Short Essay One is due by the end of academic week five on Tuesday 22 November at 11:59 PM ET. You can submit this paper late up to the last day of class, but if it is submitted past the due date it will receive a late penalty.
12 pt. Times New Roman font, double spaced, 1” right and left margins
Microsoft .docx format (not .pages or .pdf)
Directions
[STEP ONE] Short Essay One will focus on the moral theories you learned in weeks 2 through 4. You should choose two of these theories to focus on in your paper. One will be used to support what you believe to be the right moral action (section 3) and one will be a different moral theory that others might use to say you are wrong (section 2).
[STEP THREE] Your essay will be organized according to a modified Rogerian Argument Structure:
The Rogerian Argument Structure is used to find common ground between two sides in a complex issue so it is a good writing structure for analyzing and arguing ethical dilemmas. We will modify this structure somewhat to allow for the examination of an ethical dilemma. Your essay will be divided into four sections (LABEL THEM), with each section answering particular questions about the ethical dilemma and moral theories you have chosen to use. Remember, your essay will be 800-1200 words total so please allocate enough words for each section as they are equally weighted for each section!
THIS IS NOT A RESEARCH PAPER! USE THE REQUIRED READINGS FROM OUR COURSE. DO NOT GO TO OUTSIDE SOURCES!
Suggested Title: The Ethics of [case or dilemma] in [subject] using [moral theory] by [your name]
Examples:
“The Ethics of Vaccine Rationing in Medicine Using Utilitarianism by Susan Kitteridge”
or
“The Ethics of Taking A Knee in Sports Using Virtue Theory by John Meyerson”
Each section of your essay must address the following questions:
SECTION I: Explain the ethical dilemma presented in the case in your own words. What are the relevant facts that need to be understood in order to come to an ethical decision? What are the summary pros and cons of both sides? Why is there disagreement between opposing views? Mention the case study that you are using by name and include in the reference section. (Present the moral theories you chose in Sections 2 and 3 in one or two sentences.) REMEMBER TO CHOOSE TWO DIFFERENT MORAL THEORIES – ONE FOR YOUR SIDE (SECTION 3) AND ONE FOR THE OTHER SIDE (SECTION TWO).
SECTION II: Explain in detail an opposing or different ethical view. IN section III you are going to argue what you think the correct moral theory and action would be, but in this section you must argue what those who disagree with your argument would say. YOU MUST PRESENT a fair argument against what you believe and will present in section III. What do people who follow this view believe? Why? What are the facts that would lead them to believe this view? Why is this view reasonable for some people to hold? How does the moral theory or theories I chose to study help to explain this opposing view? (Beware the Strawman Fallacy in this section). YOU MUST include a full sentence quote and citation from one of your assigned readings from these weeks to show how your chosen moral theory for this section relates to this line of argument.
SECTION III: Explain my ethical view. What are the facts that lead me to believe in this view? How does the moral theory or theories I chose to study help to understand my ethical view? How does the moral theory help to understand why differing views are wrong? YOU MUST include a full sentence quote and citation from one of your assigned readings from these weeks to show how your chosen moral theory relates to this line of argument.
SECTION IV: What agreement (common ground) exists between my ethical view and the view of people who oppose or differ from my view? How does this common ground help to understand the ethical dilemma? How can this common ground lead to a solution of the dilemma? YOU MAY NOT SAY – “I’M RIGHT” OR “THERE IS NO ROOM FOR COMPROMISE.” YOU MUST PROVIDE A COMPROMISE IDEA.
Additional explanation of the Rogerian Argument Structure can be found at the website of the Excelsior Online Writing Lab, including a visual representation. (But remember, we have modified this basic structure above)
Nevertheless, utilitarian ethics provide a different concept to this notion. According to Jeremy Bentham, the most moral decision is that which maximizes happiness or utility. Therefore, according to utilitarian ethics, students may go to all levels to ensure they win. However, winning is the prize and may be justified at the expense of getting better (Nelson, 2019). For instance, weightlifting student-athletes may use doping strategies to be better than others instead of opting to remain natural and fair in the competition. As long as winning is guaranteed, utilitarian beliefs dictate that one may do all it takes to guarantee to win. However, that will be at the expense of getting better.
