Custom Term Paper Writing – Mid-term Paper Templates/Tips

Custom Term Paper Writing – Mid-term Paper Templates/Tips

Custom Term Paper Writing – Mid-term Paper Templates/Tips

Custom Term Paper Writing - Mid-term Paper Templates/Tips

Mid-term Paper Templates/Tips

II. Tips on How to Get Started

THERE ARE THREE TEMPLATES TO CHOOSE FROM

I’ll label them ‘Template 1’ and ‘Template 2’ and ‘Template 3.’

Be sure to label your paper likewise.

Note that the templates are broken into three sections. Label these sections in your paper.

Note, too, that the sections are fairly short. This does not relieve you of the responsibility to include

all the crucial elements/points we covered for each thinker/work. Sometimes writing short papers is

harder than writing long ones. My point: be sure the crucial information is included, then simply

and clearly exposit/explain/argue, with no ‘fat’/extra.

Source material: Key here will be your reaction papers and class notes. These should already

contain key quotes/ideas. You simply need to decide what is most important, and how to organize it.

NOTE: POINTS WILL BE DEDUCTED IF THE FONT IS NOT 12-POINT, THE MARGINS

ARE NOT .9 x.9, AND SPACING IS NOT DOUBLE. 4.75 PAGE MINIMUM, 5 PAGE MAX

FOR ALL TEMPLATES.

List of Thinkers/Articles/Ideas You may include in your paper…

Nietzsche (‘immoralists,’ Master and Slave morality/mentality)

Socrates/Plato (Gyge’s Ring, Socrates’ response)

Cultural Relativism (Rachels)

Bennett (Huck Finn Paper)

Pojman (religion’s importance to Ethics)

Immanuel Kant (including the “Right to Lie” paper, and “Rider in the Sky

TEMPLATE #1: KANT AND MILL

Template 1 is primarily a comparison of Mill and Kant’s ethics, with a small section in

which you will choose at least ONE (max two) other figure/s/work/s to discuss.

I. Exposit Mill and Kant

1-1.25 pages for each, 2.25 pages max total

Exposit the main view as succinctly and clearly as you can.

A high-grade exposition will include all essential aspects of the view in question, and relate

them to each other correctly.

For example: if your subject in this section is ‘Mill’, you’ll have on your ‘must-discuss’ list happiness, the Principle of Utility, Quality and Quantity of happiness, (and more—check your notes!); if your topic is Kant, you will be marked down if your description of his view forgets to include the categorical imperative, good

II. Comparatively Evaluate Mill and Kant

1.5 pages. Construct a careful argument (not a mere statement of opinion!) using reasons we discussed. The argument will show that either Mill is better than Kant at explaining the moral worth of actions, or vice versa—i.e. Kant is better than Mill.

Hint: remember the role of objections, problems, and counterexamples. Are there particular moral dilemmas/problems you have reason to think Kant’s ethics handles BETTER than Mill? Or vice versa?

III. Consider at Least One Critic of Both

1 page. Pick one (and certainly no more than two) of the other thinkers/articles/ideas about ethics we have considered. In two or three sentences explain the key idea this view/thinker presents which challenges both Kant’s and Mill’s views of morality. What might they say to Kant and Mill, were they to have an argument about morality? Explain precisely in what way things asserted or assumed by Kant and Mill are challenged and/or denied by this/these ‘critical’ view/s.

TEMPLATE #2: KANT OR MILL ON FEELING

Template 2 permits a deeper focus on either Kant or Mill, then considers the importance and moral relevance of feelings in these two thinkers, and in the views of at least two others.

I. Exposit Mill OR Kant

2 pages, 2.25 pages max. This section is an in-depth exposition of EITHER Mill or Kant, but not

Exposit the main view as succinctly and clearly as you can.

A high-grade exposition will include all essential aspects of the view in question, and relate

them to each other correctly.

For example: if your subject in this section is ‘Mill’, you’ll have on your ‘must-discuss’ list happiness, the Principle of Utility, Quality and Quantity of happiness, (and more—check your notes!); if your topic is Kant, you will be marked down if your description of his view forgets to include the categorical imperative, good

II. Explain the Role of Feeling in the View Exposited

1 page. You will now (i) explain the role of feeling in the view you exposited in the first section.

IN DOING SO, you will also (ii) compare/contrast the role of feeling in Mill (if you exposited

Kant), or the role of feeling in Kant (if you exposited Mill).

By ‘explain the role of feeling’ I mean you will look at the importance of feelings, emotions, or sympathy in these views. When, and what kind, of feeling/s or sympathies or emotions are important to the view’s picture of what is morally good and right? Which kinds of feelings are not important? And WHY, on the view considered, are these feelings important/not important to doing the right thing? You may also want to consider/ask: On the view I am discussing, are some feelings morally helpful? Crucial? Dangerous? In sum: how does feeling’s importance—or lack of importance—contribute to the view of morality you are discussing?

III. Insights About the Moral Importance of (some or all) Feelings From Others…

1.5 page max. Consider the role of feeling in at least two other views/ideas/articles we have discussed. Answer: What do these additional/alternative views/ideas about the moral importance of feelings—or, perhaps, the view of the moral importance of SOME feelings but not others— (i) contribute to the Kant-Mill discussion you’ve carried out above, and to (ii) our understanding of

morality and moral life in general?

Conclude with a few sentences stating in general what you think the role of feeling is in moral thinking/moral life. Which author/authors has/have the most convincing view? In rendering this evaluation, remember to distinguish between the most convincing view of how morals and feelings DO interact, and the most convincing view of how they OUGHT TO interact.

TEMPLATE #3: FREE FORM

This template isn’t really a template at all. It is an opportunity for you to propose one to me.

All that I ask is that it MUST

(i) Follow a particular theme (e.g. the role of God and religion in morality, or the role of ‘reason,’ or culture, or why Mill and Kant are both wrong and Nietzsche right, etc…). Another way to approach this thematically: You might alternatively pick a single moral problem that troubles you, and see what/how different views add to our  understanding of it.

(ii) Include at least 2 pages expositing Mill, Kant, or both. I also ask

(iii) That you include at least two other views/thinkers (other than Mill and Kant) in your

Note: this template requires a bit more creativity than the first two. So only choose it if, after looking over your notes and reaction papers and readings, you really find a particular problem or question (e.g. God/religion, cultural relativism, moral disagreement, ‘immoralism’) compelling, and you would like the freedom to explore it further.

NOTE: TO CHOOSE TEMPLATE #3, YOU MUST CLEAR YOUR IDEA AND

OUTLINE WITH ME BY TUESDAY.

A Critical Look at the moral Philosophy of Mill and Kant

This essay takes a brief look at the moral philosophies of both Mill and Kant. It first discusses at the main tenets of Mills’ Hedonistic Utilitarianism and then Kant’s Categorical Imperative, compares and evaluates them and then introduces views of Bernard William, modern philosopher who criticises both on the basis that the theories they espoused are too neat and tidy to be applied to human behaviour, which is untidy.

I. Exposit of Mill and Kant

i) Mill’s Ethics

is a physical and metaphysical impossibility” 1 (Utilitarianism, Ch. 4). (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mill/#MorUti). Action is ethical or not does not depend on the universal principles it depends on how much pleasure it gives to people. If an action gives maximum pleasure to maximum number of people then it is ethical. His concept of moral principles is known as hedonistic utilitarianism, and consists of happiness, principle of utility and quality and quantity of happiness. However, unlike Bentham’s Utilitarianism which is purely hedonistic Mill’s theory of Utilitarianism is not very extreme, it is based on the principles of what is happiness, Principles of Utility, and quality and quantity of happiness.

A) What is Happiness: Happiness is maximising pleasure and minimising pain to the greatest number of people. Happiness is purely utilitarian and depends on the outcome of an action. If an action gives maximum happiness it is ethical, if it does not give any or less happiness it is unethical. This is purely hedonistic view of actions that depends on the outcome of the actions before one can pronounce them moral or not

No Comments

Post a Reply