Using the material from Gazzaniga and Shoemaker, offer an analysis of the earliest stage of development at which a biologically human organism plausibly has intrinsic moral value. If you argue that this earliest point is conception, explain two arguments for why that is a bad answer and offer replies to those arguments. If you argue for a point later than conception, explain one argument that supports an earlier stage and one argument that supports a later stage, and for each of these arguments, offer a reply.
Technical Guidelines:
Word limit: 900-1000 words.
Times New Roman 12-point font, double-spaced, 1-inch margins all around.
Your paper should be checked carefully for spelling and grammar errors. A few minor slips are inevitable, but a paper with many such errors will be marked down.
Note: If English is not your native language, note this on your cover sheet and more leniency will be given with grammatical errors. However, any errors that undermine the ability of the grader to understand the meaning of what you are trying to say will still count against you.
Bibliographic Guidelines:
I don’t care what citation format you use, just make sure you’re consistent
If citing a reading from the class, you can just cite author and page number (either in a parenthetical or in a footnote), and you don’t need to include it in a bibliography
If you have no outside sources, you do not need a bibliography. If you use any sources from outside the class readings, then you must have a bibliography with entries that give adequate information for the paper reader to find the source if they wish.
Rubric: Your grade will be based on 4 criteria: clarity, accuracy, relevance, and organization. For each criterion, you will get a score between 1 and 4. Those scores will then be added together and multiplied by 5, giving a possible range of scores between 20 and 80. You automatically get 20 points just for handing in the paper, so when your earned points are added in, your range of possible scores is 40 to 100. The TAs can give scores in quarter-point increments, so it is possible, for instance, to get a 2.25 or a 3.75 for one of the components, but you would not get a 3.3 or a 1.9. Put another way:
a = clarity score
b = accuracy score
c = relevance score
d = organization score
Your total score will be 20 + (5*[a+b+c+d])
Here are guidelines for what counts as a given score on each criterion:
Clarity:
1 – Consistently difficult or impossible to tell what the writer means. Claims are frequently vague or ambiguous, and concepts are used improperly. Grammatical mistakes may hinder intelligibility.
2 – Frequently difficult, sometimes even impossible, to tell what the writer means. Claims are repeatedly vague or ambiguous, and some concepts are used improperly. Grammatical mistakes may hinder intelligibility.
3 – Usually clear writing, but occasionally difficult to tell what writer means. In a few cases, claims are vague or ambiguous, or a concept is misused. Grammar is consistently good.
4 – Writing is consistently clear and writer’s meaning is clear. Claims are rarely if ever vague or ambiguous, and concepts are used properly. Grammar mistakes, if there are any, do not get in the way of understanding the paper’s claims
Accuracy:
1 – Factual claims are regularly incorrect and reconstructions of arguments have many errors.
2 – Incorrect factual claims are incorrect with some frequency, and reconstructions of arguments often have one or more significant errors.
3 – Most factual claims are accurate, and reconstruction of arguments have no serious errors.
4 – Factual claims are reliably correct, having few if any incorrect statements. Arguments are consistently reconstructed correctly
Relevance:
1 – Essay includes a lot of material that is not relevant to the prompt and/or lacks a lot of material that is essential to answering the prompt adequately
2 – Essay repeatedly includes irrelevant material and/or lacks important material
3 – Essay has all or almost all needed material but contains some irrelevant information as well.
4 – Essay is focused on the relevant material, includes everything needed to answer the prompt and does not go off-course with irrelevant things.
Organization:
1 – There is effectively no discernable organization in the paper. Claims are introduced in no orderly way, and the paper does not build on itself to any serious degree
2 – There is not much organization to the paper. In a few short stretches, the paper builds on itself or rationally expands upon ideas introduced, but these are the exceptions, not the rule
3 – The paper mostly succeeds in creating an organized structure where ideas are introduced and then expanded upon and the paper builds on itself well.
4 – The paper consistently offers an organized structure and builds upon itself in a way that makes it easy to follow the author’s line of reasoning
