This second essay-writing exercises involve two parts, which are described below, along with the due dates for each part.

Part 1:   An outline of your basic thesis, the structure of your essay, the general line or lines along which you'll be arguing in support of your thesis, the central objection (or objections) that you’ll be considering, and how you will be responding to the objection (or objections).  (5%)

Due Date:   Thursday, November 15
 

Part 2:     The completed essay.  (15%)

Length:      Approximately 5 double-spaced, typewritten pages
                        (About 1200-1500 words in length.)

Due Date:   Thursday, December 6
 
 

Choosing a Topic

        The first thing that you need to do is to settle on a topic for your essay.  At the end of this handout, I've listed a number of possibilities.

        Some of the topic descriptions are very brief.  Others contain a number of questions.  In the latter case, the questions are intended merely to suggest some things on which you might focus, so you should not feel that you must address all of the specific questions that are listed.

A Non-Religious, Philosophical Approach

        Many people defend ethical views by appealing either to religious or theological assumptions, or to moral principles that are religiously based.  Such assumptions or principles are often of a highly controversial sort, and exercises 1, 2, and 3 were intended to illustrate how problematic an appeal either to religious and theological premises, or to moral principles that are religiously based, can be.

        It is possible of course, that there are religious claims that, although controversial, can be shown to be reasonable.  Any such defense, however, is a major undertaking, and in an essay of this length, the chances of success in doing that are not good.

Instructions for Part 1:  A Detailed Outline of Your Essay

        This first part involves writing a detailed outline for your essay as a whole.  This should consist of the following sections:

Section 1:  Your Basic Thesis

    In this first section, you should state the basic thesis that you will be defending.  This should require only a sentence or two.

Section 2:  The Structure of Your Essay

        In this section, you should describe, in a single, short paragraph, how your essay will be divided up into sections.

Section 3:  Your Main Supporting Argument or Arguments

        You may be offering a single argument in support of your basic thesis, or more than one argument.  If you do decide to offer more than one argument, this section should be divided into clearly labeled sub-sections, one for each of the arguments that you will be offering.

        Your objective in this section will be to set out your argument (or arguments) in as clear a way as possible.  Try to make all of your assumptions completely explicit, and try to show exactly how your argument supports the conclusion you wish to establish, by setting your argument out in a clear, step-by-step fashion, so that the reader does not have to read between the lines, or guess as to how exactly your argument goes.

        I shall then be able to determine whether what you are going to offer in support of your thesis seems like a generally promising line of argument, or whether, on the other hand, there are possible difficulties in your argument, so that your argument will need to be strengthened and improved

Section 4:  Important Objections to Your Arguments or to Your Thesis

        A crucial part of any essay discussing a moral issue involves considering objections, either to the argument (or arguments) that you have offered in support of your basic thesis, or to the thesis itself, or to both.  The quality of an essay depends in large measure upon whether one has addressed the strongest and most important objections to one's own arguments and views, and whether one has dealt with those objections in a convincing fashion.

        Depending upon what the topic is, it may be sufficient to consider only one important objection, in a careful and detailed way, but if you do consider more than one objection, you should divide this section up into clearly labeled sub-sections.

        For each objection that you address, there are two tasks.  First, try to set out the objection both clearly and crisply, and in a way that makes the objection seem as strong and plausible as possible.  Your goal here should be to formulate the objection at least as forcefully as it would be formulated by someone who was directing that objection against you.

        Secondly, you then need to indicate how you are going to respond to the objection, and why you think that the objection, however plausible it may initially have seemed, is ultimately unsound.  In doing this, try to make it as clear as possible where you think the central flaw in the objection lies.

Instructions for Part 2:  The Completed Essay

1.  Before doing a draft of your essay as a whole, you should read through the handout, "Writing a Philosophy Essay".

2.  The main points to keep in mind are summarized on the "Essay Checklist and Cover Sheet".  This is to be attached to the front of your essay, and before doing the final draft of your essay, you should go through your essay carefully to see whether your essay is satisfactory in the relevant respects.

3.  The heart of your essay is in the argument (or arguments) that you offer in support of your basic thesis, in the objections you consider that might be directed either against your thesis, or against your supporting arguments, and in the plausibility of your responses to those objections.  The feedback that you have received on Part 1 of this essay-writing exercise should give you a good idea whether both your positive argument (or arguments), and your discussion of objections, are falling into place, or whether, on the contrary, some strengthening is called for.  If the latter is the case, do make use of the feedback that you have received on Part 1, and talk with me if further advice is needed.  On the other hand, if there wasn't much that seemed problematic with Part 1, then it's basically a matter of incorporating your argument (or arguments) and your discussion of possible objections into a nicely structured and polished essay.

4.  In the case of this second essay – and in contrast with the first essay – the vast majority of the topics listed below raise moral questions to which empirical questions are more or less completely irrelevant.  There are, however, a few topics where the right answer to the moral question may depend in important ways upon empirical questions.  (This seems plausible in the case of topics 7 and 10, and it may be so in the case of topic 14 as well.)

    When empirical questions are important for a topic, make use of the Internet to locate relevant studies.  Once again, however, remember that there is a good deal of material on the Internet that is that is not careful and scholarly, or that has been produced by someone with a very strong bias.  (This is especially so in the case of the topic of euthanasia, where there is an enormous amount of unsound material.)  So it is very important to evaluate material carefully and critically, especially when the topic is a controversial and emotional one.
 

1.   If a person is not suffering from an incurable illness, is suicide ever morally permissible?

2.   Discuss the claim that, provided that one has no special obligations to others - such as one's family - suicide is never morally wrong in itself.

3.   Set out, and then evaluate, the most important theological argument (or arguments) against suicide.

4.   What questions arise concerning the morality of assisting someone to commit suicide, and what answers would you defend?

5.  In his essay "The Wrongfulness of Euthanasia," in a section entitled "1.  The Argument from Nature," J. Gay-Williams offers an argument in support of the claim that "euthanasia is inherently wrong."  Carefully set out his argument in a step-by-step fashion.  Then discuss which steps in his argument are most open to question, and whether they can be sustained.

6.  Taking into account the essays by James Rachels and Philippa Foot, discuss the question of whether there is an intrinsic difference (as contrasted to a difference in consequences) between killing and letting die.

7.   Set out, and then evaluate, the empirical version of the wedge (or slippery slope) argument against voluntary active euthanasia.

8.   Aside from the wedge argument, what is the most important non-theological argument against voluntary active euthanasia?  Carefully evaluate that argument.

9.   Set out, and then evaluate, the most important theological argument (or arguments) against voluntary active euthanasia.

10.   Should voluntary active euthanasia be prohibited by law?

11.   It is often held that voluntary passive euthanasia is morally acceptable, but that voluntary active euthanasia is not.  Discuss this view.

12.   Is non-voluntary euthanasia morally acceptable in cases of the Karen Ann Quinlan sort?

13.   Under what conditions, if any, is non-voluntary, active euthanasia morally permissible?

14.   What is the most important argument either in support of the view that at least some non-human animals have a right to life, or in support of the view that no non-human animals have a right to life?  Can the argument in question be sustained?

*********************************************************************************
NOTE

        The following topics are all on abortion.  Past experience with papers in this area supports a rather unhappy generalization - namely, that regardless of what position a person is defending, the average grade tends to be substantially lower than on papers on other topics.

        The main reason for the lower grades is that people are often tempted to rely upon popular, rather than scholarly, discussions of abortion, and, unfortunately, the authors of such discussions are usually not at all familiar with the crucial philosophical arguments.  (In the case of abortion, in contrast to other topics - such as euthanasia - there is an enormous gulf between popular discussions and philosophical discussions.)

        If you do decide to write an essay on one of the following topics, it will be crucial, then, to work through very carefully both all of the assigned readings on abortion, and also the relevant notes on the class web site.  The latter are available at the following location:

       http://spot.Colorado.EDU/~tooley/NotesOnAbortion.html
 

*********************************************************************************

15.  Carefully set out, and then evaluate, Judith Jarvis Thomson's defense of abortion.

16.   Set out, and then carefully evaluate, either the strongest argument in support of the view that potentialities suffice to endow human fetuses with a serious right to life, or the strongest argument against that view.  Be sure to address the strongest objection to the view that you're defending.

        The notes at the following address are very important for this topic:

        http://spot.Colorado.EDU/~tooley/Abortion5.html

17.   What is the most plausible view concerning which non-potential property suffices in itself, and independently of any relation to other properties, to give something a right to life?  What is the most important objection to that view?  Can the view be sustained?

18.   It may be that all members of the biologically defined species, Homo sapiens, possess some property in virtue of which they have a serious right to life.  But does membership in the biologically defined species, Homo sapiens, by itself, and independently of its relation to other properties, suffice to endow an individual with a right to life?  Set out, and then carefully evaluate, the most important arguments bearing upon this issue.

        Especially important for this topic are the notes at the following address:

      http://spot.Colorado.EDU/~tooley/Abortion4.html