For The Article You Choose To Write On, You Will Type 1000

For the Article You Choose To Write On You Will Type a 1000 1500 Word

For the article you choose to write on, you will type a word response in which you address each of the following points in your own words: 1) What is the author's main argument? 2) How does he support his main argument (evidence, ancillary arguments, etc.)? 3) Do you agree or disagree with him? 4) Why or why not? 5) Apply the insights of at least two of the readings we have studied in this course (in chapters 1-9) to your analysis. Make sure to give a substantive explanation of how the philosophers' insights are relevant to the topic you are discussing.

Paper For Above instruction

The task at hand involves analyzing a chosen article by dissecting its core argument and supporting evidence, then critically engaging with the author's claims, and finally connecting theoretical insights from course readings to deepen the analysis. This exercise encourages critical thinking, comprehension of philosophical arguments, and the ability to synthesize ideas across different texts, which are fundamental skills in philosophical inquiry.

Firstly, identifying the main argument of the author is essential. This involves discerning the central claim or thesis that the author seeks to communicate. Often, this argument is embedded within the introduction or conclusion, and may be supported by various sub-arguments or evidence woven throughout the text. Clarifying this main proposition lays the groundwork for an insightful response.

Second, examining how the author supports this argument requires analyzing the types of evidence or reasoning employed. This might include empirical data, logical reasoning, anecdotal examples, or references to other philosophical works or authorities. Understanding the support provided reveals the strength and validity of the author's claims and prepares the respondent to evaluate the argument critically.

Third, expressing personal agreement or disagreement involves reflecting on the argument's coherence, the sufficiency of evidence, and alignment with one's knowledge and beliefs. This step necessitates openness to new ideas, as well as critical evaluation, weighing the 'rightness' or 'wrongness' of the author's stance based on reasoned judgment.

Fourth, providing reasons for agreement or disagreement requires drawing on personal reasoning, relevant ethical or philosophical principles, or empirical knowledge. Supporting one's position with coherent justifications strengthens the overall response and demonstrates depth of engagement.

The final component involves applying insights from at least two course readings (chapters 1-9). This application entails linking philosophical theories or arguments encountered in those texts to the article's claims or themes. For instance, one might draw on Kant's notions of morality or Mill's utilitarianism, depending on the article's topic, to analyze or critique the author's perspective. Explaining how these insights are relevant shows an ability to connect theoretical frameworks to real-world or contemporary issues, enhancing the depth of the critique.

Overall, this assignment promotes a comprehensive analysis, critical engagement, and the integration of ethical and philosophical theories. The resulting response should be well-structured, theoretically informed, and reflect thoughtful consideration of both the article's content and the relevant course concepts.

References

• Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Translated by Mary Gregor. Cambridge University Press.
• Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Parker, Son, and Bourn.
• Williams, B. (1973). Utilitarianism: For and Against. Cambridge University Press.
• Nagel, T. (1979). The View from Nowhere. Oxford University Press.
• Singer, P. (2011). Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
• Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and Human Development. Cambridge University Press.
• Ayer, A. J. (1959). Language, Truth, and Logic. Dover Publications.
• Aristotle. (350 B.C.E.). Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by W. D. Ross.
• Confucius. (5th century B.C.E.). Analects. Translated by D.C. Lau.
• Descartes, R. (1641). Meditations on First Philosophy. Translated by John Cottingham.