Philosophy- Ethical Reasoning paper 2
Hnno
WritinganEthicsPaper20191.ppt*
*
On Writing an Ethics Paper
Tom Sullivan
Lasell College
2019
Argument tips
- If the waitress does a bad job, then it’s Ok not to tip her.
- If someone commits a really bad crime, it is morally permissible to put that person to death.
- If someone cheats on a test, then it is morally permissible to give that person an “F”.
- “Second premise” problem (how to prove)
- “No Ethical Standard” problem – WHY are these things permissible? What property do they have?
*
*
Arguments – better - p. 2
- If the waitress doing a bad job creates less total utility than if she does a good job, then it’s morally permissible not to tip her.
- If someone who commits a really bad crime treats others as means only, and not also as ends in themselves, it is morally permissible to put that person to death.
- If someone cheating on a test is unjust, then it is morally permissible to give that person an “F”.
*
*
Arguments – best (action)
- If not tipping the waitress doing a bad job creates more total utility than tipping her,then it’s morally permissible not to tip her.
- If putting to death someone who commits a really bad crime treats others as means only, and not also as ends in themselves, it is morally wrong to put that person to death.
- If failing someone who cheats on a test is just, then it is morally permissible to give someone who cheats an “F”.
*
*
The Waitress
1. If not tipping the waitress doing a bad job creates more total utility than tipping her, then it’s morally permissible not to tip her.
2. Not tipping the waitress doing a bad job creates more total utility than tipping her
-------------------------------------------------------
3. Therefore it’s morally permissible not to tip her.
*
*
Capital Punishment
1. If putting to death someone who commits a really bad crime treats others as means only, and not also as ends in themselves, it is morally wrong to put that person to death.
2. Putting to death someone who commits a really bad crime treats others as means only, and not also as ends in themselves.
------------------------------------
3. Therefore, it is morally wrong to put that person to death.
*
*
Cheating
1. If failing someone who cheats on a test is just, then it is morally permissible to give someone who cheats an “F”.
2. Failing someone who cheats on a test is just.
---------------------------
3. Therefore it is morally permissible to give someone who cheats an “F”.
*
*
*
*
Picking a Topic
- Choose a topic from applied ethics – not other fields, please (this is a very broad field!)
- Choose something from any source that presents an ethical problem or decision
- Conclusion should have a “should” or “morally right” or “morally wrong” (or other similar)
- Pick something that is interesting to you
- “Current events” are great topics, as well
- Check Topic and Argument with professor before proceeding (not from later this semester)
Reminder
Your paper is a critical evaluation of a specific argument.
It is NOT a report on a topic in ethics, such as “abortion” or “terrorism” or “animal rights”, or even “what Mark should have said to Laura”.
The assignment calls for specific steps to evaluate an argument – read the “Paper Instructions” document carefully!!
*
*
Outline
- Introduction
- Position
- Argument (modus ponens)
- Justifications (explain and defend) Premise one and Premise two
- Objections (E&D, P1 and P2)
- Rebuttals/answers (E&D, P1,P2)
- Conclusion
*
*
Argument
1. If Mark lying to Laura [about calling her] treats Laura as a means only [and not as both an ends and a means], then Mark lying to Laura is morally wrong.
2. Mark lying to Laura treats Laura as a means only [and not as both an ends and a means].
--------------------------------------------------
3. Therefore Mark lying to Laura is morally wrong.
*
*
*
*
Introduction
- Explain the problem that you are trying to solve (understand it first)
- Describe and explain the decision you are faced with
- Two or three paragraphs
- Singer, for example
*
*
Your Position
- At the end of the introduction, state the position that you (or someone else) take on the problem
- One sentence
- This should also be the conclusion to your argument!
*
*
The Argument
- The formal argument that supports the position (above)
- Use numbered premises and conclusion
- Valid – check with your professor (!!!) before you write your paper!
Argument
1. If Mark lying to Laura [about calling her] treats Laura as a means only [and not as both an ends and a means], then Mark lying to Laura is morally wrong.
2. Mark lying to Laura treats Laura as a means only [and not as both an ends and a means].
--------------------------------------------------
3. Therefore Mark lying to Laura is morally wrong.
*
*
*
*
Justifications
- One of the three most important sections of your paper
- State simply why your argument is valid
- Define all terms
- Explain and Defend Premise 1
- Explain and Defend Premise 2
- Differentiate “Meaning” and “Truth”
- 2-3 Paragraphs per premise
1. If Mark lying to Laura [about calling her] treats Laura as a means only [and not as both an ends and a means], then Mark lying to Laura is morally wrong.
What does it mean?
- Plug in the definitions and restate the premise.
- Explain what it means.
- What is the underlying principle?
- What does that mean?
Why is it [arguably] true?
- What theory or principle underlies this?
- What are the reasons that support that theory – why should the reader buy into this approach?
- Use material from the readings, but put this defense in your own words.
- Why, why, why.
*
*
2. Mark lying to Laura treats Laura as a means only [and not as both an ends and a means].
What does this mean?
- Plug in the definitions and restate the premise.
- Explain what it means.
- What about this action makes it so that this claim is true?
- What does it mean?
Why is it arguably true?
- What ideas support this claim?
- What evidence is there to show that this is true? Why should the reader agree with your understanding of this set of facts?
Use material from the readings, but put this defense in your own words. - Why, why, why.
*
*
IMPORTANT NOTE!!!
If you are saying the same thing for premise one and premise two, you have one of them wrong. They DO NOT say the same thing (even though some of the same words appear).
*
*
*
*
Objections
- Aimed at Premises
- One for each premise
- Watch for quality – explain and defend EACH objection
- Same length as Justifications
- Goal is to show each premise false
- Don’t object to conclusion
Keep them separate: Premise ONE
- Why is premise one false?
- Even if [the antecedent] is true, that still does not mean [the consequent]. (!!!)
- Aim at the premise: how will an “opponent” argue against you?
- Theory weaknesses (!)
*
*
Premise TWO
- Why is premise two false?
- “Deny” the premise: “Mark lying to Laura does not treat Laura as a means only [and not as both an ends and a means].
- Defend this idea (which contradicts pr. 1)
- Why, why, why.
*
*
*
*
Answers to Objections
- Goal is to show that objections are false
- Don’t repeat or restate justifications
- Explain and defend: why each objection is false, and give evidence
- Two paragraphs each
- These Aim At the Objections.
Rebuttal/Answer to Pr. 1 Objection
- Why is the objection to premise one false?
- How can you reject the claims in the objection?
- Remember to explain AND defend what you mean (theory strengths).
- And, of course, why, why, why!
*
*
Rebuttal/Answer to Pr. 2 Objection
- Why is the objection to premise two false?
- How can you reject the claims and evidence presented in the objection?
- Explain and defend, and:
- Why, why, why.
*
*
*
*
Conclusion
- Summarize your paper – don’t add new material
- If you are rejecting an argument, put your final replies to “answers” here, briefly
- Final comments
- Maximum two paragraphs
*
*
Some Tips
- Don’t write at the last minute
- Pick a topic that interests you – controversy helps
- Imagine a diverse, interested audience
- Grade is on how well you do justifications, objections, answers – not on your position!
- Avoid BS, but use good, relevant evidence
- Watch out for “premise 1” implication
- Smooth transitions are OK, or use numbers, but be very clear about what you are doing at any time in the paper!
