Your assignment (due by hardcopy on Thursday, March 31 and worth 10% of your
grade) has seven parts.
First, read (completely) one of the following readings:
1. St. Thomas Aquinas, “The Natural Law,” pp. 95-102.
2. Ayn Rand, “The Ethics of Emergencies,” pp. 102-108.
3. Annette Baier, “The Need for More than Justice,” pp. 160-172.
4. Confucius, “Analects,” pp. 183-188.
5. Virginia Held, “The Caring Person,” pp. 188-198.
6. Jean-Paul Sartre, “Existentialism and Humanism,” pp. 198-207.
7. Philip Quinn, “Divine Command Theory,” on Blackboard.
8. W.D. Ross, “What Makes Right Acts Right?” on Blackboard.
9. An approved article/chapter from normative ethics that is not already in this list.
Second, briefly explain and summarize the main normative ethical theory that the author
is advancing in the reading. (Remember that normative ethics is not the same as either
meta-ethics or applied ethics.)
Third, schematize an argument from the reading that the author discusses in support of
the normative ethical theory being advanced. (If the argument is already schematized in
the reading, you are not allowed to use it.) (Note: try to be charitable in your
interpretation.)
A schematized argument is an argument in “premise-conclusion form.” For example:
P1. If different cultures have different moral codes, then there are no objective
moral values.
P2. Different cultures have different moral codes.
————————————————————
C. So, there are no objective moral values.
Fourth, explain how the argument is supposed to support the normative ethical theory the
author is advancing. That is, explain the relevance of the argument.
Fifth, explain the reasoning of the argument. That is, explain how the conclusion is
supposed to follow from the premises. Use correct terminology from the logic section.
Sixth, defend the premises. Provide argumentation for the premises and defend them
against any objections.
2
Seventh, critically evaluate, on your own, whether the argument ultimately succeeds or
fails. Defend your answer.
