Length: 3-5 pages
Format: double spaced, 12-point standard font, 1” margins,
Bibliography and in-text citation: Required!! Choose your preferred format (go for MLA if you don’t know where to start)
Purpose: Demonstrate your understanding of ethical views; take a critical position on an ethical issue and support that position
You are not required to use outside sources, but if you do, you must cite them properly or you will be penalized. You are expected to use the readings from our class as sources.
Each question will be assessed in terms of accuracy of theories, concepts and arguments; soundness of argumentation and adequacy of support given; clarity in terms of language and grammar; and organization of the answer.
question to answer in your paper:
One of the most clearly intuitively wrong behaviors is that of abusive control or manipulation of another person. Please explain how Mill’s utilitarianism and Kant’s deontology, respectively, would explain the wrongness of abusive behavior. Then, take a position on which theory gives a more accurate justification for its wrongness, or in other words, explain how one of these theories might fall short in their explanation of the wrongness of abuse. Consider and respond to one objection to your argument.
Grading Rubric
You’ll be evaluated on 4 main criteria that are meant to help you hone your writing and philosophical skills These are:
Accuracy: Make sure you address all the relevant and important parts of the idea or argument correctly. You want to represent the author/ideas as they are.
Ask yourself: What points would someone need to know to understand this idea? What information is crucial? Did I express the author’s idea correctly?
Precision: Pretend you are writing for a genie. Genies are notoriously fickle about precision. If you don’t say exactly what you mean—no more, no less—you could end up living forever in an aging body with a fish for a husband. So, be precise.
Ask yourself: Is X point relevant to the idea? Are there any pieces of information that aren’t needed? Is there any ambiguity or vagueness in my language?
Clarity: Paper follows a logical order, written in easily understood language, and is expressed clearly and simply. Few grammatical mistakes.
Ask yourself: Would someone who has never read the source material understand what I’m saying? Does the ‘flow’ of the content make sense?
Argumentation: Displays incisive critical thinking: arguments are sound and well supported by reliable evidence.
Ask yourself: Is all of my reasoning sound? Does my evidence support my thesis?
