Here is where you explain and summarize the author’s argument. You need not summarize everything they say – just those parts of their article which are relevant to the part of their argument which you are analyzing. So, the “explanation” requires you to explain at least one argument he puts forth in favor of one of his main philosophical claims (e.g. his argument in favor of the Principle of Procreative Beneficence). This will require you to reconstruct that argument. This reconstruction could be you: explaining and walking me through the argument, breaking it down to its premises and conclusion, etc. It could/should also include you giving the main claims he makes and noting the examples (e.g. though experiments) that he uses in order to support these claims (the claim(s) you are analyzing). A central part of this will be you explaining how and why he believes that his supporting claims and examples support his main claim (i.e. the position he is arguing for that you are examining). Otherwise put, what does he argue for and how does he argue for it? Which leads to…
Your evaluation requires you to analyze Savulescu’s OR Barnes’ argument – to offer your own analysis of Savulescu’s/Barnes’ argument(s)/ the claims of theirs which you are evaluating. This could take the form of you raising a challenge to it, explaining why you think it works or doesn’t, offering a counter-example to some claim the author makes, explaining why the argument doesn’t/does work and how it could be improved. There are many ways in which you can “attack” an argument or argue that it is lacking in one way or another. You might:
Argue that the premises (i.e. reasons) that they offers in support of their conclusion don’t actually support that conclusion (maybe they support only a weaker claim, a different claim all together, or they don’t successfully support anything, etc.)
Argue that some of the premises that they offer in favor of their conclusion are false (that is, there isn’t good reason to believe they are true or good reason to believe they are not true)
Argue that their claims are true but that the arguments he or she gives for them are not the best – you should supplement this with how you would fix it and why your fix would work
Offer a counter-argument to some claim that he makes, e.g. show that a part of his argument is false/counter-intuitive/etc.
Conclude by explaining why you think that either his argument can be fixed (and how you would fix it) or explaining why it cannot be fixed.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|