PHL 1320 Course Content Essays MWF (9)
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Oakland University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
1320
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by oishidass1234
PHL 1320 – Course Content Essays
Total: 30 points each (120 points total)
Instructions:
Throughout the semester, you will answer four of the essay questions below. There
is no required exact number of words for each answer, but a good answer will generally be at
least two-three pages double-spaced (so in the range of 600-900 words for each essay).
Completed essays will be submitted on Moodle.
You can make use of any notes, readings, videos, etc. But if you use any additional outside
sources, make sure to cite them in some way. Also,
do not quote from the class notes word-for-
word.
Instead, always make sure to put everything in your own words.
You will not be graded on grammar or spelling, so long as your essay is readable.
However, of
course, it is good to get into the habit of using proper grammar and proper spelling. In terms of
formatting, make sure that your submission is double-spaced. Outside of this requirement, just
keep the formatting reasonable and readable. Finally, I
am willing to look at a rough draft of your
first course content essay in order to make sure that you are on the right track. Email any rough
drafts directly to me.
Due dates for your course content and case study essays (you can choose what order to complete
them in):
Essay 1: October 8
th
Essay 2: November 5
th
Essay 3: November 27
th
Essays 4, 5, and 6: December 16
th
Here are the questions you can choose from for your four course content essays.
1.
Explain Act Utilitarianism, including how Act Utilitarians say we should make moral
decisions. Next, create your own counterintuitive result objection to Act Utilitarianism.
Make sure to explain why Act Utilitarianism would lead to the counterintuitive result that
you offer. Next, explain how a Rule Utilitarian would attempt to avoid the objection that
you raised. Finally, do you think the Rule Utilitarians attempted solution to your
objection succeeds? Why or why not?
2.
Give and explain both of the formulations of Kant’s Categorical Imperative that we
discussed (the First Formulation and the Second Formulation). Next, create your own
counterintuitive result objection against each formulation (this will mean offering two
separate counterintuitive results – one against each formulation). Make sure to explain
why Kant’s formulations would lead to each counterintuitive result.
3.
Explain why Aristotle thinks that happiness is equivalent to rational activity. Next,
explain why Aristotle believes that pursuing your own happiness leads to correct moral
action. (Make sure to explain the process that we are supposed to follow to become more
virtuous.) Finally, give and explain an objection to Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics.
4.
For this essay you will be writing about
either
(1) Thomson’s People-Seed Case, (2)
Warren’s Personhood Argument,
or
(3) Marquis’s FLO Argument.
The prompt is as
follows: Pick one of the above arguments and explain the author’s argument.
Next, offer
a potential reasonable objection that one might raise against the argument.
Finally,
explain how the author might best respond to that objection.
(Note: you can pick this
essay up to two times, writing about a different author each time.)
5.
Explain Rachels’s Pro-Euthanasia Argument. Next, explain how Sullivan would reply to
Rachels. Finally, give your own analysis. Do you think either author’s argument
succeeds? Why or why not? Ultimately, do you think euthanasia is morally permissible?
Why or why not?
6.
Explain Mill’s Anti-Paternalism Argument. Analyze the argument – do you think it
succeeds or not? Next, explain Goldman’s Rational Goals Argument. Does this argument
succeed? Why or why not? Finally, do you think paternalism is ever morally permissible
in health care settings? Why or why not?
7.
Explain Rachels’s account for the right to privacy. Why does he think we have such a
right? Make sure to apply his argumentation to the medical professional/patient
relationship. Next, explain Siegler’s argument against confidentiality in medicine. Do you
agree with his analysis? Why or why not?
8.
Give and explain two reasons why, in general, truth-telling seems morally important.
Next, give an original example (not just one from the notes) where it might be morally
permissible for a medical professional to lie or withhold the truth from their patient. Next,
give Lipkin’s Anti-Truth-Telling Argument. Do you think this argument succeeds? Why
or why not?
One final, important note. At the top of each essay submission, you need to include an integrity
pledge that goes as follows:
The essay below is wholly my own work. Any outside sources that I have used are given proper
credit and citation throughout the essay. I have not used any Chatbot or LLM in creating this
essay.
We will talk about plagiarism and proper citation practices in class. To be safe, make sure to list
every source you use, even if you do not quote directly from it word-for-word. I do not care what
citation system you use or whether you use footnotes, endnotes, parenthetical asides, etc. You
just have to make sure to include every outside source you use while writing your paper. If you
have any questions about plagiarism and/or proper citation for your specific papers, make sure to
ask me.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help