Essay 3 Assignment Sheet
Write a 5-page essay on topic below:
1. In On Liberty, Mill argues for the utility and urgency of defending the liberty of thought and discussion in a modern society. On what grounds does he defend this liberty? In the face of controversies regarding free speech and social justice today, do you think these same grounds remain valid for an effective defense of this liberty? If so, why? If not, why not?
You are expected to:
· Respond to the topic you choose.
· Have a clear thesis and a clear structure.
· Develop arguments that are (1) logical and (2) well-supported by textual evidence.
· Cite textual evidence properly (*lecture slides don’t count as textual evidence*).
· Interpret textual evidence accurately and charitably.
· Consider and refute possible disagreements that your readers may raise to your thesis.
· Avoid spelling and grammatical issues.
· Stay within the page limit (US letter, 5 pages, double-spaced, 1-inch margin, 12 font size).
· Not plagiarize.
You do not have to:
· Cite any secondary sources.
Prepare the first draft of your research paper to include:
Your research question
Hypothesis—What do you think your research could yield?
Note: You are creating, but not carrying out your research plan. Communicate which loopholes in research your research plan would close. What questions would it answer? Why and
You don’t have to read all the files I upload, but you need to choose one or more of them to help me to do it. Thank you so much!
1. Like the first paper assignment, this option asks you to engage with texts we have read by posing and responding to your own question(s). Take one or more of the readings through week 6 and construct a question or several questions that you would like to pose about the reading(s). State the question(s) and first discuss how the author(s) would respond and then present your own responses to the question(s). State the question(s) and first determine how the author(s) would respond and then present your own responses to the question(s). Your own responses may be expository, critical (positive or negative), speculative (describing how the question provokes your own thinking), or a combination of these.
2. Respond to one of the following sets of questions, using some of the readings we have studied so far this quarter, and presenting the views of an author or authors on the topic and then presenting your own views:
A. What does it mean to be a child? Should children be treated differently than adults; if so, in what way(s)?
B. Should adults facilitate discussions with children about such potentially anxiety-producing topics such as death, identity, faith, and the meaning of life? What might be some possible problems with fostering these kinds of conversations in classrooms?
C. What does it mean for children to experience philosophical recognition from adults and their peers? Should this be an aim of education?
D. Can philosophical inquiry contribute to diminishing the impact of social inequalities in classrooms? If so, in what way? If not, why not?
Whether you choose option (1) or (2), please structure your paper as follows:
Introduction: set up your topic by stating the question(s) you will be exploring.
Body: develop your responses in a thoughtful manner. In general, discuss the philosopher’s or philosophers’ responses first, and then give your own. Your own responses may be expository, critical (positive or negative), speculative (describing how the question provokes your own thinking), or a combination of these.
Conclusion: end by critically summarizing or bringing together your insights.
The paper should be 3-4 pages, typed and double-spaced in 12-point font with one-inch margins all around.
Length: 5 to 7 FULL pages.
Topic: You have to choose one ethical theory/framework, apply it to a case study
I chose Care Ethics as an ethical theory to be applied to the Roe v. Wade case in 1973.
Topic sentence: A topic sentence stating your position/stance has to be underlined and placed in the very beginning or the very end of the first paragraph.
My topic sentence is: In this paper, I would like to argue that care ethics is an effective ethical framework in the case of Roe v. Wade.
Facts and Ethical Issues of the Medical Case: Provide a summary of what exactly happened and what the ethical issues (were and) are regarding the case that you pick.
Unpacking Ethical Theory: Use at least two paragraphs to demonstrate your understanding of the ethical theory that you would like to apply to the medical case of your choice.
Reasoning: Use the main body of the paper to demonstrate your reasoning process that back up your topic sentence.
Objection: Take a forceful objection against your position into consideration, and refute this objection if possible.
References: Cite at least five academic sources (at least one from our textbook, at least one from a journal article, a book or e-book that you can find through a library, and at least one credible source from the Internet) to back up your claims. Be sure to use a citation style (APA, Chicago Manual, MLA) consistently in order to identify the sources of your information academically.
Your Argument: Summarize your paper in the form of a rational argument (with premises and conclusion) on an extra page; you have the freedom to decide whether or not this page will be counted towards the total length.
** Identify the reasoning pattern of your argument as either explicative or ampliative.
** If your argument is explicative, please identify possible scenario(s) in which one of your premises can be rejected.
** If your argument is ampliative, please identify the possible risks of accepting your conclusion, even if all of your premises are true.
** The suggested format of the argument is:
Premise #1: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Premise #2 (if necessary): ********************************
Premise #3 (if necessary): $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Conclusion: Therefore, [the ethical framework of your choice] is effective/ineffective in [the medical case of your choice].
The article summary is a 250-300 words in length double-spaced (1-1.5 pages), summary of the 2 main viewpoints addressed in chapter 6 of the Wolff text, An Introduction to Moral Philosophy: psychological egoism and ethical egoism. For each viewpoint, carry out the following steps:
1) First define and explain both viewpoints: one or two sentences for each.
2) Second, concisely state the reasoning from the text for each of these viewpoints.
3) Finally, give your own evaluation of them. Do you agree or disagree with one, or both? Why or why not?
1st Note: Point form is acceptable for this assignment, even preferred.
2nd Note: You do not need to give any background information on the topic or author. You will be graded only on how well you understand the article and it will be important to state your ideas concisely to keep within the 300-word limit.
Review the Bill of Rights for the U.S. Constitution (the first 10 amendments) to understand what rights are listed. There are numerous online sources to find the Bill of Rights.
Next, go online and look up your state’s constitution (NEW YORK). Find three state sections that are similar to or align with the Bill of Rights. Examples include religious freedom, freedom of speech or association, etc. Compare and contrast these three state sections with their comparable sections in the Bill of Rights and discuss the guidelines for each
Writing Requirements (APA format)
Length: 1.5-2 pages (not including title page or references page)
12-point Times New Roman font
References page (minimum of 2 scholarly sources in addition to textbook if cited)
*VERY IMPORTANT MUST READ AND FOLLOW*
This reflective well written and structured paper must be of about 3000-word 6 pages, double spaced, with one-inch margins, using Times Roman 12pt font.
The assignment at core is as follows: You are asked to put two(or more) human artistic and philosophic expressions OF YOUR CHOICE, in a dialogue with each other — as they confront a major issue or question partaking to “existence in general” and to “the human condition” in particular. They can be opposing or complementing each other.
The assignment at core is as follows: You are asked to put two (or more) human artistic and philosophic expressions OF YOUR CHOICE, in a dialogue with each other — as they confront a major issue or question partaking to “existence in general” and to “the human condition” in particular. They can be opposing or complementing each other.
Again, you may choose any two entities of your choice: be it a poem, a painting, a movie, an object of art, an essay, a piece of music in short, literally anything that you think will contribute to the quality of your paper but is important to provide the rationale and the meaning for it.
When I say “dialogue” or conversation I mean it metaphorically. It can be any way that puts the two sources in touch with each other. It can be in a form of confrontation, comparison against each other or complimenting each other.
In the process of reflecting on your essay you might start from the topic of your interest and then find in your resources the two entities best serve to elucidate your point. Or you might start with the two entities close to your heart and mind and find if and in what way their meeting reveals something new and insightful.
demonstrate a serious command of the academic language and style; the ability for a well-structured presentation of your topic and your arguments as well as mastery of the content and the complexities of the subject of your writing
Notes and bibliography about five resources with at least two academic resources
Please read entire instructions, Rubric and Revisions. I have provided all of these in the attachment. This assignment consists of many revisions and an additional 1 page of writing. The assignment is currently 5 1/2 pages but needs to be 6 1/2. There are many citation errors as well as reference errors. There must be 10 scholarly sources. Please provide the additional sources. Please watch the video below. There are detailed instructions.
Your argumentative essay will be on an environmental topic from the list of options below. Consider your audience for this paper to be your peers. The essay should be between 3 ½ and 4 pages (850 to 1,000 words) in length, not including the cover page, abstract, or reference page. In this paper, you will be demonstrating your ability to synthesize information from different into a coherent argument that is properly documented. Your paper should be double spaced in Times New Roman 12 point font and must include:
• An introduction, a minimum of 3 body paragraphs, and a conclusion
• a clearly articulated thesis that states the claim, position, or stance that your essay will prove in the introduction to your paper
• 4 cited sources, at least 2 of these sources should come from the MDC databases
• At least 4 quotes from your sources
• Topic sentences that focus the discussion in the body paragraphs
• Examples, details, and explanations, and other researched evidence in the body paragraphs that clearly support the claim of your thesis
• Counterarguments and refutations that show you understand the complexity of your argument and can accurately acknowledge the views of the opposition and refute them
• Clear connections between ideas from paragraph to paragraph and within paragraphs (coherence)
• Proper APA style format in the cover page, in the abstract, in the in-text citations, and in the Reference page (see the template and instructional video for creating the APA format)
• Reference page listing a minimum of four sources
• Standard usage, grammar, and mechanics
Here’s the rest of the prompt (since I couldn’t fit the whole thing above): Do you think the argument works? Why or why not?
I’m attaching the full Taurek reading below as well as a more concise reading outline from class that goes the important terms/concepts from the reading.