its a paper thats easy its for ethics and the chapters on the book is on youtube
In Critical Response Paper #2, you are asked to reflect on the readings in Shafer-Landau, Part Two, Chapters 5-8 on the first four normative theories in ethicsâ€”morality & religion, natural law, psychological egoism, and ethical egoism. You are also encouraged to interact with other relevant readings weâ€™ve done up to this point such as the insights drawn from the RSL readings from The Ethical Life assigned in Units 6-8.
Critical Response Paper Question
Shafer-Landau argues in Chapters 5-8 of The Foundations of Ethics that there are various attempts among moral philosophers to offer and defend a normative approach to ethics. What does it mean to say that an approach to ethics is normative? According to the readings, what the essential thing is a moral philosopher attempting to do in setting forth an ethical theory? (Think about what philosophers do in general and try to apply this to the field of ethics.) Trace through the arguments for morality & religion, natural law, psychological egoism, and ethical egoism and offer a brief summary for each ethical approach.
Next, identify at least one of the major objections each ethical theory or approach in question must satisfactorily answer if it is to be successful. What objection do you think is the most damaging to the ethical approach in question? Offer good philosophical arguments for your position. Which ethical approach, given its tensions, objections, and aims, has the most promise of being a defensible position? Again, support your conclusion with good reasons and arguments.
The design behind this assignment is to allow you to showcase your understanding of the basic concepts inherent to a philosophical discussion of normative ethics.
Points for Consideration
You will notice that a philosophical exercise such as this is comprised of a mixture of objective answers and debatable points of view. In other words, you must first have a correct conceptual understanding of the normative approaches in question before you can offer a substantive critical analysis. No one is required to agree with your critical analysis, and your grade is not based on whether you are deemed right or wrong. You grade is based on your ability to reflect good philosophical reasoning, the way youâ€™ve seen it presented in the readings.
Start early. If you wait too long, youâ€™ll likely feel rushed and not benefit from the design intention of the assignment. I realize it is easier said than done but do your best to enjoy the exercise. The more you can step back and have time to reflect, the more you will likely benefit from the insights and enjoy the process.
Keep in mind that the purpose of a written assignment is to write. So, while there is a minimal word count of no less than 700-800 words, you are strongly encouraged to produce a paper of sufficient length to clearly and concisely cover the critical nuances necessary for a substantive discussion of the question.
As all good philosophical arguments go, the conclusion is only as good as the premises from which it follows. If we reject the truth of the premises or premises, or if the premise is expressed as a definition we find inadequate or objectionable on good rational grounds, itâ€™s difficult to make a rational defense for the conclusion. For example, what does it mean to say that an ethical approach is normative, or that some approaches to ethics are intended to be prescriptive, while others are consciously descriptive in nature?
Be sure to carefully define your terms. What is meant by normative ethics? What is meant by prescriptive and descriptive theories?
Is there such a thing as a moral â€˜oughtâ€™ that can be used as the basis for objective moral truth?
Keep in mind that these are only points for consideration. Iâ€™m asking you to think about these questions as you work through your paperâ€”that is, they are intended as a primer. A good deal of critical analysis is about asking the right kinds of questions and thinking through various implications.
The real value of the paper is to allow yourself to go through the process of reflective thinking. This means youâ€™ll want to start sooner rather than later to allow yourself plenty of time to introspect on the ideas in question
800 Word Minimum (More is typically better. Write enough so that your points are clear.)
12 Point Font
No Cover Page
Saved as a Word .doc
Proper Citations (MLA, APA, Chicago/Turabian)
Must be turned in
(uploaded through eLearn) on or before the due date. Papers not
turned in, on time, through the eLearn Dropbox must be emailed to the instructor.
There will be a deduction of one full letter grade for every day the assignment is late.
The paper must be argumentative within a critical response framework. Do not plagiarize or
copy other sources without giving credit to the original author. Intentional and unintentional
cases of plagiarism are treated the same:
a zero on the paper and a possible F in the cla