Criminal Justice

Due tomorrow….if you cannot make the deadline, please do not send a handshake!! Work will be checked using turnitin

 

#1

Explain how public opinion helps to set the stage in formulating or adjusting criminal justice policy. How does public opinion affect the criminal justice policy process and the relationships between stakeholders? Is the public knowledgeable enough about current issues to help make policy decisions? What are some specific issues about which you believe the public is well informed?Support your claims with examples, and properly cite your references with both in-text and APA citation at the end of your post. Must be atleast 400 words

 

#2

Reentry and rehabilitation programs are controversial and have proponents on both sides of the issues.  Explain the role special interest groups play in their effort to influence legislation that dictates reentry and rehabilitation policy. Then from a macro perspective, should there be so many access points that allow special interest groups to access legislators?What are the negatives to allowing special interest groups to have an active role in political campaigns? Support your claims with examples, and properly cite your references with both in-text and APA citations at the end of your post. Must be atleast 400 words

 

#3

There is 2 parts of this assignment:

 

Identify a scholarly journal article. When conducting your search, check the boxes for “scholarly” and “full-text” filters. The journal article you select must address the Department of Homeland Security’s role in influencing criminal justice policy issues. Give a summary of the article you selected….it must be at least 400 words.

 

Then….

 

Use your summary as a basis to write a 1 ½ page rough draft on the Department of Homeland Security’s role in influencing criminal justice policy issue. Your review must not be based on an abstract of the article.

Must include

  • An explanation of the basic premises of the author.
  • A summary of the journal article you chose
  • An examination of the recommendations of the author.
  • A determination of the effects of the author’s recommendations on the criminal justice system and current policy.
  • Your assessment of the journal article. (This is the main focus of your presentation.)
  • The effect the author’s recommendations have on social justice, based on your analysis.
  • A references page formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. Include the APA-formatted reference entry for the selected journal article, as well as any additional references you used in your evaluation and analysis.

Reflection Paper

Question description

You will write a 1000-1500 word response to your chosen paper topic from the list below.

Assessment:

Students should demonstrate that they can distinguish the relevant points that form a logically coherent argument. They should also be able to construct criticisms which effectively undermine, through the use of appropriate counter-examples, some premise of that argument.

Your assignment is to read any ONE of the following four articles:

The Frivolity of Evil

How and How Not to Love Mankind

What We Have to Lose

Roads to Serfdom

Then, FOR THE ARTICLE YOU CHOOSE TO WRITE ON, you will type a 1000-1500 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.

A WORD OF WARNING: These articles are rather long and complex. The author likes to make extensive use of his rather copious vocabulary, so I strongly urge you to have dictionary.com handy as you work your way through your chosen article. The purpose of this essay assignment is for you to demonstrate your ability to discuss, analyze, and evaluate complex philosophic arguments. I am confident that the reading assignments, tests, and discussion boards will have prepared you for this final, and no doubt challenging, essay assignment.

Please use MLA format.

Your paper will be graded according to the following rubric:

GRADING RUBRIC:

The following standards are numbered in order of importance for grading.

1.Essay demonstrates an understanding of the material: The student has correctly grasped a philosophical problem or question, has explained it accurately, and on the basis of a substantially correct interpretation of any texts involved. Key terms are used correctly. The essay shows evidence of the student’s independent thought, and is written in his or her distinctive voice. Short (one sentence) quotations are used (comprising no more than 10% of the body of the paper), when appropriate, to support the writer’s analysis, and an explanation is offered for each quotation. The use of block quotations will result in a severe point deduction.

95 points

2.Essay has clear and coherent argument: There is a clearly stated thesis, and support for this thesis in the body of the paper. Each paragraph contributes to this argument, and follows logically from the paragraph before it. The argument presented is persuasive. The insights of two other philosophers are incorporated into the analysis.

95 points

3.Essay fulfills assigned task: The essay addresses the entire assigned question or topic, elaborating on important ideas in satisfactory depth, but without bringing in anything extraneous or irrelevant. The introduction of the essay focuses and provides clarity for the paper. Important terms are clearly and accurately defined. Each paragraph conveys a coherent, organized thought. Short (one sentence) quotations are occasionally used, when appropriate, to support the writer’s analysis, and an explanation is offered for each quotation. No more than 10% of paper is made up of direct quotes. No block quotations.

40 points

4.Essay obeys standards for good persuasive writing: the writer shows that he or she is comfortable using philosophical language, and the prose is clear, not awkward. The structure of the sentences reflects the relationships between/among the ideas discussed.

40 points

5.Essay is technically correct: The essay has been carefully and thoughtfully proofread. The argument is written in complete sentences, with punctuation that does not mislead the reader. There are no mistakes in spelling, grammar, word choice, and punctuation.

30 points

Anthropology discussion assignment

Question description

11.5 Late Pleistocene Homo Assignment (Graded Assignment)

Late Pleistocene Homo Assignment

For years we have been able to analyze the fossils of extinct humans like those of Neanderthals. Their bones gave us clues to how they looked, how they lived, and how they might be related to us. In the last few years, we have been able to get a better view into these extinct species and their relationship to our species. Thanks to next generation genomic sequencing technologies, we have been able to obtain genetic data on Neanderthals, Denisovans and others that have allowed us to make direct comparisons between our species and theirs. In addition, we have been able to observe the presence of DNA from these extinct species within our own genomes which tell us that we had kids with these now extinct humans.

If we take Neanderthal DNA as an example, we find that we share 99.5 percent of our DNA with them. Which means that we and Neanderthals were separated from each other for more than 500,000 years. This also means that we were genetically similar enough to be able to have offspring with each other. We see evidence of this genetic introgression between us and Neanderthals when we look at our DNA. Interestingly, if we obtain one thousand DNA samples from Grossmont College students, we estimate that we would be able to extract at least 20% of the Neanderthal genome from them. This means that 20% of our collective nucleotide sequences are shared with Neanderthals but this doesn’t mean that 20% of our genes are Neanderthal specific genes. Of the twenty-one thousand genes that Neanderthals had, only a few dozen of their genes survive within our genome. The same holds true for Denisovans. What is more interesting is that older versions of ourselves have a tendency to have higher levels of DNA from extinct humans compared to ourselves. In other words, over the course of thousands of years we have been slowly weeding out the DNA of the other humans from our genome in favor of our genes.

One basic question that we might like to ask is why have we been losing Neanderthal and Denisovan genes over time? Also, why do we still have a significant amount of DNA segments that don’t seem to be going anywhere? The answer to this has to do with selection.

The answer to the first part of the question has to do with the fact that we were not fully genetically compatible with the other human species to begin with. Basically, to have had Neanderthal or Denisovan genes in the past meant that an individual’s level of fitness was reduced. To get rid of their genes in favor of our own would mean that the relative fitness of individuals would increase overtime.

The answer to the second question has to do with the fact that DNA segments from Neanderthals and Denisovans that did not code for proteins remained because there was little selective pressure against them. As far as genes are concerned, the only Neanderthal and Denisovan genes that remain only exist because they had a selective advantage or at least have been neutral to our species.

DNA segments that that were neutral or that had a selective advantage, whether genes or not, simply remained because they were advantages or there was little selective pressure against them.

Your task for this week is to look for information about one Neanderthal or Denisovan gene that survive within our species and to tell me what function that gene has and how that gene may increase the fitness of modern human populations.

  • In your post, discussONE Neanderthal or Denisovan gene that is currently found within our species.
    • Tell us about the gene and its function. Explain what it does for us. (Make sure you give a citation.)
    • Explain in your own words any possible advantages that your Neanderthal or Denisovan gene might have. Make sure you give in informed opinion that is grounded in your research.
  • You will not have to respond to other student posts.

Asian philosophy short paper

Question description

Sources

If you want to know more the ancient bronze drums (like the NL1), then, read these secondary sources for your own interests.

This article is a part of the About.com guide to the Dongson Culture (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site., and the Dictionary of Archaeology (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site..

Hirst, Kris K. 2018. Dongson Culture: Bronze Age in Southeast Asia. Ceremonial Bronze Drums, Fishing and Hunting in Vietnam. ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/dongson-culture-bronze-age-170720 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Ballard C, Bradley R, Myhre LN, and Wilson M. 2004. The ship as symbol in the prehistory of Scandinavia and Southeast Asia. (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. World Archaeology 35(3):385-403. .

Chinh HX, and Tien BV. 1980. The Dongson Culture and Cultural Centers in the Metal Age in Vietnam. (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.Asian Perspectives 23(1):55-65.

Han X. 1998. The present echoes of the ancient bronze drums: Nationalism and archaeology in modern Vietnam and China. (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. Explorations 2(2):27-46.

Han X. 2004. Who Invented the Bronze Drum? Nationalism, Politics, and a Sino-Vietnamese Archaeological Debate of the 1970s and 1980s. (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. Asian Perspectives43(1):7-33.

Loofs-Wissowa HHE. 1991. Dongson Drums: Instruments of shamanism or regalia? (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.Arts Asiatiques46(1):39-49.

Solheim WG. 1988. A Brief History of the Dongson Concept. (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. Asian Perspectives28(1):23-30.

Tessitore J. 1988. View from the East Mountain: An Examination of the Relationship between the Dong Son and Lake Tien Civilizations in the First Millennium B.C. (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. Asian Perspectives 28(1):31-44.

Yao A. 2010. Recent Developments in the Archaeology of Southwestern China. (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.Journal of Archaeological Research 18(3):203-239.

Notes: According to Heger, there are four major types of the so-called “Dongson drums” (named after the first archaeological “Đông-Sơn” site in North Việt-Nam). The Ngọc-Lũ 1 is considered to be the best among all the bronze drums of the first type. The exact number of Heger Type I drums is not yet known. The current total stands over 400 bronze drums of Heger Type I. The Ngoc-Lũ 1 (among 150 bronze drums of Heger Type I found in North VN) is normally believed to have been made around 700 BCE and thereafter by the Lạc Việt holy sages (the LV are known to have been the ancestors of the Viêtnamese).

THE TOPIC

What does the Ngọc-Lũ 1 (NL1) tell you about the world by the self-revealing powers of its systems of pictorial images and geometrical symbols given on its tympanum (its surface)? (To put it differently: What story does the art on the NL1 tympanum tell you? What can you discover any message in its self-revealing art?)

To address the topic, state your own thesis (in the form of one sentence) and make your own arguments to validate your own thesis (argument is a series of key points reasoned and backed up by evidence to prove that a thesis is correct).

If you cannot figure out the philosophical message, read the relevant secondary research sources listed (and if still empty-minded, then, read the PowerPoint lecture (M38.Ancient Việtnamese Philosophy).

The Instructions

01) Under RESEARCH, provide some background information on the bronze drums of the Heger Type I.

02) Under ANALYSIS, identify the key aspects of the self-revealing art (like the orchestra and the importance of the bronze drums of Heger Type 1, the model of counter-clockwise circularity with all things moving around concentric circles, etc.).

03) Both the FORM and the CONTENT of your PA18 shall be graded. For the FORM of your PA8, use the BWRs and the basic writing procedure (CLAIM > REASONING > EVIDENCE).

THE STUDENT PRACTICE OF PHILOSOPHICAL HERMENEUTICS (RESEARCH > ANALYSIS > INTERPRETATION > EVALUATION)

Art, Society, Censorship, and Transgression

Question description

(Content Warning: Given the inherent socially offensive nature of Transgressive art and philosophy, it is very possible you will find something that offends you.Some of the thinkers I mention at the bottom of this page offend me, what is important is to examine that offense- it may be merited- but even if it is, examining the root and dimensions of offense and taboo are important exercises, and should be undertaken with an open mind. That being said, be aware that transgressive art and thought may deal with and feature explicit and graphic violence, explicit and often niche sexuality, a-typical and antinomian religious thought, unusual, bizarre, or unsettling visuals and lyrics, or other elements likely to cause some degree of offense or revulsion. If you have any personal concerns about the material- or interest in a specific philosophical avenue-feel free to contact me.)

Much like Zhuangzi used maimed men to problematize class and ritual in Chinese society, modern artists, thinkers, philosopher, and writers, have used social taboo and transgression in their work- not only to shock- but to confront dominant sensibilities and challenge preconceptions. Transgressive themes, particularly popular in the late 19thand early 20thcenturies, are once more being utilized to challenge conventional thinking and reason- and are ubiquitous elements of many 21stcentury media, Horror movies, Extreme musical genres, and modern art to name a few, exist almost exclusively to viciously confronting the problems of modern life, in strange, shocking, assaultive, and potentially violent ways.

What is the purpose of employing intentionally shocking imagery? What is the strength it carries and how is it employed? This assignment will require you to acquire a personal understanding of what transgressiveand countercultural mean, and how they are employed. After you have done some research, you will compose your own work of transgressive art, as well as a short essay, explaining what you have created, how it fits into yourunderstanding of ‘transgressive’ (or countercultural, antinomian, avante-garde), and social issues.

There are many different works you can compose, they can be written or visual, you should not feel constrained by standard academic conventions and styles for the artistic composition, offensive or unorthodox content is acceptableand encouraged. For your essay, focus on explaining what the work means, and what it is supposed to say/do. Beyond this you are fairly open in topic and material, though I encourage you to formulate your personal social qualm or definition/use of transgression first.

Examples of Acceptable submissions.

  • Personal Essay, Monologue, or, journal
  • Short Fiction, Poetry, stage and screen plays.
  • Photography, painting, sketching

Below is a list of a variety of thinkers varyingly dubbed Transgressive or counter-cultural, I would not encourage you to look all of them up, but if your own research isn’t turning up anything viable, these may be good places to start.

(Antonin Artuad, George Bataille, Tristan Tzara, Gilles Deleuze, Felix Guattari, Fad Gadget, Marilyn Manson, G.G. Allin, Dario Argento, Alejandro Jodorowsky, Kenneth Anger, Salvador Dali, John Waters, J.G. Ballard, Alistair Crowley, Anton Lavey, The Guhuyasamāja Tantra, Zhuangzi, Liehtzi.)

mind over matter?

Question description

Objectives:

Analyze a current debate case.

Explain an argument that supports a position for or against the case.

Apply an ethical theory to your argument.

Instructions:

1. Read Case 11: Mind Over Matter? from the 2017 Texas Regional Ethics Bowl Competition.

QUESTION: Should the Museum include the biography of the artist with the art work?

Write three- five paragraphs evaluating the ethical issues of the case and arguing FOR or AGAINST a position from the question. Make sure to pick ONE position (for or against), identify the stakeholders, address various ethical issues (e.g., freedom of speech, violation of rights, happiness of society, autonomy, etc.), give at least 1 argument that supports your position, and explain and reply to a possible objection.

FORMAT:

Paragraph 1: Summarize the scenario briefly, focusing on the elements that you will address in your argument and state your thesis (pick a position either FOR or AGAINST)

Paragraph 2: Give one argument that supports the thesis. Remember to explain your argument fully, using examples or scenarios.

Paragraph 3: Give another argument that supports the thesis.

Paragraph 4: Explain a possible objection to the thesis. Reply to that objection.

–Your goal is to give objective arguments to support a thesis.Use the theories that we have studied to support your arguments. One of your arguments must explicitly address one of the ethical theories we covered (Utilitarianism, Deontology, Cultural Relativism, Social contract theory, Egoism, Divine command theory). Think about what Mill or Kant would say.

–Make sure your arguments do not commit any obvious fallacy such as anecdotal evidence, emotional appeal, fallacy of assertion (stating beliefs or opinions), straw man, etc.

–Make sure you give REASONS for the position.

— Explain your arguments fully, using examples or scenarios. Pretend that your reader doesn’t know the case, and does not agree with you. Explain your argument fairly and sufficiently.

–Your last paragraph (or two) should explain a possible objection against your argument, and then explain your reply. Thus, if your thesis is FOR a position, explain an argument AGAINST the position, and reply to that argument.

Case 11: Mind over Matter?

On April 29, 2017, the Ditchling Museum of ART + CRAFT opened a new exhibit: Eric Gill: The Body. Gill was one of the finest British artists of the 20th century; his sculptures stand in buildings across the world, including Westminster Cathedral (London) and the United Nations Building (NYC). His sculptures, engravings, and drawings permanently reside in prestigious museums. According to Ditchling’s web page, “[w]ithin Gill’s work, the human body is of central importance; this major exhibition asks whether knowledge of Gill’s disturbing biography affects our enjoyment and appreciation of his depiction of the human figure.”109 The “disturbing biography” referred to is Gill’s sexual abuse of his two oldest daughters during their teens.

Prior to mounting the exhibition, Ditchling’s director, Nathaniel Hepburn, convened a workshop that included academics, museum professionals and curators, critics, and journalists to consider not whether, but how, the exhibition might usefully examine this sexual abuse. Journalist Rachel Cooke, a workshop participant, queries: “For me, though, the biggest question remains unanswered: why do this show at all? The darknesses in Gill’s life have been public knowledge… [since] 1989. It is not as though this information is secret. Why force it on visitors?”110

Certainly some viewers will be distressed—perhaps mightily distressed—to see sculptures and engravings of the abused daughters, executed during the periods of their abuse. For example, abuse survivors may experience flashbacks of their abuse. Members of the more general public are likely to experience feelings of disgust and repugnance in learning how Gill came to acquire such intimate knowledge of his subjects’ bodies. Abusers themselves may view their own behavior as validated upon learning that a great artist produced brilliant work as a result of his sexual abuse of minors. Indeed, one post on the museum’s Facebook page notes: “Voyeurism is not art – your exhibition feeds the poisoned minds of child molesters – for the safety of all young bodies and souls at risk – I insist you remove these images.”111 109 “Eric Gill: The Body,” Ditchling Museum of Art + Craft, June 6, 2017, http://www.ditchlingmuseumartcraft.org.uk/event/eric-gill-body/.

110 Rachel Cooke, “Eric Gill: Can We Separate the Artist from the Abuser?,” The Guardian, June 9, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2017/apr/09/eric-gill-the-body-ditchling-exhibition-rachelcooke?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other.

111 Ditchling Museum of Art + Craft Facebook Page, June 9, 2017, https://www.facebook.com/pg/museumartcraft/reviews/.

32
Why, then, bring up the abuse at all? Why not just show Gill’s work without mentioning this aspect of his personal history? The relationship of artists’ personal lives to their works has long been a vexed question that remains unsettled. Director Hepburn responds: “Museums have a duty to talk about difficult issues. They are a place where society can think. There is some public benefit in organisations like ours not turning a blind eye to abuse.”112

Moreover, the American Association of Museum Curators’ Code of Ethics lists as curators’ first value “[t]o serve the public good by contributing to and promoting learning, inquiry, and dialogue, and by making the depth and breadth of human knowledge available to the public.”113 The Code adds that curators’ interpretive responsibilities include: “When possible and appropriate, [curators] accurately and respectfully represent the creator’s perspective.”114 The Code does not address who is/might be the arbiter(s) of “the public good”, or the exact nature of this good.

Finally, the issue of self-censorship arises: If museums themselves censor exhibitions’ content by choosing to omit objects viewers might find offensive, the public will be deprived of art that, at least according to some art experts, has aesthetic value— Robert Mapplethorpe’s photos come to mind here.

Ethics Bowl: The War Against Fake News

Question description

Objectives:

Analyze a current debate case.

Explain an argument that supports a position for or against the case.

Apply an ethical theory to your argument.

Instructions:

1. Read Case 6: The War Against Fake News from the 2017 Texas Regional Ethics Bowl Competition.

QUESTION: Should facebook create algorithms to censor fake news articles?

Write three- five paragraphs evaluating the ethical issues of the case and arguing FOR or AGAINST a position from the question. Make sure to pick ONE position (for or against), identify the stakeholders, address various ethical issues (e.g., freedom of speech, violation of rights, happiness of society, autonomy, etc.), give at least 1 argument that supports your position, and explain and reply to a possible objection.

FORMAT:

Paragraph 1: Summarize the scenario briefly, focusing on the elements that you will address in your argument and state your thesis (pick a position either FOR or AGAINST)

Paragraph 2: Give one argument that supports the thesis. Remember to explain your argument fully, using examples or scenarios.

Paragraph 3: Give another argument that supports the thesis.

Paragraph 4: Explain a possible objection to the thesis. Reply to that objection.

–Your goal is to give objective arguments to support a thesis.Use the theories that we have studied to support your arguments. One of your arguments must explicitly address one of the ethical theories we covered (Utilitarianism, Deontology, Cultural Relativism, Social contract theory, Egoism, Divine command theory). Think about what Mill or Kant would say.

–Make sure your arguments do not commit any obvious fallacy such as anecdotal evidence, emotional appeal, fallacy of assertion (stating beliefs or opinions), straw man, etc.

–Make sure you give REASONS for the position.

— Explain your arguments fully, using examples or scenarios. Pretend that your reader doesn’t know the case, and does not agree with you. Explain your argument fairly and sufficiently.

–Your last paragraph (or two) should explain a possible objection against your argument, and then explain your reply. Thus, if your thesis is FOR a position, explain an argument AGAINST the position, and reply to that argument.

Ethics Bowl: Voting Rights for Felons

Question description

Objectives:

Analyze a current debate case.

Explain an argument that supports a position for or against the case.

Apply an ethical theory to your argument.

Instructions:

1. Read Case 2: Voting Rights for Felons from the 2018 Texas Regional Ethics Bowl Competition.

QUESTION: When, if ever, should felons’ voting rights be restored?

Write three- five paragraphs evaluating the ethical issues of the case and arguing FOR or AGAINST a position from the question. Make sure to pick ONE position (for or against), identify the stakeholders, address various ethical issues (e.g., freedom of speech, violation of rights, happiness of society, autonomy, etc.), give at least 1 argument that supports your position, and explain and reply to a possible objection.

FORMAT:

Paragraph 1: Summarize the scenario briefly, focusing on the elements that you will address in your argument and state your thesis (pick a position either FOR or AGAINST)

Paragraph 2: Give one argument that supports the thesis. Remember to explain your argument fully, using examples or scenarios.

Paragraph 3: Give another argument that supports the thesis.

Paragraph 4: Explain a possible objection to the thesis. Reply to that objection.

–Your goal is to give objective arguments to support a thesis.Use the theories that we have studied to support your arguments. One of your arguments must explicitly address one of the ethical theories we covered (Utilitarianism, Deontology, Cultural Relativism, Social contract theory, Egoism, Divine command theory). Think about what Mill or Kant would say.

–Make sure your arguments do not commit any obvious fallacy such as anecdotal evidence, emotional appeal, fallacy of assertion (stating beliefs or opinions), straw man, etc.

–Make sure you give REASONS for the position.

— Explain your arguments fully, using examples or scenarios. Pretend that your reader doesn’t know the case, and does not agree with you. Explain your argument fairly and sufficiently.

–Your last paragraph (or two) should explain a possible objection against your argument, and then explain your reply. Thus, if your thesis is FOR a position, explain an argument AGAINST the position, and reply to that argument.

Ethics Bowl: Euthanasia for Alcoholism

Question description

Objectives:

Analyze a current debate case.

Explain an argument that supports a position for or against the case.

Apply an ethical theory to your argument.

Instructions:

1. Read Case 1: Euthanasia for Alcoholism from the 2017 Texas Regional Ethics Bowl Competition.

QUESTION: Is euthanasia morally permissible for conditions other than terminal illnesses?

Write three- five paragraphs evaluating the ethical issues of the case and arguing FOR or AGAINST a position from the question. Make sure to pick ONE position (for or against), identify the stakeholders, address various ethical issues (e.g., freedom of speech, violation of rights, happiness of society, autonomy, etc.), give at least 1 argument that supports your position, and explain and reply to a possible objection.

FORMAT:

Paragraph 1: Summarize the scenario briefly, focusing on the elements that you will address in your argument and state your thesis (pick a position either FOR or AGAINST)

Paragraph 2: Give one argument that supports the thesis. Remember to explain your argument fully, using examples or scenarios.

Paragraph 3: Give another argument that supports the thesis.

Paragraph 4: Explain a possible objection to the thesis. Reply to that objection.

–Your goal is to give objective arguments to support a thesis.Use the theories that we have studied to support your arguments. One of your arguments must explicitly address one of the ethical theories we covered (Utilitarianism, Deontology, Cultural Relativism, Social contract theory, Egoism, Divine command theory). Think about what Mill or Kant would say.

–Make sure your arguments do not commit any obvious fallacy such as anecdotal evidence, emotional appeal, fallacy of assertion (stating beliefs or opinions), straw man, etc.

–Make sure you give REASONS for the position.

— Explain your arguments fully, using examples or scenarios. Pretend that your reader doesn’t know the case, and does not agree with you. Explain your argument fairly and sufficiently.

–Your last paragraph (or two) should explain a possible objection against your argument, and then explain your reply. Thus, if your thesis is FOR a position, explain an argument AGAINST the position, and reply to that argument.

Ethics Bowl: Running Away With the Competition

Question description

Objectives:

Analyze a current debate case.

Explain an argument that supports a position for or against the case.

Apply an ethical theory to your argument.

Instructions:

1. Read Case 10: Running Away from the Competition from the 2017 Texas Regional Ethics Bowl Competition.

QUESTION: Should women with elevated levels of testosterone be allowed to compete in women’s events in the Olympics?

Write three- five paragraphs evaluating the ethical issues of the case and arguing FOR or AGAINST a position from the question. Make sure to pick ONE position (for or against), identify the stakeholders, address various ethical issues (e.g., freedom of speech, violation of rights, happiness of society, autonomy, etc.), give at least 1 argument that supports your position, and explain and reply to a possible objection.

FORMAT:

Paragraph 1: Summarize the scenario briefly, focusing on the elements that you will address in your argument and state your thesis (pick a position either FOR or AGAINST)

Paragraph 2: Give one argument that supports the thesis. Remember to explain your argument fully, using examples or scenarios.

Paragraph 3: Give another argument that supports the thesis.

Paragraph 4: Explain a possible objection to the thesis. Reply to that objection.

–Your goal is to give objective arguments to support a thesis.Use the theories that we have studied to support your arguments. One of your arguments must explicitly address one of the ethical theories we covered (Utilitarianism, Deontology, Cultural Relativism, Social contract theory, Egoism, Divine command theory). Think about what Mill or Kant would say.

–Make sure your arguments do not commit any obvious fallacy such as anecdotal evidence, emotional appeal, fallacy of assertion (stating beliefs or opinions), straw man, etc.

–Make sure you give REASONS for the position.

— Explain your arguments fully, using examples or scenarios. Pretend that your reader doesn’t know the case, and does not agree with you. Explain your argument fairly and sufficiently.

–Your last paragraph (or two) should explain a possible objection against your argument, and then explain your reply. Thus, if your thesis is FOR a position, explain an argument AGAINST the position, and reply to that argument.