Project #97539 - essay

Write a 1,500 word paper (more or less, but please include your word count!) comparing and contrasting     either Gandhi, Gran Torino, Judgment at Nuremberg, Watchmen (ideally, the “Ultimate Cut” version, if you can get your hands on it), or Battlestar Galactica (2003-9) episodes “A Measure of Salvation” or “Dirty Hands” with either utilitarianism (especially Mill’s) or Kant’s ethics. (Examples questions to consider and suggestive prompts can be found below.)  *** At the heart of any paper is an answer to the question, “So, what’s your point?” I expect you to take a position—to have a view—on the movie and the moral view you are comparing and contrasting. But more than this, I expect you to convince me that your view is right. You need to do more than simply articulate how you understand what’s going on. You need to argue why it would be a mistake to understand it otherwise. You think your view is the right one; why should I agree? How do you justify your beliefs? What reasons can you give?   In doing this, make sure that you 1) tell your readers, in your very first paragraph, what they can expect from the rest of your paper. It should be no kind of secret where your paper is going. Nor should they be at all surprised in how we get there. Explicitly articulate your paper’s thesis and outline how the rest of your paper argues for it. You should continue to guide your readers through your paper by giving them “signposts” that harken back to this “roadmap” of how what follows establish the truth of your thesis (which is, after all, your paper’s point, its “destination”, if you will). Please note, that although this introductory paragraph is where your readers start, it is not where you should begin writing your paper. It is almost always best written last and only after you know where your paper actually goes and how it gets there.   If your first paragraph “writes a cheque” the rest of the paper “covers” and means to “pay off”, you will need to do in detail what you have sketched in outline above. Make sure that in articulating and arguing for your view you both 2) critically explain what’s philosophically or morally interesting in the movie and 3) what about the movie highlights or elucidates aspects of the moral view you consider. In short, how does each—the movie and the philosophy—shed light on the other?   Thus, your paper ought not merely summarize, report, or explain anything. Nor should it be in any way a “research” paper, merely presenting other people’s ideas. You shouldn’t have to consult any outside sources, indeed, your paper should in no way resemble anything like a “book report”. (Though, of course, if you do consult outside sources for anything other than general background, you need to properly credit and cite your sources). Rather, papers in this (and in many philosophy) class(es) are meant to be exercises in critical, argumentative – that is, philosophical – writing. You need to engage and think carefully through the topic/issue/problem at hand and in light of those primary sources we’ve examined together and as part of this class. This means, as surprising as it may seem, whether your position is in fact right or not is far less important than its being honestly argued for.  The one thing you can’t do, however, is bullshit your way through a paper like this!

Subject Philosophy
Due By (Pacific Time) 12/06/2015 12:00 am
Report DMCA
TutorRating
pallavi

Chat Now!

out of 1971 reviews
More..
amosmm

Chat Now!

out of 766 reviews
More..
PhyzKyd

Chat Now!

out of 1164 reviews
More..
rajdeep77

Chat Now!

out of 721 reviews
More..
sctys

Chat Now!

out of 1600 reviews
More..
sharadgreen

Chat Now!

out of 770 reviews
More..
topnotcher

Chat Now!

out of 766 reviews
More..
XXXIAO

Chat Now!

out of 680 reviews
More..
All Rights Reserved. Copyright by AceMyHW.com - Copyright Policy