Click any of the links above for the best AP Biology practice exams, free response questions, notes, videos, and study guides.
References and Further Reading 1. Applied Ethics as Distinct from Normative Ethics and Metaethics One way of categorizing the field of ethics as a study of morality is by distinguishing between its three branches, one of them being applied ethics.
By contrasting applied ethics with the other branches, one can get a better understanding what exactly applied ethics is about. The three branches are metaethicsnormative ethics sometimes referred to as ethical theoryand applied ethics. Metaethics deals with whether morality exists.
Normative ethics, usually assuming an affirmative answer to the existence question, deals with the reasoned construction of moral principles, and at its highest level, determines what the fundamental principle of morality is.
Applied ethics, also usually assuming an affirmative answer to the existence question, addresses the moral permissibility of specific actions and practices.
Although there are many avenues of research in metaethics, one main avenue starts with the question of whether or not moral judgments are truth-apt. The following will illuminate this question. Consider the following claims: A large proportion of people, and perhaps cross-culturally, will say that this claim is true and hence truth-apt.
So, it is the branch of metaethics that deals with this question, and not applied ethics. Normative ethics is concerned with principles of morality. This branch itself can be divide into various sub-branches and in various ways: A consequentialist theory says that an action is morally permissible if and only if it maximizes overall goodness relative to its alternatives.
Consequentialist theories are specified according to what they take to be intrinsically good. Modern utilitarians, on the other hand, define goodness in terms of things like preference-satisfaction, or even well-being. Other kinds of consequentialists will consider less subjective criteria for goodness.
But, setting aside the issue of what constitutes goodness, there is a rhetorical argument supporting consequentialist theories: I take this straight from Robert N.
For example, consider the Transplant Problem, in which the only way to save five dying people is by killing one person for organ transplantation to the five. Such theories either place rights or duties as fundamental to morality. One is not morally permitted to save five lives by cutting up another person for organ transplantation because the one person has a right against any person to be treated in this way.
Similarly, there is a duty for all people to make sure that they do not treat others in a way that merely makes them a means to the end of maximizing overall goodness, whatever that may be.
Finally, we have virtue theories. But given that we live in a world of action, of doing, the question of what one ought to do creeps up. Therefore, according to such theories, what one ought to do is what the ideally virtuous person would do.
What should I do? Then whatever I do from there is what I should do now. This theory is initially appealing, but nevertheless, there are lots of problems with it, and we cannot get into them for an article like this.
Applied ethics, unlike the other two branches, deals with questions that started this article — for example, under what conditions is an abortion morally permissible? Notice the specificity compared to the other two branches.
Already, though, one might wonder whether the way to handle these applied problems is by applying one of the branches. Actually, this may be wrong. It might be the case that even if we are in error about morality existing, we can nevertheless give reasons which support our illusions in specified cases.
More concretely, there really is no truth of the matter about the moral permissibility of abortion, but that does not stop us from considering whether we should have legislation that places constraints on it. Perhaps there are other reasons which would support answers to this issue.
The pursuit and discussion of these purported reasons would be an exercise in applied ethics. Furthermore, suppose we go with the idea that there is a finite list of principles that comprise a theory with no principle being fundamental.
In summary, we should consider whether or not the three branches are as distinct as we might think that they are. Of course, the principle questions of each are distinct, and as such, each branch is in fact distinct.
But it appears that in doing applied ethics one must or less strongly, may endeavor into the other two branches.The Environmental Literacy Council Environmental Science Testbank This testbank is designed to enable educators to collaborate in developing a collection of test questions for upper level environmental science courses.
Answer all four questions, which are weighted equally; the suggested time is about 22 minutes for answering each question. Write all your answers on the pages following the questions in this book.
19 APES Free Response Question Tips tips for completing the free-response section of the Environmental Science AP exam Adapted from " Fast Track to a 5, Preparing for the AP Environmental Science Examination".
AP Environmental Science is interdisciplinary, embracing topics from geology, biology, environmental studies, environmental science, chemistry, and geography. Exam questions are based on each major topic area outlined in the course description.
As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 75, lessons in math, English, science, history, and more. Plus, get practice tests, quizzes, and personalized coaching to help you succeed.
The correct answer is (A). Drip irrigation is the most efficient form of irrigation because it utilizes a slowly dripping hose that is either laid on the ground or buried beneath the soil. It allows plants to absorb at a steady pace, rather than all at once, as in flood or furrow irrigation.