Philosophy

analyze the position of peter singer regarding animal rights and compare the position with the broader positions of utilitarianism (Mill). cite quotes from the book Bonevac, Today’s Moral Issues: Classic and Contemporary Perspectives.

Paper 1 is perhaps your first philosophical writing
assignment, and the emphasis for this assignment
is pure analysis. Writing in philosophy is a bit
different than other disciplines, although it has
some similarities with others. The key thing in
philosophical writing is clarity. We don’t want
flowery prose or poetic phrasing, nor do we want
needlessly obscure words pulled from a thesaurus
because they sound fancy. The goal in philosophical
analysis is a clear, compelling, and comprehensive
explanation of the matter at hand.
With that in mind, your assignment for paper 1 is twofold:
(1)  Analyze the position of either Peter Singer or Tom Regan regarding animal rights.
(2)  Compare the position with the broader positions of utilitarianism (Mill) or deontology (Kant).
a.  If you write on Singer, compare with Mill
b.  If you write on Regan, compare with Kant
This may sound like a simple assignment, but there are several important matters of philosophical
significance that you should keep in mind as you attempt to do (1) and (2):
  Philosophical Analysis is an explanation that focuses on a position’s arguments and key terms. You
must explain both the logic (sometimes in premise/conclusion format, but needn’t always or for this
assignment), but also be sure to clarify key terms.
  A key term plays a significant logical role in a philosopher’s
argument. Key terms are usually best clarified by both a definition
and an example. For example, you might clarify the term ‘function’
as Aristotle discusses as follows:
o  “Aristotle refers to the function of humans to further
examine the notion of happiness. The function of a human
can be thought of as the overall purpose that a thing has.
For example, one might think the overall purpose of a job is
to make money while contributing to society in a way that is
somehow significant.
  Definition
  Example
  All arguments exhibit a logical structure that needs to be fully
explained. For example, it does not do to simply say that Aristotle
believes that happiness is achieved by exercising reason. Instead,
you must point to the logical structure that Aristotle employs in arguing for the conclusion that
happiness is achieved by exercising reason:
PAPER 1 INSTRUCTIONS
“I Use logic and key terms, yo!”
o  “Aristotle argues that happiness for humans is achieved by the exercise of reason. He does
this by looking at the function of humans. A function can be thought of as the overall
purpose that a thing has. For example, one might think the overall purpose of a job is to
make money while contributing to society in a way that is somehow significant. In looking at
the function of humans, Aristotle compares and contrasts humans with other things in the
world. We first can look at all living things, such as plants, animals, and humans. While they
are all alive, it looks as if plants stand out in that they only exhibit a nutritive function. That
is, plants only seem to take in energy and material from the world and grow. By contrast,
animals do more than just have a nutritive function. Animals have sense perception and
move around in the world, so they have a sensory function. But humans beyond both plants
and animals have the function of exercising reason. Reason…”
o  Hopefully you get the idea of the logical structure here, cause that’s about all I’m going to
write in the example.
  Comparing a broader ethical theory with the narrower application to animals will require that you
have some reference to either Kant or Mill. You want to make sure that the references do not veer
too far off into the details of those theories, but instead keep an eye on the big picture of those
theories. That is you don’t need to spend too much of an emphasis on Mill or Kant’s own arguments
for their views. Instead, pay more attention to the terminology they employ and the overall
conclusions or ethical principles they have.
  Don’t take an author out of context. Reading comprehension requires that you display an
understanding of what the author means. Cherry-picked or otherwise unclear quotes, or
misinterpretations of the author’s argument or terminology are really bad in every discipline!
Key Requirements of the Paper
1000-1200 words (do not go over 1400); leave a word count for your TA. This
amounts to about 3 pages of double-spaced typing, depending on your font size
and margins, which really don’t matter. Word count is more important than pages,
and MS Word does a word count at the bottom of the screen.
Double space or make a wide right-margin for comments from your TA
Be sure to give credit to the authors as you discuss or paraphrase their views.
Cite your quotes by giving credit to the author in the sentence in a way that flows
well. For instance, you could say:
However, Singer points out that “the speciesist allows the interests of his
own species to override the greater interests of members of other
species.”
Don’t worry about a works cited page or page numbers, as (1) you should only use
references from the course readings, and (2) some have e-books and page
numbers don’t always match or even exist for those.
Paper is DUE on FRIDAY 1 MAY 2015 in lecture
Students should feel free to consult me or their TA for writing advice, tips, or other
general matters, but we cannot review drafts of your paper.