Paley's teleological argument for God compares objects in the natural world to this object. (Don't be late!)

This tale from Plato's "Republic" tells the story of a poor shepherd who finds a magical ring. Thank goodness, Tolkien fans, Plato's work is public domain!

Jeremy Bentham believed that this was the ultimate human good. What a hedonist!

Between "acting from duty" and "acting according to duty", this phrase describes a good act that is performed from the wrong (e.g., selfish) motive.

If we can prevent something bad from happening without sacrificing anything of equal moral significance, we ought to do it - at least according to this contemporary moral philosopher.

St. Anselm says that existence in reality is greater than this type of existence.

Attention divine command theorists! Your theory about morality into falls prey to this "dilemma" named after one of Plato's dialogues.

Utilitarianism is this type of moral theory because it defines the morally right act in terms of the consequences of the act.

"Consequences of an act, be damned!"... This is what is matters for Kant when judging the moral worth of an act.

According to this philosopher, "the unexamined life is not worth living".

David Hume argues that the teleological argument makes an weak inference because it attempts to derive a cause from its known effects without this.

This theory, which defines morality as a set of rules agreed upon by individuals for their mutual benefit, was proposed by Thomas Hobbes.

The morally right act is the act the generates the greatest pleasure/happiness for the greatest number. At least, so says this principle of morality.

"If I want to do well on this exam, I ought to study" is an example of this type of imperative.

Science uses empirical observation. Religion uses faith. Philosophy, on the other hand, bases its answers on this.

"2+2=4" and "a bachelor is an unmarried male" are types of claims we can know this way.

This pre-political state is one in which Thomas Hobbes calls "nasty" and "brutish".

Woah there! It may be difficult to measure this subjective experience - at least, so the objection to utilitarianism goes.

Kant's first formulation of the categorical imperative states that the principle or reason on which you act must have this feature.

Giving to the poor is often regarded as "charity". But it should be labeled this, according to Peter Singer.

For many people, intelligent design is replaced by Darwin's theory of evolution because the latter provides a better one of these.

Enjoying public radio without paying? Earning a good grade on a group project without working? You can properly be dubbed on of these.

According to a popular objection to utilitarianism, utilitarianism fails to give due regard to these. Our founding fathers described them as "unalienable".

Be rational! Because it is the our rationality that gives us this status. (Don't be a tool!)

Besides explaining why evil is permitted by God, the believer in God could also do this to respond to the problem of evil.