This final assessment is worth 40% of your course grade. It is in two parts of equal weight. Please submit both parts in a single Word document. Remember to number your answers so I know which topics you are writing on.



Part 1

In an essay of 500 to 1000 words, address one of the following topics.

1          A thought experiment -- A vaccine against Covid 19 has become available. It works, but supply is limited.  Who should get it first? Rank the six categories of people listed below in order of priority, and justify your ranking.

Those whose good health is most important to the community
Those most at risk of contracting the disease;
Those most likely to die if they catch it;
Those most likely to spread the disease to others;
Children;
Those who can pay for it.
2          When, if ever, is torture justified? Who, if anyone, can be legitimately tortured? In what ways?  Fo

Read Onora Oneills article, A Kantian Approach to Famine Relief and Carrs Ethics of
Care Contribution and then answer the following questions:
1. From the lecture, what is Kants view of making ethical considerations dependent
on consequences? What should be the foundation of ethics instead?
2. From the lecture, you learned that Kant believes that that moral requirements
must be unconditionally valid. What does this mean and why does he think this is
necessary? What is the formula of the Humanity as an End in Itself formula of the
Categorical Imperative?
3. From the lecture, explain Gilligans observations and how they led her to propose
care as a new basis for assessing ethics.
4. From Oneills article, what does it mean to treat someone as a mere means?
When it is permissible to treat someone as a means? Formulate an example to
show the difference between treating someone as a means and as a mere
means.
5. From Oneills article, explain the diffe

Write a paper of at least 2,000 words [Garamond 12 or TNR 12; spacing 1.5; margins: 1.5]. You can choose any of the following topics:
Topic One. The Ethics of Abortion. Use as primary sources the two essays discussed in class (Thomson and Marquis). Explain as carefully as you can the nature of abortion as an ethical problem. Describe Thomson and Marquis views and explain how they differ and how they may, to some extent, overlap. Examine possible objections to each view. Present your own view on the issue backing it up with solid reasons/arguments.

1) Title of the Paper (as informative as possible of what the reader will find when reading your essay);
2) Introduction (half a page max.; explain, as clear as possible, the thesis you will be defending);
3) Development of your Argument(s) (main portion of your paper; roughly 75-80% of the total length);
4) Conclusion (a clearly laid-out concluding paragraph presenting a brief retrospective evaluation of what your paper ha

Suppose that someone posted an essay online arguing that women are genetically less intelligent and less ambitious than men. This essay is intellectual in nature. It has cited evidence, including some scientific evidence. Like most essays, some of what this essay says is factually right and some factually wrong, and its reasoning is right in some aspects and wrong in others.

Write a five-part essay arguing whether this essay should be allowed to be published.

The structure of this essay is the following:

Part 1: I say that this essay should be allowed/should be banned because
Part 2: One might object that
Part 3: I reply that
Part 4: One might also object that
Part 5: I reply that

Notes:
(i) The format of this assignment is quite different from the previous assignments. In particular, it begins in a different way, and you need to discuss and reply to two objections.

(ii) Word limit: 1000 words. There will be a mark penalty if you go ove

This week you will participate in the debate. You will NOT be debating this based on an opinion you have; you will be debating it based on information you have researched on the topic, and on a particular ethical framework. See all the materials in the module.  You must support your position using evidence from valid research, and you must identify the ethical framework you are basing your response on.

Week 7:  DUE Oct 12 - Round One Initial Argument -  A) Read and carefully review ALL the materials given in Module Week 7 for this assignment. B) After you have constructed your first argument you will post your argument in the appropriate forum by starting a thread. Make sure your subject heading starts with either: AFFIRMATIVE POSITION or NEGATIVE POSITION. YOU WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO VIEW ANYONES POSTS UNTIL YOU POST YOUR INITIAL ARGUMENT.
Week 8: Due Oct 19  - Round Two First Rebuttal - After each group member has posted their arguments (Week 7), you mus

Part A: Summarize Dale Spenders account of how language makes us see reality in a certain way. Do you believe that what Spender says here is correct? Why or why not?

Part B: Assume that what Spender says is true. Would this mean that the realities that people with different languages live in are different? If this is the case, could people with different languages ever be able to communicate with each other, or would people only be able to communicate with people who have the same reality as they do?

Research the following for background to the above questions:

1.  Wm. Von Humboldt:

Although there has always been strong interest in Humboldt expressed by political and cultural historians and educationists in Germany, it is only in recent decades that his contributions to the formation of modern linguistics, to semiotics, hermeneutics and philosophy of language have given rise to renewed attention to his pioneering achievements in these areas, even though

This week, you will complete your argumentative paper. Following the directions in assigned textbook reading on how write an argumentative essay on the issue you chose in Week 1. Be sure your essay contains the following:

An opening paragraph that states a clear thesis that is focused, plausible, and arguable and that gives direction and purpose to the paper
A fair-minded, balanced, and objective development of the pros and cons of the issue in a well-organized sequence of ideas, free of mechanical errors
Credible, reliable, and authoritative evidence in support of the points made
A strong conclusion that summarizes your views, reminds the audience of the issue and its importance, and shows in brief that you have successfully defended your thesis

Length: 4-6 pages (not including title page or references page)
1-inch margins
Double spaced
12-point Times New Roman font
Title page
References page

This week, all the hard work you have done in re

For this weekly check-in, read the ninth chapter, "Death," on pp. 87-94 in your book What Does It All Mean? by Thomas Nagel. While discussing the possibility of life after death, Nagel says:



If we go only by ordinary observation, rather than religious doctrines or spiritualist claims to communicate with the dead, there is no reason to believe in an afterlife.

For your original thread, discuss whether you believe this statement is true and why or why not. In your paragraph, you may also discuss any other aspects of this chapter that stood out to you.

After posting your original thread, reply to at least two classmates. You may let them know whether you share their ideas if their post helped you to think of things in a new way, etc.

For this weekly check-in, read the eighth chapter, "Justice" on pp. 76-86 in your book What Does It All Mean by Thomas Nagel. While discussing issues of justice both nationally and globally, Nagel says:



Most disturbing of all are the enormous inequalities in wealth, health, education, and development between rich and poor countries. Most people in the world have no chance of ever being as well off economically as the poorest people in Europe, Japan, or the United States. These large differences in good and bad luck certainly seem unfair; but what, if anything, should be done about them?


For your original thread, explain if you agree that the enormous inequalities in wealth, health, education, and development between rich and poor countries seem unfair and why or why not. Next, answer Nagels question: What, if anything, should be done about these large differences in good and bad luck?

After posting your original thread, reply to at least two classmates

The paper should be 4-5 pages long but no more than 10. By 'argumentative' I mean your positions, thoughts, and arguments towards a philosophical problem. The bulk of the paper should consist of your arguments and positions. Note that no papers will even qualify for an A unless they are reasonably free of grammatical and spelling errors as well as ill-formed sentences. To be considered for an A or a B, your paper must be more than a textbook-style summary. Superior papers will accomplish one or more of the following goals:
a. Explore the topic in some depth instead of painting a broad picture.
b. Attempt to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the positions discussed.
c. Show familiarity with the different critical interpretations of the theory or author in question.
d. Argue a position or present some sort of conclusion.