– Please don’t use AI to write this essay. the professor will know if used as she posts this prompt into AI to see what students could write about.
Please don’t write more than 2000 words (student will be penalized if more than 2000 words.
– You will write an imaginary debate between 2 people created by you on an issue of practical ethics (please choose between abortion or AI).
– please write this essay in a way that a non-philospher could understand.
Write the essay in this format
– In your opening paragraph, you should introduce us to the debate: tell us who will be talking, and what issue they will be discussing (remember its a debate so there should be 2 and only 2 people).
– Each philosopher should speak at least twice: the first time to set out their view and the second to respond to their interlocutor. The format should accordingly look like this: opening paragraph, philosopher A, philosopher B, response from philosopher A, response from philosopher B, any additional responses and/or conclusion.
– Each step of the argument should be clearly explained. Please do not make arguments begging the question or an argument stronger than the other one as this can show bias.
– KEEP IN MIND THIS IS NOT A RESEARCH PAPER SO PLEASE DO NOT TURN IT INTO ONE. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO USE ANY SOURCES BUT IF YOU ARE PLEASE CITE THEM AND SUBMIT THEM TO ME BEFOREHAND SO I CAN SEE IF I HAVE ACCESS TO THEM AS I NEED TO ASSESS THEM BEFORE.
– IF YOU WILL USE SOURCES TO HELP CONSTRUCT THE ARGUMENT WHICH AGAIN IT SHOULD BE A PAPER ON AN IMAGINARY DEBATE CREATED BY YOU PLEASE ONLY USE 2 AND NO MORE THAN 2 SOURCES. Citations do not count toward your overall word count.
Look at the grading rubric when writing the essay:
1. Quality or arguments:
– the arguments each interlocutor presents do not have obvious flaws or slips in reasoning. objections are relevant and carefully considered. the steps of arguments are easy to follow.
2. Engagement:
– The interlocutors address the other’s side position with charity and understanding. They focus on the relevant aspects of the debate and do not talk one another. They attempt to avoid begging the question against their interlocutor as much as possible.
3. Clarity:
– Terms and issues are used or explained such that a non-philosopher could understand the debate. Examples are used where appropriate and helpful.
