My two liars are, Donald Trump and Richard Nixon
The other two articles by Carter and Pasquerella and Killilea is also on the file. All of my sources are on the file linked below
Which Lies Are Worse?
Key Skills: research, summary, documentation, argument, counter argument, ethical reasoning
In Unit 2 you researched two people who told lies publicly and read articles by scholars evaluating lies and lying to decide if there are times when lying is acceptable.
Now you will think critically about the people and lies you studied so you can answer the question, Which is worse?
You will create your own criteria for judging the lies and then apply that criteria to both. The criteria has several uses. First it will help you compare the cases of lying and be methodical as you judge them. Second it will help you explain to your readers why you decided one case was worse than the other. One place you will have seen this sort of criteria used is in the grading rubrics I use to score your papers. Notice that I always have several aspects of the project to look at. You’ll do the same.
Your criteria is yours alone, though you will be guided by the articles by Carter and Pasquerella and Killilea, as well as the readings you’ve done about ethical reasoning from the Markkula Center. You may decide, like a utilitarian, that a lie that harms many people is worse than a lie that harms only the liar. Or you may decide that a person, say a president, has an obligation to work for the good of the country and if he is telling self-serving lies, he is not worthy of holding that office. Following the thinking of the virtue approach to ethical reasoning, you would then decide that his lies are worse than the lies of a social media influencer who does not have that same obligation to work for the good of others.
After judging the cases of your two liars, you will write an argumentative essay. Your claim will be that one of the two is worse than the other. In your paper you will summarize and explain the two cases in detail, you will explain your criteria, especially your ethical reasoning, then you will apply the criteria to each case and show why you believe one is worse than the other.
You will also explain a counterargument—how someone could disagree with your conclusion that one case of lying is worse than the other or that they might value different criteria than you. You will try to generously imagine their thinking and explain why they might disagree with you in an accurate and respectful way. Since you will be “arguing like a friend,” you do not have to refute the counterargument, just explain it.
As always, create a structure for your argument that helps your reader follow your thinking. Have an engaging opening that grabs the reader’s interest quickly. Use reasoning and evidence from sources to support your claim and subclaims. Have a well-rounded conclusion that reminds us of your main claim (that one case of lying is worse than the other) and underscores the significance of the issue. That is, you will remind your readers why we should care that both these people have told lies publicly and explain which you think is worse.
Requirements
Highlight your main claim in yellow.
Use readings from the Markkula Center on ethical reasoning
Use at least one of the articles on lying I gave you, either Carter or Pasquerella and Killilea
Use at least two substantive articles from Cabell Library, one for each of your liars.
You can use more sources and you can use things from the internet in addition to the two works from the library.
Write 1250-1750 words
Include in-text citations every time you quote, summarize, or use information from a source.
Include a complete References listing in APA style following the examples at VCU Writes! athttps://rampages.us/vcuwrites/citation-guide/
