Assignment Students are required to submit a 750-word (minimum) assignment. The student will present a situation requiring an ethical choice, consider the possible choices available and their consequences, take a position on the situation, and justify that choice. The student must incorporate significant references to at least one thinker discussed in the course so far as part of their evaluation of the situation requiring an ethical choice. The assignment must include the following:
Summary of Situation Requiring a Choice: The student must summarize the situation
which calls for an ethical choice, including all relevant details.
Presentation of Available Choices: The student must present the possible choices
available and the consequences of those choices.
Decision and Justification: The student must make a choice in the situation and justify
that choice with well-reasoned arguments.
Philosophical Engagement: These references can be used in any part of the
assignment and should demonstrate thoughtful engagement with the philosopher and ideas
Students need to do is introduce an ethical issue, such as euthanasia or abortion. Then present arguments for it and against it, along with some of the reasoning behind these arguments. After this, students will introduce their chosen ethical theory, explain this theory, and then use it to support their argument. For example, why is abortion right (Or on the other hand, why is abortion wrong, depending upon which side you would be arguing)? Guide to Writing this Term Paper
The basics boring requirements:
12-point Times New Roman Font
750 words minimum
Bibliography (NOT WORKS CITED)
The seeminly challenging requirements:
For this paper you must present a situation requiring an ethical choice. This situation must be drawn from a news article. It must be a situation that actually happened. No hypotheticals. An ethical choice means you are deciding what would be good or right. Avoid political situations that bring in the question of justice. This makes the topic too large for a 750 word paper and the question of justice is much more challenging. Stick with the good for the individual. Possible topics: Suicide, Euthanasia, Abortion, Stem Cell Research, Physician-Assisted Suicide, Prostitution, Cloning, Abstinence, Same-Sex Marriage, Animal Testing, Sex Dolls, Forced Marriage. (Note that some are easier than others and some will require a large amount of research to support arguments.)
You must present at least, and preferably, two possibilities and provide arguments and reasons on behalf of both possibilities. Don’t simply give a bunch of statements. Provide arguments that defend each position. Why would people argue that this side is right? Why do they say this is the good act? If you cannot provide arguments for both sides, you need to pick a different topic.
Finally, you must take a position on this situation and justify that choice. Don’t give away your conclusion until this point. Everything prior to this should be completely neutral. This is the stage where you should bring in your philosopher/ethics. Make sure to use someone who will support your arguments. Work closely with the philosopher. Do not explain this philosopher or cite them via secondary sources. You must incorporate significant references to this thinker.
You should not:
Create hypothetical situations to analyze.
Use the personal, ever.
Argue against a system of ethics instead of using a system to support your arguments.
Weaken your argument by stating that your chosen ethics is often wrong, but right on this one occasion.
Make personal attacks.
Curse. (Keep the paper professional.)
Give away your conclusion at the beginning.
Make claims without any supporting arguments or evidence.
Make overly general statements. (Always and never are usually a bad sign)
Jump to special cases or alternatives. (Stay focused)
Your ethical situation. Lead in with the news article. Explain the topic and make it important/problematic (Don’t just say it is important).
Arguments for side 1.
Arguments for side 2. (Not just statements, the reasoning underneath these statements. What do they see as good? How are they judging the right action?)
Conclusion for side 1 and justification using chosen philosopher and their ethics. Cite major points by the philosopher and then connect these points with your arguments. How do the arguments from side 1 above match up with the chosen ethics? How do the arguments for side 2 fall short?
Conclusion of paper