Read Regan's article. Suppose some scientists want to experiment on monkeys to stop the COVID-19 pandemic, but the monkeys will suffer. According to Regan's rights view, is this morally acceptable? Why or why not? You should explain clearly what the rights view is, and how it applies to this example. Make sure you also explain the meaning of "inherent value" and "subject of a life". (300 words maximum. Include a word count. Shorter answers are fine as long as they are accurate.)