- Are fathers discriminated against when it comes to child custody and child support? Primary reading (you must criticize): Benatar. You must also read and use: Shanley.
- Should parents try to inculcate gender roles in their children? You must criticize: pro-neutrality position, which you should construct using Fausto-Sterling, Saul, and the interview with F-S in this post. You must also read and use: Poisson; Erdely
- Is it morally wrong to circumcise newborn boys? Primary reading (you must criticize): Darby. You must also read and use: Feinberg; Benatar & Benatar.
- Is it morally wrong to circumcise newborn boys? Primary reading (you must criticize): Benatar & Benatar. You must also read and use: Feinberg; Darby.
- What rights should teenagers have? Should they be able to vote? Should they be able to make intimate choices for themselves? Primary reading (you must criticize): Archard. You must also read and use: UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
- Do parents have a moral obligation to vaccinate their children? Primary reading (you must criticize): Stemwedel. You must also read and use: vaccination video; Orr.
- Do adult children owe anything to their parents? Primary reading (you must criticize): English. You must also read and use: Wang; Chua; Mildred Pierce (movie)
- Must children treat their parents with "filial piety"? Primary reading (you must criticize): Wang. You must also read and use: English; Chua; Mildred Pierce (movie), the sources in this post.
- Does it make our lives better to have children? Primary reading (you must criticize): Kazez. You must also read and use: Lybomirsky and Caplan.
- First think about which question/reading you have something to say about. You will need to critically respond to the primary reading and take a stand on the issue.The other readings listed should also come into your discussion where helpful and relevant.
- Next, you'll need to come up with a scenario that raises the question. Scenarios can come from the news or from movies or fiction or situations you know about personally.
- Read all the related class material--lecture notes, blog posts, powerpoints. Follow relevant links at the blog, etc.
- SCENARIO. Present your scenario vividly.
- QUESTIONS. Next, explain what ethical questions are raised by your story. One will be your topic question (whatever you chose from the above list), but if there are others, state them.
- PLAN. Then explain what you will do in your paper--i.e. how you will address your topic question.
- AUTHOR. Explain what your chosen author would say about the scenario. Then explain how your chosen author supports that position. You will probably need to be selective, explaining just the most important arguments. (Topic 2 is different: your target is the "pro-neutrality position," not a specific author.)
- CRITICAL. Now make objections to the arguments your covered in section 4, or to some of them anyway. This will be the hardest section to do well on. Start early so you have plenty of time for reflection.
- CONSTRUCTIVE. Explain what you would say about the scenario. Support your position with arguments. Make clear why your position is better than the author's.
- CONCLUSION. Sum up.
- BIBLIOGRAPHY. This should consist of (a) the philosophical article you're focusing on, and (b) the source for your scenario, and (c) sources you use for factual background, if any. You should be using no additional philosophical sources. Don't look around online for what other people have said about your topic. Yes, a million people have written about Thomson's violinist analogy (for example) but your job is to think about it yourself!
- Paper should be 6 pages, with no section headings. Word count at the end: about 1,800 (could be longer, but not massively longer)
- Please use Times New Roman 12, or something similar. Double space, leave margins for comments.
- Turn paper in using "safe assign" at Blackboard. There will be instructions there. "Safe assign" checks whether you're turning in someone else's work. See discussion of plagiarism below.
- 50 points -- you turn a paper in on the right topic, with the right length and structure; there is no excessive quoting
- 10 points -- scenario is appropriate and well stated
- 10 points -- "author" section is accurate and complete; you make use of background material, as needed
- 10 points -- "critical" section makes thoughtful objections aimed at the arguments in the "author" section; you make use of background material, as needed
- 10 points -- "constructive" section is coherent and well thought through--it does not consist of simply agreeing with the author or some other author; you make use of background material, as needed
- 10 points -- writing is clear; paper is well edited and proofed; sources are supplied appropriately in bibliography and whenever you use quotes
- Read the class policy on plagiarism very carefully.
- Don't waste space with excessive quoting. But if you do quote from a text, properly acknowledge your source. Failure to do so can be an honor code violation.
- To acknowledge the source of a quotation, put author and page number in parentheses, like this: "Blah, blah, blah." (Thomson, p. 445).
- It's best to put aside the reading before you sum up an argument. Explain in your own words, not by lifting phrases from the text. Doing that to excess can be an honor code violation.
PAPER I TOPICS
QUESTIONS/READINGS
- Is a childless couple doing something wrong by having no children? Reading: Smilansky
- Is it obligatory for people to stop having kids and let humankind go extinct? Reading: Benatar
- Is it wrong to destroy an embryo that's just 2-3 days old? Reading: Olson
- May a woman have an abortion if her pregnancy is life-threatening? Reading: Finnis
- May a woman have an abortion if her pregnancy is due to rape? Reading: Thomson
- If a pregnancy results from failed contraceptives, is abortion wrong? Reading: Thomson
- Is it wrong for affluent couples to pay poorer women to carry babies for them? Reading: Purdy
- Should we try to avoid having children with disabilities? Reading: Asch
- Is it wrong for deaf parents to try to have a deaf child by choosing a deaf sperm donor? Reading: Davis
- Is it wrong to choose between two embryos based on gender? Reading: Savulescu
- Should we use Kavka's restricted lives principle to guide our procreative decisions? Reading: Kavka
- Should we use Steinbock and McClamrock's parental responsibility principle to guide our procreative decisions? Reading: Steinbock and McClamrock
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.