35806 Topic AbortionNumber of Pages 5 (Double Spaced)Num.docx

35806 Topic: Abortion
Number of Pages: 5 (Double Spaced)
Number of sources: 3
Writing Style: APA
Type of document: Essay
Academic Level:Undergraduate
Category: Philosophy
Language Style: English (U.S.)
Order Instructions:
Week 5 - Final Paper
Ethical Reasoning
[WLO: 3] [CLOs: 1, 2, 3, 4]
Please read these assignment instructions before writing your
paper as they contain very precise and specific instructions on
both the content and format requirements. You should download
the provided outlinePreview the document and use that to
structure your paper, and consult the assignment

guidancePreview the document and modeled examplePreview
the document for additional help. Finally, before submitting
your assignment please use the checklistPreview the document
to ensure that you have completed all of the requirements.
Overview
This course has three written assignments that build upon one
another and are designed to take you step-by-step through a
process of writing a paper that identifies an ethical question,
examines the context, issues, and arguments surrounding the
question, and attempts to defend an answer to that question
using strong moral reasoning.
In the Week 1 assignment, “Ethical Question,” you chose an
ethical question, provided an introduction, a position statement
and supporting reason, and an opposing position statement and
supporting reason.
In the Week 3 assignment, “Applying an Ethical Theory,” you
explained utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics, including
its core moral principle or ideal, and applied that theory to the
topic by demonstrating how its principles would support a
particular position on your ethical question.
In this final written assignment, you will combine what you
have done in these two exercises by examining an ethical issue
and defending your own position on an ethical question
regarding that issue.
This final written assignment should be written in essay form
with the following clearly labeled sections:
Introduction
Ethical Argument

Explanation and Defense
Objection and Response
Conclusion
The paper should be between 1,300 and 1,500 words, utilize
three scholarly resources, and include a title page and reference
page.
Part 1: Introduction
In this section of the paper, you will begin with your ethical
question, introduce the topic and paper, and close with a thesis
statement.
The ethical question may be the same as your Week 3 written
assignment (“Applying an Ethical Theory”) or a revised version
of it.
The introduction should be revised in a way that reflects your
additional thinking on the issue and question.
End this section with a thesis statement that states your position
on the issue (the answer to the ethical question you believe is
strongest) and provides a brief summary of the main ideas you
will be presenting in the paper. Please see the assignment
guidance for examples of thesis statements.
Place the introduction under the Part 1: Introduction heading.
Part 2: Ethical Argument
In this section of the paper, you will present the strongest
argument you can in support of the position you have stated in

your introduction.
This will be similar to the “supporting reasons” you offered in
the first assignment; however, this argument should reflect your
research into the key ethical issues that need to be identified
and addressed, the arguments on different sides of this problem,
and the theories of moral reasoning we have studied in the class
(you will discuss the specific details and implications of the
moral theories in the next two sections).
You can think of this as a summary of the main argument you
would give if you were an attorney trying to convince a jury of
your position.
Place this information under the Part 2: Ethical Argument
heading.
Part 3: Explanation and Defense
In this section, you will explain and defend your argument by
drawing on the moral theory that aligns most closely with the
argument you presented in Part 2. This may be the same theory
you discussed in your second assignment, but it may also be a
different theory.
You must first explain the theory in general terms similar to
how you explained a theory in your second assignment,
including a brief account of the historical background of the
theory and the philosopher(s) associated with it and general
overview of the core moral ideal or principle of the theory,
including the way it guides and constrains moral reasoning.
You should then clearly show how your argument represents an
application of that form of moral reasoning.
In other words, if the argument you present in Part 2 is

utilitarian, deontological, or virtue-based (teleological), you
will want to explain utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics
in general terms, then explain how your argument from Part 2
reflects or draws upon the core principles and values of that
theory. Please refer to the Week 3 assignment instructions for
directions on how to explain and apply the moral theory.
Place this section under the Part 3: Explanation and Defense
heading.
Part 4: Objection and Response
In this section of the paper, you will present the strongest
objection you can to your argument, and briefly defend that
objection by appealing to a different ethical theory than the one
you focused on in Part 3.
Briefly explain the core moral ideal or principle of the theory
and how that could be the basis of an objection to your
argument. For instance, if you explained and defended your own
argument by applying the principles of virtue ethics, you could
raise an objection from the perspective of utilitarianism by
briefly explaining the core utilitarian principle and how
applying that principle could lead someone to a different
conclusion than the one you are defending.
Next, you should respond to the objection by explaining why it
is not strong enough to undermine the main argument in defense
of your position.
See the assignment guidance for suggestions on how to
effectively respond to the objection.
Place this section under the Part 4: Objection and Response
heading.

Part 5: Conclusion
In this section of the paper, provide a summary of what you
have done in the paper by briefly describing what you
accomplished in each of the above sections.
Place this section under the Part 5: Conclusion heading.
Resource Requirement
You must use at least three scholarly resources, only one of
which may be the textbook. In other words, you must use at
least two scholarly resources in addition to the textbook.
Acceptable ways of using a source include providing a
quotation, summary, or paraphrase; merely providing a citation,
especially when it is unclear how or where the text supports
your claim, is not sufficient.
If you need help with finding additional resources or are unsure
about whether a particular resource will count toward the
requirement, please contact your instructor.
For sources to count toward the resources requirement, they
must be cited within the text of your paper and on the reference
page. Sources that are listed on the references page but not cited
within the paper do not count toward fulfilling the resources
requirement.
In your paper,
Introduce the topic and paper.
Provide a thesis statement.
Present an argument in support of the position.

Defend the argument by explaining and applying the ethical
theory that most closely aligns with the argument.
Present an objection to the argument by appealing to a different
ethical theory.
Respond to the objection.
Provide a conclusion that describes what was accomplished in
each of the sections of the paper.
The Ethical Reasoning Final Paper
Must be 1,300 to 1,500 words in length (not including title and
references pages) and formatted according to APA style as
outlined in the Ashford Writing Center’s APA Style (Links to
an external site.)Links to an external site.resource.
Must include a separate title page with the following:
Title of paper
Student’s name
Course name and number
Instructor’s name
Date submitted
SHORTENED TITLE
Abortion
Jackie Duong
PHI 208: Ethics and Moral Reasoning
Prof. Dukette

Running head: ABORTION
2
SHORTENED TITLE
November 5, 2018
Abortion
Part 1: Ethical Question
Should abortion be legal?
On January 22, 1973, “Roe v. Wade was a legal case in which
the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (7-2) that unduly restrictive state
regulation of abortion is unconstitutional” (Roe v. Wade, 2018).
As stated in the Britannica, Justice A. Blackmun came to a
conclusion that, “criminalizing abortion in most instances
violated a woman’s constitutional right of privacy, which it
found to be implicit in the liberty guarantee of the due process
clause of the Fourteenth Amendment” (Roe v. Wade, 2018).
This case was huge case back then and it is definitely still
relevant now.
Part 3: Position Statement
There has been a debate for a long time about whether abortion
should be legal or not. In my opinion, I think that abortion
should be legal. Some say that abortion should be illegal
because it is considered killing a fetus, and some say that it is
against the bible. Primarily, abortion should be legal because it
should be a woman’s choice to do what she wants with her
body. If abortion was illegal, the law is taking away a woman’s
decision to do what she wants. Abortion being illegal is almost
like taking away a woman’s right to her body as well. Why
would anyone want a woman to bring an unwanted baby into the
world and not provide them the best life possible?
Part 4: Reasons in Support of Your Position
The reason why I support abortion is because that a woman
should be about to make choices for herself, and not let any man
or law do that for her. The reason why Roe v. Wade was passed

was because that it violated a woman’s right to privacy and
deemed unconstitutional. Also, one huge argument, is that
women get raped and sexually assaulted more than we know. If
the victim of rape was to get pregnant by her perpetrator, she
should have the right to have an abortion because it was an
unwanted pregnancy.
Part 5: Opposing Position Statement
Abortion should be illegal because it is killing a human being.
Part 6: Reasons in Support of the Opposing Position
Some people would rather bring a baby into this world and then
put the baby up for adoption so that it could have a chance of
living. Pro-life supporters think that killing the fetus is the
worst thing anyone can do because it just like killing a human
being in their eyes. Also, not only do they think it is killing a
human being, it is also against the bible. Some people are
religious and think that abortion should be illegal because it is
against their religion.
Running head: SHORTENED TITLE
2
SHORTENED TITLE
PHI 208: Ethics and Moral Reasoning
Prof.
Running head: SHORTENED TITLE
5
SHORTENED TITLE

Part 2: Ethical Argument
Part 3: Explanation and Defense
Part 4: Objection and Response
Part 5: Conclusion
REFERENCES
Week 5 Assignment Guidance:
General Notes and Advice:
· This paper is a demonstration of what you have learned about
moral reasoning based on our examining of ethical theories and
specific ethical issues. As such, you should focus your
attention on carefully spelling out the reasoning that supports
your conclusion, and relating that to the theories we have
discussed in class.
· You are free to write on the same topic and question you wrote
on in previous papers, or choose a different topic and question.
· If you choose a different topic, you would benefit from going
through the exercises in the previous assignments.
· You are free to draw upon the work you did in previous
papers, and reuse parts that you feel were strong, but you are
not to simply recycle the previous papers. This paper should
reflect the culmination of the development of your thoughts on
this issue, and many of the requirements for the final paper
cannot be satisfied by a heavily recycled paper.
· The consideration of an objection against your own view is a

way of showing that your view has the support of good reasons
and can answer its strongest objections. Therefore, aim at
identifying and addressing the strongest opposing argument you
can, bearing in mind that a good thesis should be able to
respond to the best arguments for the other side.
Thesis Statement
The thesis statement is more than just a position statement of
the sort you provided in the first assignment; rather, it states the
position and the primary reasons in such a way that the reader
should have a clear sense of how the reasons support the
position, which is what will be spelled out and explained in the
body of the paper. Please see the guide on constructing a thesis
statement at the end of this document.
Ethical Argument
The ethical argument does not need to refer to a specific ethical
theory like utilitarianism or deontology. If you believe that the
strongest argument relates certain actions or policies to the
values and character needed to flourish, you could explain that
here, and then in the next section describe virtue theory and the
way that it regards questions of character and flourishing to be
more fundamental than consequences or duties. Or, if you
think that the strongest argument in favor of your position
involves showing the consequences, you can argue that one
action or policy has better consequences than another. In the
next section, you can explain why you believe that the action or
policy with the best consequences is the morally correct one by
explaining utilitarian theory. Or you could explain why one
action or policy involves respecting or violating fundamental
rights, or is inconsistent, or fails to respect persons, or
something like that and then explain that in the next section by
discussing Kantian theory.
Objection and Response
The objection needs to directly address the argument that you
made. One way to think about that is whether someone could
accept the view of the objection and accept your own view at
the same time.

When you respond, you can identify a premise or assumption
that the objection makes that can be challenged. Remember that
if you challenge a premise or assumption, you thereby challenge
the conclusions that are based on that premise or assumption.
You might also try to show that the objection is inconsistent, or
that it would lead to further conclusions that are unacceptable.
When you respond, be sure that you do not end up defending a
different position than the one you defended in the main part of
the paper.
Guide on Constructing Thesis Statements
The thesis serves as the backbone of your paper. Or if you like,
it states the central idea of the paper, around which everything
else revolves. Every part of your paper is meant to in some way
explain and defend that thesis. So it’s really important to
construct a thesis that is focused enough that you can defend it
in the space given to your paper, and for that thesis to be clear,
concrete and specific, and to include a statement of the primary
reasons for that position.
So let’s look at some examples of some strong and some weaker
theses.
First you will be presented with a weak thesis statement, and
you should try to think about why it’s weak and what might
make it stronger before reading the explanation.
1. Weak Thesis:
· Abortion is a really tough issue that has sparked a lot of
controversy and debate for over four decades, and there are
many good arguments on both sides.
What makes it weak:
· No position. In other words, you don’t really tell me what
your stand is on this issue; you simply reiterate that it is an
ethically important issue, which should already be obvious. Be
sure that your thesis clearly states your position.
Some Stronger Alternatives:
· Even though abortion involves taking the life of a biologically

human creature, its relative lack of development, considered in
comparison to the burdens a woman may face in carrying it to
term, means that abortion may be morally justified in some
cases, and that is a determination that should be left up to the
individual woman to make with the full support of the law.
· Anytime there is uncertainty about whether a class of beings is
human, a liberal democratic society should always err on the
side of humanity, thus we should consider fetuses to be human
and criminalize most cases of abortion.
These statements specify the position that the person takes, and
provide a concise statement of the primary reasons for that
position. They also limit themselves to one particular aspect of
this wide and complex debate. Compare that with the next
thesis.
2. Weak Thesis:
· Racism is a problem in this country because blacks are treated
as inferiors, there is too much prejudice within law
enforcement, and there are many racist stereotypes in the media
and popular culture.
What makes it weak:
· Too broad. While each of these points is worth considering, it
would be impossible to adequately defend all of these claims
within the scope of a single paper. It is important to make sure
that the claim being defended is narrow and focused enough that
you can adequately defended it in the space provided by the
assignment. Remember that it is better to be narrow and deep,
rather than broad and shallow.
· When we examine rates of incarceration and instances of
police brutality, we find that people of color are targeted at
much higher rates than whites, and this reveals an inherent
racism within the criminal justice system that is unjust and
demands substantial and concerted efforts to change.

· While some people may find the image of the “Mammy”
character in literature, media, and advertising to be warm and
comforting, it reinforces the idea that the “proper place” of the
black woman is in a servile position, which in turn supports a
conception of the inherent inferiority of blacks that conflicts
with the notion that all humans are inherently equal.
Notice how each of these theses limits itself to one of the many
ways in which racism might be a force in society. Moreover, it
doesn't simply describe the sociological facts; it also includes a
clear ethical claim, i.e., a claim that invokes conceptions of
value, right and wrong, and so forth. Compare that with the
next thesis.
3. Weak Thesis:
· Placing more restrictions on gun ownership will make it much
harder for potential criminals to have access to guns.
What makes it weak:
· Not an ethical thesis. The claim made by this thesis statement
is a sociological one, not an ethical one, strictly speaking; in
other words, it is a claim about what effects on society certain
policies will most likely have. An ethical thesis would state the
ethical significance of that claim, if it were true. The truth of
the claim may mean that we have a responsibility to impose
tighter restrictions on gun ownership, but it may not. Whether
or not it does depends on how that fact relates to our
conceptions of ethical value and moral responsibility.
· While supporters of gun control are correct in holding that
there should be some restrictions on gun ownership, I will argue
that restrictions similar to those in many European countries
would cause more harm than it would prevent if implemented in
the United States, given how many people in our society depend
upon guns for protection.

· While tighter gun control measures might mean that some
people will not be able to engage as freely in certain leisure
activities like sport hunting and target shooting, the fact that
human life itself is far more valuable than such activities and
that lives that would be saved by tighter gun control measures
justifies the inconvenience such measures would cause for a few
people.
In the first case, the thesis appeals to the idea that our moral
responsibility is to ensure the greatest good and least harm. In
the second case, it appeals to the ethical idea that the value of
human life itself outweighs the value of any particular
enjoyments within that life. These ideas are all debatable, as
are the sociological facts, but the relation between the two is
the focus of the thesis; the body of the paper would be focused
on defending these debatable claims.
4. Weak Thesis:
· I believe that doctors have an obligation to always respect the
rights of their patients.
What makes it weak:
· Too vague about some of the key terms. Watch out for terms
like “rights” and “respect” and others that can mean many
different things. You want to instead be as specific as you can.
In the alternatives below, notice how the “rights” in question
are specified, and what it means to “respect” a patient (and what
it doesn’t mean) are also clarified.
· A patient always has the right to be told the truth by his or her
doctor so that he or she can make the most informed decisions,
even when telling the truth results in greater harm than good.
· A patient has the right to the most effective form of treatments
possible from her doctor, and if a doctor believes that a patient
will be better treated if they aren’t aware of the whole situation,

then it is permissible for the doctor to lie.
5. Weak Thesis:
· Criminals are scourges on society and it’s ridiculous to think
they deserve to keep living.
What makes it weak:
· Too extreme, indefensible, uses inflammatory language. This
is a formal philosophical essay, not a screed, not a Facebook
post or blog comment, not a conversation among friends. Make
sure your position can be adequately defended with reasons and
evidence, and that you maintain a respectful, formal tone.
· When someone knowingly and deliberately takes the life of
someone else without just cause, the only kind of punishment
that truly fits that crime and satisfies the demands of justice is
to have his or her own life taken in return.
· It is never right to take the life of an innocent person, and
since there is always a possibility that we might execute an
innocent person, capital punishment is not justified.
6. Weak Thesis:
· Everyone has their own religious beliefs, and who are we to
force them to pray if they don’t want to?
What makes it weak:
· Rhetorical question, not a statement. Remember that this is a
thesis statement.In fact, avoid using rhetorical questions
anywhere in your essay. Ideas are almost always communicated
much more clearly and precisely when they are stated positively
and directly.
· Since public prayer implicitly expresses an endorsement of

religious belief, officially sanctioned prayer in public schools
constitutes a violation of religious freedom and should not be
allowed.
· While official school prayers are a violation of religious
freedom, banning any student-led prayer gathering on campus
grounds is equally a violation of religious freedom.
Again, remember that a thesis announces your position, and it is
something you can argue for. I should know what conclusion
you will be trying to defend on this topic, and the primary
reasons supporting that conclusion. And for ethics papers, the
thesis should have a clear ethical statement to make.
In sum, you should avoid a thesis statement that:
1. doesn’t state the position clearly and directly;
2. is too broad;
3. does not state an ethical claim;
4. is too vague;
5. is extreme, indefensible, or uses inflammatory language;
6. uses rhetorical questions.
When you have constructed your thesis, run through these
examples and consider whether your thesis statement makes any
of these mistakes. If it does, try to revise it, and if you are
unsure or are having trouble, please consult your instructor.
Week 5 Assignment Checklist
This checklist can help you ensure that you have completed all
of the assignment instructions.
Provide an introduction that:.
|_|
Starts with the question,
|_|
Describes the ethical problem (including the most relevant
issues),
|_|
Summarizes the procedure of the paper,
|_|

Concludes with a thesis statement.
|_|
Place the introduction under the PART ONE: INTRODUCTION
heading.
|_|
Present the strongest in support of the position stated in the
introduction.
|_|
Place the argument under the PART TWO: ETHICAL
ARGUMENT heading
|_|
Explain in general terms the moral theory that aligns most
closely with the argument presented in Part Two, following the
procedure described in the Week 3 assignment.
|_|
Show how the argument represents an application of that form
of moral reasoning.
|_|
Place the application of the theory to the question under the
PART THREE: EXPLANATION AND DEFENSE heading.
|_|
Present the strongest objection you can to your argument, and
briefly defend that objection by appealing to a different ethical
theory than the one you focused on in part three.
|_|
Explain the core moral ideal or principle of the theory and how
that could be the basis of an objection to your argument.
|_|
Respond to the objection by explaining why it is not strong
enough to undermine the main argument in defense of your
position.
|_|
PART FOUR: OBJECTION AND RESPONSE heading.
|_|

PART FIVE: CONCLUSION heading.
|_|
Include at least 3 scholarly sources.
|_|
Cite your sources within the text of your paper and on the
reference page.
|_|
Include a title page and list of references.
|_|
Proofread carefully for mechanical and grammatical errors.
|_|
Format the assignment in APA style.
|_|
Write between 1300-1500 words.
I uploaded documents that's an outline to follow, so it should be
fairly easy to do and follow.
I have gotten a part of my argument down, but if you guys can,
please apply an ethical theory in my paper. Here are the three
theories to choose from:
utilitarianism - A consequentialist ethical theory that holds that
morally right actions, laws, or policies are those whose
consequences contain the greatest positive value and least
negative value compared to the consequences of available
alternatives.
Deontological Ethics (deontology) - Ethical systems that
maintain that the moral value of actions depends on some
feature of the action itself.
virtue ethics - Ethical systems that focus on identifying and

describing the kinds of character traits or virtues that are
integral to living a good human life
Thank you!

35806 Topic AbortionNumber of Pages 5 (Double Spaced)Num.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 35806 Topic AbortionNumber of Pages 5 (Double Spaced)Num.docx

Similar to 35806 Topic AbortionNumber of Pages 5 (Double Spaced)Num.docx (11)

More from rhetttrevannion

More from rhetttrevannion (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

35806 Topic AbortionNumber of Pages 5 (Double Spaced)Num.docx