The Natural and the Good

Use the argument “Is it okay to eat meat?” There are two main goals for this paper:

To demonstrate that you understand why appeals to nature are fallacious by providing a specific example of an appeal to nature and explaining why it fails.
To practice putting forward your own normative/prescriptive argument in response to a normative/prescriptive issue question.
OVERVIEW:

We recently saw an example of a philosopher – Burton Leiser – challenging a common argument against homosexuality. The argument Leiser was attacking attempted to infer that “homosexuality is wrong” from the supposed fact that “homosexuality is unnatural.” Leiser sought to show that, no matter how we interpret the word unnatural, the argument fails. Leiser’s conclusion is that whether homosexuality is right or wrong cannot be settled by an appeal to what is ‘natural.’

But sexuality is not the only realm in which arguments about what is natural and unnatural are used to form normative judgements. Here are some other issues that are sometimes addressed with appeals to nature:

Is infidelity acceptable?
Is monogamy or polyamory a better way to approach romantic relationships?
Is violence an acceptable way to settle a score?
Should women hold leadership roles?
Is incest between consenting adults problematic?
Should we avoid genetically modified GMO foods?
Is it okay to eat meat?
Should people get cosmetic surgery?
Is it moral for parents to use technology to genetically alter their children?
Should we try to save endangered species?
Should women be allowed to serve in the military?
Should we try to prevent climate change?
How much time should we spend outside?
In this paper you will pick one of the above issues, or come up with another issue on your own, to demonstrate (a) how some have tried to use an appeal to nature to answer the issue, (b) why doing so fails, and (c) to provide your own reasoned response (i.e. argument) to answer the issue.

DETAILS:

Your paper should be between 1200 and 1500 words and follow the directions below. If you feel you need to deviate from either the word count or the directions you should speak to me ahead of time. This paper will be reduced by 10% for each day late unless an extension is arranged ahead of time.

DIRECTIONS:

Your paper should include all of the following (you can put these in labeled sections or not)

Introduction
Your chosen example of an ‘appeal to nature’ argument
An explanation of the flaws in the ‘appeal to nature’ argument you have chosen
Your own *reasoned* answer to the issue question (not an appeal to nature)
Conclusion
Introduction Section: (about 150 – 250 words)

Welcome your reader to the paper by providing an overview of your project. What is your essay primarily about? What do you hope to accomplish? How will you go about achieving that goal?

Appeal to Nature example: (about 150 – 300 words, depending on complexity)

Choose one of the normative/prescriptive issues above (or one you have heard that is not on the list) in which an appeal to nature has been used to try to settle the issue, and introduce your reader to that argument. You can do this by putting the argument in premise -conclusion form, or you can describe it in prose, or both.

The flaws in the ‘appeal to nature’ argument (about 300 – 600 words)

In this section your job is to identify and explain any logical flaws that you believe arise in the argument presented in the previous section. These flaws may include, but are not limited to, ambiguity with respect to the words ‘natural/unnatural,’ and the inherent error in appeal to nature reasoning. It may be helpful, but it is not necessary, to reference Burton Leiser’s article “Homosexuality and the Unnaturalness Argument” since he addresses each of these points.

Your own answer to the issue question (about 300 – 600 words)

In this section you will offer your own argument in response to the initial issue question. This should not be an appeal to nature and does not have to invoke naturalness in any way. Your argument can either reach the same conclusion, or a different conclusion, than the now debunked appeal to nature.

Explain your reasoning. You can offer your argument in premise-conclusion form, but you don’t have to, as long as it is clear to your reader what your conclusion is, and what your premises are. Take time to support your key premises as best as possible, and to explain why you think they either strongly support or necessitate your answer to the issue question. For this paper, research is not required. However, if you think your reader may be skeptical of one of your premises, and you would like to cite research or data to support that premise, this is welcome. Just remember, you must provide in-text citations whenever referencing another’s work, and a works cited page with the full citation.

Conclusion Section (100 – 150 words)

Complete the essay by reminding your reader of its main point. Meaningfully connect what you did in the first section to the latter sections to show your reader the logical cohesion of your project. The conclusion section can also be a place for helping place your argument in a larger context, or making connections with other issue questions. You can tell the reader why they should care about what you’ve said, or maybe why it’s relevant to their own lives. This section should ideally be one paragraph.

Last Completed Projects