Editing and writing business essay Philosophy

Philosophy 225: Business Ethics

Spring 2017

Ethical Theory Essay

Write a 2200 – 2700 word paper on one of the below questions. (If, so some reason, you need to significantly depart from these parameters, you MUST clear it with me FIRST.) Your essay should have a clear, specific thesis, be coherently organized and argued, well supported and engage the relevant texts. It should also be typed (First Draft too), double spaced and in accordance with Chicago Manual Style. While it is necessary that you spend some time laying out the problem and engaging the philosopher/text, it is crucial that you also present your view (with supporting arguments), consider counter-arguments to your view and defend your position in light of these counter-arguments. ABSOLUTELY NO LATE PAPERS!

***Remember some important steps:

A) Brainstorm and try to organize your ideas into a coherent and structured thesis.

B) Develop each of your major points (from the thesis) in detail and support with examples, analogies and/or arguments, explaining what you think each proves.

C) Discuss and outline a major counter-argument for each of your main points, explaining the problems raised by the counter-arguments.

D) Rebut the counter-arguments by showing how they are unproblematic, wrong or irrelevant and also show why your view is better. This involves continuing and amplifying arguments begun in Step 2.

GRADING CRITERIA: (to what extent and with what proficiency)

This paper will be graded on the following considerations, in addition to the criteria laid out in the Essay Guidelines handout in the syllabus:

1) To what extent did you follow all the directions?

2) In Step 1, did you laid out the theory charitably, with adequate textual support and in a clear, coherent manner?

3) Did you include analysis that ties the specific argument to the larger work of the philosopher and other works in ethics?

4) Do you have a clear, specific thesis with at least two separate major points which makes clear your assessment of the theory discussed in Step 1?

5) Does the paper have clear, coherent organization that is easy to follow?

6) In Step 2, do you present clear, specific and well-explained evidence for your thesis? Do you make a convincing argument for your view?

7) Are Steps 3 and 4 present? Did you try to work through the entire 4 Step process? (You will be graded mostly on Steps 1 and 2)

8) Does your paper follow the basic style rules for a good academic paper?

9) Are any ideas or analysis that is not your own properly documented?

10) Did you really try to engage the theory and bring your own ideas into the discussion in an interesting way?

The Draft MUST include a fully worked out version of both Steps 1 -3 , as well as a start on Step 4, and be a minimum of 2000 words.

**IF you run into problems, do not know where to start or just need some ideas, please ask! I can help!

1) Stakeholder Theory represents a critique on Milton Friedman’s classic position on social responsibility in business, arguing that constituents other than shareholders are also important. Choose either Goodpaster or Freeman’s ( not Friedman ) view on Stakeholder theory and sketch out the arguments and details of their view of the role of Stakeholders, and on what moral basis they make these arguments. What do you make of the Stakeholder view in question? Do you agree with the arguments? Why/why not? How would you make your case? How does this view track relative to how social responsibility is viewed in business?

4 STEP WRITING PROCESS

PURPOSE: To develop the critical and analytical writing style used to evaluate and defend philosophical arguments. (These questions are not the structure of the paper, they are for you to think about as you pre-write. This is true of any questions I give you in an assignment!)

STEP 1: EXEGESIS AND ANLAYSIS (including proper textual references/citations)

EXEGESIS: What is the position of the author?

What are the supporting arguments/ reasons/ideas/examples for the thesis ?

INTERNAL ANALYSIS: How do they support the argument? How are they connected?

What is the argument supposed to show? Why is it important? What is the author concerned with and why? How does this argument fit with the philosopher’s other concerns?

EXTERNAL ANALYSIS: How does argument connect or contrast with other views on the topic?

How does it fit within the larger debate?

STEP 2: ASSESSMENT/ YOUR POSITION

What is your thesis? What do you want to argue about this issue?

What are your two or three specific points or arguments?

What evidence/support can you give for your position? What does it show/prove? How? Why is it important/relevant?

What is your judgment of the argument? Do you agree/disagree? Why?

Are the argument and its supporting reasons convincing? Why or why not?

ARGEEMENT: What are the strengths of the argument? Why? *

DISAGREEMENT: What are the weaknesses of the argument? Why?

What problems do you see or objections can you raise in the argument? *

Why and how (exactly) are they a problem? *

STEP 3: COUNTER-ARGUMENTS

What objections might someone who disagrees with your position (STEP 2) raise against your specific points? (One objection for each point in Step 2)

What criticisms might they have of your argument?

Why/How are these objections/criticisms problematic for your arguments?

Why/How might they undermine your specific points? (Be specific, not general)

What critical issues are at stake here?

What is the main source of disagreement?

STEP 4: REFUTATION/DEFENSE + PARTING SHOTS

How can you answer/refute the counter-arguments raised against your view? Why are they wrong or not really a problem for your view?

How can you defend your view?

AND

How can you prove/show your view is right/better? How can you amplify your argument? What are the advantages of your view? Why should we adopt your view?

What are the implications of your argument? Why? How does the specific argument that you make relate to the larger philosophical debate on this issue?

ESSAY GUIDELINES

All essays should be typed, double-spaced and conform to the appropriate citation format and writing standards. (Chicago Manual is the Philosophy Department standard; see Sakai handout or Library site for more information) The following guidelines are designed to give you an idea of what I generally expect for each grade category, but are not hard and fast rules. Any assignment must (to receive a passing grade) follow the directions and include all components of the assignment. You should also consult the specific grading criteria for each assignment for more detailed information and guidance.

An A Paper should: develop its thesis in clear, well-organized paragraphs, which are connected by good transitions and follow in a logical order. The thesis and arguments are supported by specific examples and explanations and do a good job of laying out the problem in an understandable and compelling way. The paper presents its ideas in a way that shows insight, originality, good comprehension and intellectual risk taking. It is mostly free of grammatical and usage errors, with a clear and fluent style. The use of sources should be interesting, compelling and bring a new perspective to the issue.

A B Paper should: present a thesis of substance and in an interesting manner, addressing the questions and issues in a clear fashion. It may have a few minor flaws in organization, development or grammar. The thesis should be well supported and demonstrate an understanding of the central issues involved, including possible concerns or objections. The use of sources should go beyond competency; they should be well integrated with the material, supporting or providing enhancement to the perspective.

A C Paper should: have a thesis that competently answers the questions raised and lays out the problem adequately. It should be competent in organization, development, grammar and usage. It may contain little that leaves a lasting impression on the reader, lacking significant or original ideas and grace in style. The argumentation may show flaws in reasoning or evidence, but in general it makes the point well by providing adequate support for its claims. The use of sources should be appropriate and competent, avoiding plagiarism and using the proper citation style consistently.

A D Paper will: have a thesis that is deficient in important ways. The thesis may be vague or indefensible, may lack convincing or accurate argumentation, may lack adequate organization, fail to support its claims or contains massive grammatical or usage errors which inhibit the thesis and support. Such a paper may also fail to address or engage the issues involved or fail to lay out the problem in a helpful or appropriate way. The use of sources may be substandard, irrelevant or inadequate to the issue.

An E (failing at PLU) Paper will: have a thesis that is unclear and deficient in more than one respect -- organization, development, grammar and usage. It usually fails to address the important issues and lay out the problem and fails to provide any significant support for the position argued. Such a paper may have some merit, but it is difficult to follow and understand and frustrates the reader or simply fails to fulfill the requirements of the assignment. The use of sources is absent or involves plagiarism.