ethics essay

Anonymous
timer Asked: Mar 26th, 2017
account_balance_wallet $20

Question Description

  1. answer three questions in essay format
  2. each essay should have 500-1000 words based of readings
  3. essays need to include how well are you able to explain the relevant course material? (Very important
  4. To what extent can you make an (evidence-based) argument for a thesis? (Very important)
  5. To what extent do your paper’s structure (e.g. intro/body paragraphs/conclusion) and language (e.g. grammar, style) make it easy for a reader to follow? (Important to the extent that they impact the two criteria above)

i want it to have details and examples

Unformatted Attachment Preview

1 Muaz Alkhalifah Dr. Brendan Shea PHIL1125 Date Rape by Lois Pineau According to Pineau (1989), date rape is sex without consent but does not involve physical injury. She refutes that the requirements by courts that physical injury is the key proof that someone has been raped. Her argument regarding this is that women are sexually provocative and always asking for it while men cannot control their sexual desire. Pineau dismisses these sex myths. She also argues that the contractual sexual model should be replaced with a communicative model. With a communicative model, she says that a man cannot assume that a woman has consented for sex (Pineau, 1989). If the man makes the assumption of consent under contractual model and goes ahead to engage in sex with a woman, then that is rape. In this essay, I write the arguments that Louis Pineau makes and answer two potential questions which may arise. Pineau asserts that there is minimum legal protection for a woman who was sexually assaulted by a stranger during a casual date. The reason for this is that it is not easy to substantiate the lady’s claims that she did not give in to the sexual advances from the man. She further argues that even when it is clear that the lady resisted and protested the sexual act, the courts usually fail to interpret this as withholding sex by her. Instead, the courts use the myth that when a woman says ‘no,’ she actually mean ‘yes.’ It is believed that when a woman protests sex, she is just pretending (Pineau, 1989). This is why it is not easy to prove in the current court system that the man is culpable. 2 Pineau says that when faced with rape allegations, most men defend themselves against the accusations saying that the woman asked for it (Pineau, 1989). She reasons against the arguments made that provocation from a woman and the uncontrollable nature of a man are the main reasons why date rapes happen. According to her, women need to be able to be provocative without fearing that they will be assaulted. Pineau points out the absurdity of these arguments. Her reasoning is that women also need to have pleasure in sex and that they cannot get it from being date raped. Thus, women do not enjoy being raped as some people would suggest. Regarding the inability for men to control themselves when they are past a certain point in the sexual process, Pineau says that there is no human desire that is uncontrollable. In her arguments, Pineau explains that a sexual contract cannot be likened to other legal and binding contracts. In these contracts, one can go to court and make a claim if one party is in breach of the contract. However, this is not the case with a sexual contract which does not have the moral obligation to fulfill it. Two Expected Questions and their Answers Is Pineau arguing that date rape is wrong? No. her objective is to demonstrate that the system that courts use to judge rape accusations are prejudiced towards the victim. Why do the courts require physical injury evidence to prove that rape took place? Courts believe that for a woman to claim that she was raped, there must have been aggression from the man, which usually leads to physical injury. 3 Reference Pineau, L. (1989). Date Rape: A Feminist Analysis. Law and Philosophy, Vol. 8, No. 2, 217-243. Ethics: Exam 1 Due Date: Tuesday, 2/21/2017, 11:30 PM Here are the guidelines for Exam 1. 1. The questions are listed below. You should only answer THREE of them (not all of them!). 2. Each essay should be between 500 and 1000 words. I won’t penalize you for going over, though I will stop reading at around 1,000 words, unless you’ve provided convincing evidence that you *need* the extra words to make your point. 3. Direct quotes from the book or handouts can be cited simply as (page number or handout name). If you choose to use outside resources, please use a standard citation style (such as APA, MLA, or Chicago), and provide a full citation. In general, no more than 15% of your paper should be quotes. 4. Please don’t use the words or ideas of others without proper attribution. Please see the syllabus for details on the policy regarding plagiarism and academic integrity. I regularly use www.turnitin.com to check for plagiarism or related issues. 5. Since the goal of the exam is to demonstrate how well you understand the material, you should try to use your own words/examples. Essays that simply reproduce the handouts will not receive good grades. 6. Please submit your exam as a SINGLE MS WORD file to the D2L assignment folder. Each essay should start on a new page. The Questions Answer THREE of the following questions. If you’ve already written on these topics (in discussion boards or essays for the class), it’s fine to reuse what you wrote. However, I do expect that you will make an effort to revise and improve earlier work. 1. Pretend you are teaching the allegory of the cave to a group of 12-year-olds. Use simple, clear words and examples they can relate to in order to explain both the structure of the allegory and “what it means.” In your explanation, be sure to include each of the following parts: the shadows, the puppets, the fire, the objects in the world outside, and the cave. 2. In recent years, there have been a number of prominent political acts aimed at changing laws (see MLK handout for some examples). Do a little research, and choose one particular political movement that interests you. Describe it in 12 paragraphs, making sure to say what law/policy was being challenged, and how those seeking to change the law responded. Now, consider how MLK (in “Letter for Birmingham Jail”) and Plato (in “The Crito”) might evaluate it. 3. Carefully describe the Euthyphro dilemma (the dilemma that arises from claiming “Morally good actions are those God loves”) in your own words. Then, explain what you think the best response is for theists (e.g., people who believe in God). 4. Argue for a yes/no answer to the following claim: “Morality relative to culture.” Be sure to incorporate what you’ve learned from James Rachels’ reading. I’d also encourage you to bring in real-life examples of what this might mean (the review question on the handout has some sample issues). 5. Argue for a yes/no answer to the following claim: “Any rational person ought to be an egoist.” Be sure to incorporate what you’ve learned from James Rachels’ reading. Again, use examples where appropriate. 6. Is lying always immoral? In your answer to this question, please explain and analyze Kant’s claims that lying is wrong because it treats people as mere means and/or lying isn’t “universalizable.” 7. Use utilitarian ethics to evaluate a state or federal law/policy. Some ideas might include gun control laws, health care reform, environmental protection, college funding, a decision to go to war, or whatever. (This may be require a little outside research) In your answer, you should be sure to (a) explain what exactly utilitarianism is, and how utilitarians approach these sorts of problems, (b) identify both benefits and costs of the policy/law in question. a. Note: You don’t necessarily need to solve the problem here. Instead, you just want to show that you understand how utilitarianism works. 8. In 2-3 paragraphs, explain the basic ideas of Aristotelian virtue ethics. Now, apply it to your own life: pick a moral virtue you want to improve at, and explain how Aristotle might advise you to approach this. 9. Explain the argument of Lois Pineau’s “Date Rape” in a way that might be understandable to a high school freshmen. Consider at least two questions the students might have, and provide answers to them. Exam Grading Rubric Each essay is worth TEN points, and the whole exam is worth 30 points. Your grade will depend on how well you do each of the following: 1. How well are you able to explain the relevant course material? (Very important) 2. To what extent can you make an (evidence-based) argument for a thesis? (Very important) 3. To what extent do your paper’s structure (e.g. intro/body paragraphs/conclusion) and language (e.g. grammar, style) make it easy for a reader to follow? (Important to the extent that they impact the two criteria above) The grading criteria are as follows: Grade Description 0 No answer submitted, or evidence of plagiarism. 1-4 Significantly below minimal requirements, in terms of content (e.g., doesn’t address the question at all), or word count. 5-6 Fails to meet minimal requirements in terms of content (e.g., addresses a related question) or word count. Essays that simply report what you “believe” or “feel,” without providing an argument may receive this grade. 7 Meets minimal requirements in terms of both content (it clearly addresses the assigned question) and word count. However, there may be some significant errors or omissions when it comes to the explanation of relevant class material, or providing a detailed response to the question. 8 Fully meets both content and word count requirements, and provides satisfactory explanations of relevant arguments and concepts from class. There are no major errors in argumentation or explanatory gaps. 9-10 Goes significantly above the minimal requirements. The essay’s treatment of course material shows a full mastery of the relevant content, and provides a creative, well-thought out response to it. I will grade essays in the order they are submitted (first-come, first-serve). Grades go up in whole-number increments (there is no .5). Tips on Writing Philosophy Philosophy essays can be a bit different from other sorts of writing. Here are some general tips: 1. You should have an introduction that concisely introduces the topic, and a thesis sentence that clearly states your position. Philosophy papers often begin with theses of the form “I will argue X because Y.” 2. When discussing tough ethical or philosophical issues, avoid phrases like “I feel,” “I think,” or “I believe.” Part of taking these issues seriously involves granting that one’s actions and beliefs have consequences for other people, and that (for this reason) they need to be defended with the sorts of arguments and reasons that these other people could actually accept. For this reason, appeals to your own emotions, religious beliefs, etc. are generally (though not always) inappropriate. 3. Pretend you are writing to an intelligent and interested (but relatively ignorant) 12-year-old who doesn’t know anything about the subject (rather than your philosophy professor). This means you’ll need to write clearly, explain new concepts, and offer interesting, memorable examples. A significant portion of your grade will be based on your ability to explain the arguments/concepts we’ve been studying using your own words and examples. 4. Your essay should have multiple paragraphs, each of which has a clear topic sentence that clearly relates back to your thesis. When writing philosophy, it’s easy to get “off topic.” So, always ask yourself: is this paragraph helping me provide evidence for my thesis? If the answer is “no,” it should be cut or revised. 5. You should always consider possible objections to your thesis. Ask yourself: “How would a smart, well-educated opponent respond to my argument?” In some cases, this might be a real author who you can cite; in other cases, you’ll have to play your own “devil’s advocate.” 6. The conclusion should help the reader appreciate the way your argument fits into the “big picture.” For example, what exactly do you take yourself to have shown? How does this relate to similar cases? What might be the “next ste” of this argument, if you had more time and space? ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Tutor Answer

Robert__F
School: Boston College

Good luck in your study and if you need any further help in your assignments, please let me know Can you please confirm if you have received the work? Once again, thanks for allowing me to help you R MESSAGE TO STUDYPOOL NO OUTLINE IS NEEDED AS IT IS A DISCUSSIONand Chisite

Running head: ETHICS
Topic: Ethics
Student name:
Instructor name:
Course name:

Ethics

2

1. Pretend you are teaching the allegory of the cave to a group of 12-year-olds. Use simple,
clear words and examples they can relate to in order to explain both the structure of the
allegory and “what it means.” In your explanation, be sure to include each of the
following parts: the shadows, the puppets, the fire, the objects in the world outside, and
the cave.
The Plato’s Allegory of the Cave explains the world whereby prisoners got tied to chains
for a significant period of their lives in a cave. During their captivity, a prisoner breaks and
leaves the cave and goes to the outside world. Previously, their faces got masked, and they have
no idea of the outside world. While at the cave, the shadows in the cave appeared relatively real
to the prisoner. When the prisoner goes to the outside world, he feels that their existence got
controlled by others. The prisoner also learns to distinguish the reality of the life outside and the
prison life, which he previously had no idea at first.
According to Oglesby, (2012), the cave explains to human beings a situation where
human beings live and confined by what we are allowed to see. When one gets an opportunity to
know the truth, he or she may information their counterparts, but they may not readily accept
because they have not experienced the real world. The same information applies to the
conspiracy theories of the present world, whereby the government hides information from its
people.
The allegory explains the existence of tons of undefined information that one does not
readily understand. According to Wankel, and Malleck, (2014), when one gets born, they come
across different information, apart from the information they receive from their seniors. People
get preoccupied and limited to the ideologies within the society in which we live until we don’t

Ethics

3

have the capacity to define the truth and separate it from the wrong. Many things in the
contemporary society that keep individuals barred from the truth including food, media, and
government among other things.
In fact, the present day’s society hides the truth from people unlike the past because of
preoccupation within the society. The people in the current society represent the prisoners,
whereas the cave represents the society we live. The media, military and government comprise
the shadows that inmates encounter during the cave. The media and government in a way control
our actions and the processes we engage unless a person leaves the cave or the society they live.
When we break from the cave, it means that one escapes the bondage of hidden truth and
gets into the free world where a person understands the processes taking place in their
environment and world. A person begins understanding the impact of the government, media,
and other life issues that blocked them from knowing the truth.
Living a life where one believes in everything and anything they encounter equates to the
life in prison in the cave. Oglesby, (2012) argued that the misinformation does not let one grow,
apart from the fact that they won’t differentiate the truth from the wrongs. People grow seeing
shadows go past them, and each day is an opportunity to break from the suffering and seek the
light in the real world. The truth is binding; however, the truth is relatively shocking that one
may delink themselves from the truth. Truth and enlightenment may force one understand the
problems facing them. Working together is one way of breaking from the lies and knowing the
truth.

Ethics

4

2. Carefully describe the Euthyphro dilemma (the dilemma that arises from claiming
“Morally good actions are those God loves”) in your own words. Then, explain what you
think the best response is for theists (e.g., people who believe in God).
The Euthyphro Dilemma
The argument gets inspired through Plato’s Euthyphro dialogue. Euthyphro Dilemma
gets introduced with the statement intending to know if God commands the good as it is good, or
because God commands it. The dilemma has a significant impact on monotheistic philosophical
theism. The question described above generated a bit of problem t...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Top quality work from this guy! I'll be back!

Similar Questions
Related Tags

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors