Philosophy 3100 - Ethical Theory

Term Paper

30 points (15% of your grade for the course)

Due Wednesday, April 29, in class

Write a 5 or so page (~1500 word) paper related to one of the topics that we studied this semester.

Regarding format, your paper must:

• be typewritten and double-spaced, with normal fonts and margins.
• be printed out and submitted in class on the due date. Do not submit your paper by email.
• contain your name on each page.
• contain page numbers on each page.
• be stapled together.

Failure to conform to these rules will hurt your grade.

Regarding content, your paper must have a clearly stated thesis. Your paper cannot be a mere “book report” of the views of others (though it can, and definitely should, provide the reader with whatever background is necessary for understand the paper's thesis and argument -- and this background providing may take several pages). You must have a view on the topic on which you are writing. You must make it blatantly obvious to the reader what that view is. Here are some examples of some theses that a paper in this class might defend:

• “Moore's no-disagreement argument successfully refutes metaethical subjectivism." (Such a paper would need to explain subjectivism, and explain Moore's argument in detail. Then it could raise several objections to the argument that, it is argued, ultimately fail.)
• “The Frege-Geach problem is in fact not a problem for non-cognitivism."
  (This would require explaining non-cognitivism and the Frege-Geach problem in detail. Then it would explain why, according to the author, the Frege-Geach problem fails. If there is time, possible replies by an advocate of the F-G problem could be raised and responded to.)
• “The Euthyphro problem refutes the DCT and, in fact, all forms of subjectivism in metaethics.”
  (Again, this would require explaining DCT and the Euthyphro objection in detail. Then the original contribution the paper would be making might be (i) to raise interesting objections to the Euthyphro problem and to show why they all fail, and (ii) to explain why the basic problems the Euthyphro objection reveals in DCT are the problems that are also present in all forms of subjectivism.)

Here are some other topics you might express your view about one way or the other:

• the argument from disagreement
• one of the many objections to AU that were discussed either in class or in the Mill or Feldman readings
• the experience machine objection to hedonism
• the leveling down objection to egalitarianism
• the argument from psychological hedonism
• Norcross' argument by analogy
• Kant's Categorical Imperative
• Whether Kant's Categorical Imperative supports duties of special relationship

In each case, a good paper structure to adopt is something like this:

• state and explain your thesis clearly
• provide the necessary background for understanding your thesis (your paper should be comprehensible by someone with no background in ethical theory; it's ok if providing the background takes anywhere from 1/4 to 1/2 of your paper)
• provide your support for your thesis, which can be in the form of providing positive reasons to think it is true, of responding to reasons against thinking it is true, or both.

Your thesis can be directly about the views of someone we've read this semester, or it can just be your own view on one of the topics we've studied. If it’s the latter, it would still be a good idea to incorporate some of the views or arguments of one or more of the philosophers we read. E.g., if some philosopher has an argument against your thesis, it would be a good idea to show how you can answer that argument.

To repeat, the main purpose of your paper will be to defend its thesis – to persuade the reader, through rational argument, that this claim is correct. There are several ways to defend a thesis. One of the most straightforward ways is to come up with a positive argument for it. Another way is to rebut what you take to be the main argument(s) against your thesis. Obviously, this would require first explaining the argument(s) you will be rebutting. If you have the space, you should consider and reply to objections to your position. In some cases, doing this is mandatory.

If you are having a hard time coming up with a thesis, you might begin by consulting your initial reaction to, say, one of the arguments we studied. Then try to think of what you would say if you wanted to persuade a friend that your initial reaction is correct. When you do this, you will be laying out an argument for your view, an argument that could form the centerpiece of your paper. You may find that when you subject your own thesis and the reasons you hold it to scrutiny, you actually convince yourself that your thesis is mistaken. If that happens to you, you might be able to turn all of this into a paper arguing against your original thesis.

Regarding style, you should:

• aim for clarity, precision, succinctness, and directness.
• avoid flowery language, polysyllabic words, and long, winding sentences.
• try not to sound “deep” – instead, just make it completely clear exactly what you are trying to say.
• make no spelling and grammatical mistakes – use a spell checker and get a good style manual.

General Guidance. Here are two helpful guides on writing a philosophy paper. Please look them over.

• A Guide to Writing, by Michael Huemer: http://home.earthlink.net/~owl233/writing.htm
• Guidelines on Writing a Philosophy Paper, by James Pryor: http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/guidelines/writing.html

Cheating: You are encouraged to discuss your paper with others in the class; however, the paper you turn in must be your own work. Students turning in duplicate or near-duplicate papers will receive an F for the entire course and may be subject to expulsion from the university. I take cheating very seriously.

Do not quote much or at all in your papers. I want to hear the ideas in your own words. But if you must use the words of others, put them in quotation marks and cite the source. Otherwise, you are plagiarizing. Plagiarism will earn you an F for the whole course and possible expulsion from the university.

Late Paper Policy: Your score will go down two points for every day your paper is late. Late papers may be submitted to me by email at heathwood@colorado.edu. In any such email, ask me to reply back to you to confirm that I got your paper and could open the attachment. If you forget to attach the paper, your paper won’t count as having been turned in. If the email system malfunctions and your message is never delivered, your paper won’t count as having been turned in.

Extra Assistance: I am more than happy to provide assistance to you as you work on your paper. Feel free to come to office hours with questions or just to run a rough outline by me.

home