Write a three to four (3-4) page paper in which you: State your position on the topic you selected. Identify (3) three premises (reasons) from the Procon.org website that support your position and explain why you selected these specific reasons. Explain your answers to the “believing” questions about the three (3) premises opposing your position from the Procon.org website. Examine at least two (2) types of biases that you likely experienced as you evaluated the premises for and against your position. Discuss the effects of your own enculturation or group identification that may have influenced your biases. Discuss whether or not your thinking about the topic has changed after playing the “Believing Game,” even if your position on the issue has stayed the same. The paper should follow guidelines for clear and organized writing: Include an introductory paragraph and concluding paragraph. Address the main ideas in body paragraphs with a topic sentence and supporting sentences. Adhere to standard rules of English grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and spelling. Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements: This course requires the use of Strayer Writing Standards (SWS). The format is different than other Strayer University courses. Please take a moment to review the SWS documentation for details. Based on the guidelines in SWS, “A well-researched assignment has at least as many sources as pages.” Since this assignment requires you to write at least 3-4 pages, you should include at least 3-4 references. The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are: Identify the informal fallacies, assumptions, and biases involved in manipulative appeals and abuses of language. Create written work utilizing the concepts of critical thinking. Use technology and information resources to research issues in critical thinking skills and informal logic.
Three Parts to Include in Report: Part One: Intro to Philosopher 1. Name and time period of philosopher 2. What was the report (focus) of the philosopher in ethics? 3. Tell us about the basic BIO. of the philosopher? 4. Tell us a few things totally offbeat and unusual (and perhaps funny) about the philosopher. Part Two: Primary Readings/Summary 5. What is the name of the philosophers famous work in ethics (primary readings)? 6. How many pages did you read of it? Which sections?? 7. Give us a basic summary of what you read. (sections 7 and 8 are the most important parts of the report) 8. Analyze the material compare/contrast/evaluate Part Three: Application 9. Apply the philosophers ideas to today / to yourself. 10. Would you recommend this philosopher to others? Overall, what do you think about this philosopher? Did the philosopher change your thinking in any way? Any final statements about this philosopher??
For this week’s assignment respond to one of the following options, and include Option 1, 2, or 3 as part of your heading. Option 1: The first option is to name and describe in detail a key specific and recent healthcare technology. What are at least two key moral problems this technology creates? What are the proper moral guidelines for dealing with it in your view? Compare your approach to what a utilitarian and ethical egoist would say (each independently). Option 2: In the second option, name and describe in detail a key specific and recent social technology. What are at least two key moral problems this technology creates? What are the proper moral guidelines for dealing with it in your view? Compare your moral approach to what a utilitarian and social contract ethicist would say (each independently). Option 3: John Doe, Patient One, is in late-stage of kidney disease. If he does not receive a new kidney, then he is predicted to die within a week. Doe is 45, single, and has no children. Doctors theorize that Doe damaged his kidney by not following a low-salt diet. Doe inherited one million dollars and is known for giving money to charity. Without a transplant, he will probably be forced to spend all his money searching for a kidney outside of the usual legal channels. Patient Two is Jane Doe (no relation to John). Patient Two is the mother of two children (ages 21 and 24). She is divorced and 55 years old. She developed kidney problems due to eating a high-fat and high-sugar diet. If she does not receive a kidney within one month, doctors believe she will die. Patient Three is an orphan. This orphan lives in a state facility. She was born with a genetic condition that constantly damages her kidney. The only known approach to her condition is to provide her with a kidney transplant every so often. She is 11 and has already undergone two kidney transplants. She will perish in two months if she does not receive another transplant. All three patients are at the same hospital. The hospital only has one kidney to give out. The orphan’s birth parents were known to be of a religion that is opposed to organ donation. The other patients come from religions that do not oppose organ donation. Who should get the kidney? Why should that candidate receive it over the others? Devise a course of social action and a solution for this case by using the ethics of egoism and then utilitarianism to a key moral conflict involving health care in this case. Appraise the interests of diverse populations (in terms of ethnicity, race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.) and how they relate to the case. For all the options: Cite the textbook and incorporate outside sources, including citations. You should not be using any text you used in a discussion board or assignment for this class or any previous class. You will submit all of the following: A written report that presents one of the options above (Be sure to give equal time to each element.) An oral presentation that summarizes the report and examines the ethical ideas beyond the particulars of each case. The link or a scan of the article mentioning the health technology, social technology, or case you are reporting on. If you made up the case, please indicate that in your report. You should not be using any text you used in a discussion board or assignment for this class or any previous class. Cite the textbook and incorporate outside sources, including citations. Writing Requirements (APA format)
Do women actually exhibit the different forms of ethical reasoning attributed to them? If they do, what is this a consequence of (nature, society, etc.)? Does it affect feminist ethical theories?
Proposition: Felons in the United States should regain the following rights immediately after being released from prison: the right to vote, the right to live in public housing, and the right to apply for all employees without discrimination (which would entail banning the box For your debate project, each of you is to submit a minimum of 4 of the strongest pro arguments for your topic. Each of these arguments should be fully developed with multiple premises, written in your own words, and thoroughly supported by several separate pieces of documented evidence. In total, each argument should contain a minimum of 6 clear premise statements logically supporting a specific conclusion statement. Each of your 4 arguments should lead to a different, specific conclusion related to a particular aspect of your larger conclusion (your general proposition for the debate). (120 points) 4 of the strongest con arguments for your topic. Each of these arguments should be fully developed with multiple premises, written in your own words, and thoroughly supported by several separate pieces documented evidence. In total, each argument should contain a minimum of 6 clear premise statements logically supporting a specific conclusion statement. Each of your 4 arguments should lead to a different, specific conclusion related to a particular aspect of your larger conclusion (the negation of your general proposition for the debate). (120 points) 10 credible and relevant sources for your debate topic (these cannot include sources like procon.org, debate.org, thoughtco.com, debatewise.org, etc.). You need to include a minimum of 2 specific, relevant pieces of information from each of these sources somewhere in your arguments or moderator questions. (30 points) 10 good moderator questions, in your own words. Approximately half of your moderator questions should be aimed at the weaknesses of the pro argument and approximately half of your questions should be aimed at the weaknesses of the con side of the debate. (30 points) This assignment should be at least 4 – 6 pages, not including your works cited page. You need to submit your own work, in your own words. If your Turnitin score is above 25% you will not receive a passing grade for this assignment. If your work is plagiarized or Rogeted, in any way, you will receive a zero for the assignment. Remember to include your specific proposition at the top of your submission. I’m not concerned if the sources you provide are in MLA, APA, etc. format as long as you include adequate information so that I can easily find each source and verify that it’s a credible and relevant source.
Remember that you have to think critically, which means leaving feelings and religious beliefs aside. We are dealing with the concrete, social problems and must find a practical, specific solution. Read the articles in your textbook but above all refer to class discussions and lectures. The textbook is the one I uploaded.
You need to address the subjectivism vs. objectivism debate in ethics. Which do you find the most convincing? What arguments do you find the most compelling to support your position? In other words, you need to choose either ethical objectivism or ethical relativism, explain which arguments help you choose your position, and explain why other arguments are NOT convincing. You will find details of this debate in our William Lawhead Philosophical Journey book (pages 431-453) Next, you need to present the various theories of ethical relativism found in our Lawhead book and give the strengths and weaknesses of each theory. Then you will need to decide which theory you find most convincing, and support your decision with arguments. Subjectivism pp. 433-435; Conventionalism pp. 435-443 Finally, you need to present the various theories of ethical objectivism found in our Lawhead book. You will need to give strengths and weaknesses of each theory, explain which is the most convincing, and support your decision with arguments. Ethical egoism pp. 453-469; Utilitarianism pp. 470-487; Kantian ethics pp. 488-505; Virtue ethics pp. 506-525
2. Explain why doing something that you do not want to do is not necessarily a restriction of your autonomy. 3. Explain why identifying how some action harms someone is not sufficient to apply the principle of Justice. 4. Why does Weston think we should seek to integrate values? Answer the questions below about this scenario: Martha Johnson works for Antenna Engineering, which has designed the antennas and a thousand-foot tall tower for a local TV station. The tower has been put in place, except for the last section containing the antenna baskets. Because the baskets are attached to the top section, it cannot be lifted in the same way as the other sections. To hold this last section away from the tower as it is hoisted so that the antenna baskets will not be damaged, the construction workers, who work for a different firm than Johnson and are not engineers, plan to bolt some lifting arms to the section. These arms, which would extend beyond the edge of the tower section, would allow the section to be held far enough away from the tower to prevent damage to the antenna baskets. Not being confident that this method of lifting the final section is sound from an engineering standpoint, the construction workers call Johnson, asking, Can you look at our proposal for lifting the last section to be sure it is safe? Johnson calls her boss, Bill Mason, the president of Antenna Engineering, to relay the request. His response is emphatic: No way! If we are involved in construction in any way and there is an accident, we are liable. Our contract was only to design the tower and the baskets. We have no responsibility for construction. We tried to be nice guys once before and ended up being sued for $250,000. We are a small company and cannot afford to lose our insurance. Johnson knows enough about the construction contractors proposed way of lifting the last section to suspect that it is indeed unsafe and that there is the real possibility that the last section could fall, killing the workers who will be riding the section to the top of the tower. Unfortunately, she also knows that her bosss fears for the welfare of the company are legitimate and that she will probably lose her job if she gives the contractors any advice. 5. Which moral principles apply? For those that do apply, what course of action to they support or oppose?  6. Identify the values at stake in this situation, and then devise an integrative (win-win) approach to the problem. 
Write a short, objective summary of 250-500 words which summarizes the main ideas being put forward by the author in this selection.
Try it now!
How it works?
Follow these simple steps to get your paper done
Place your order
Fill in the order form and provide all details of your assignment.
Proceed with the payment
Choose the payment system that suits you most.
Receive the final file
Once your paper is ready, we will email it to you.