I want my topic to be about violence, on how Kant, Atistole, and John Mill feel about violence. Also the ethics of sports, getting hit in that manner. I do MMA so if i can help me speak about the topic in a personal manner as well.
Interested in Violence – ppl. Is it okay to resort to violence .What are you thinking about,How the text , says what the theories would say . The ethics of sports . Explain why in certain cases it’s ethical to fight , and light . How would Utialridm feel about it , how does Aristotle feel about Violence , how does Kant feel about violence- this is my topic!
Here are the insturctions.
This is where you explain the issue that you are tackling in the paper, and the approach
that you will take to it. I want to see at least three things from you here: a clear description of the argument that you are making, an accurate summary of what you are going to say about it, and a brief justification of why your reader should care about what you have concluded. On that last point: for example, is your conclusion philosophically important? Does it tell us something interesting about the history of a given philosophical idea? Etc. Do NOT take these examples as exhaustive. They are merely meant to be suggestive. But if you can’t think of anything that seems obviously better to you, then they are OK to use.
Here is an oversimplified rule of thumb for structuring an essay: tell me what you’re going to tell me (introduction), then tell me (body), then tell me what you told me (conclusion).
Body: This is where you work out your argument. One helpful way to organize things (though not the only possible way) is to take the ultimate point(s) for which you are arguing (your conclusion(s)) and break down your argument into premises that you can show logically imply your conclusion(s). For example, if you are trying to argue that Socrates is mortal, you might begin from the premises that Socrates is a man, and all men are mortal. If this remains unclear to you, then find a guide (e.g., on the Internet) to what a logically valid argument is and try to make your argument valid in that sense, since that is what I am describing. If you can lay things out in this form, then a useful way of proceeding once you have done so is to argue
for each of your necessary premises in turn. This means telling me why I should believe these premises, responding to what you think people who disbelieve them would say to dispute them, and so on. (You should at least include those first two components!) The better a case you can make for your premises, the more strongly you will have supported your conclusion(s).
Conclusion: In the conclusion of the essay, your job is simply to summarize what you have argued, what you take yourself to have shown in the course of the argument, and to assess if there are any larger takeaways from your argument to be had. You should also tell me why what you have argued matters, i.e., why anyone else should be interested in your results, even if you have already done so in the introduction. For even if you did so in the introduction, that was merely prospective. But in the conclusion you are in a position to point to specific things that you established in the body to support your claims in this regard.
Above all, please make your argument, and your writing in general, clear and easy to follow. If I cannot even begin to understand what you are getting at, then I will be unable to tell you much about where you are going wrong. And then you won’t be able to really learn from your mistakes.
