Week Two: Discussion 2: Critiquing Consequentialist and Non-Consequentialist Ethics
Critical Essay Response: For this week’s second discussion forum, refer back to the set of four controlling questions you responded to in Discussion 1 for this week and select one question for treatment in a more structured and fully developed critical essay in the range of 400-650 words in length. This second weekly discussion asks you to write a short critical essay that provides a more detailed and thought-through answer to the particular question you chose to study more closely from among the four you addressed more briefly earlier in the week. Your main purpose in a critical essay is to do the following:
Lay out the issue or theme under discussion.
State your position on the issue (this is your thesis or central claim of the essay). Write extensively in the FIRST PERSON about your unique perspective. Do not use sources outside of Rosenstand.
Provide evidence that supports the truth of your thesis and establishes your position as the correct or best position.
Re-state your thesis and summarize your argument(s) (your evidence or reasons why), emphasizing your most important insights or findings.
Remember, your task here is to analyze and evaluate, using your unique stamp of priginality, not simply to describe or report information.
Please only use the textbook no outside sources.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|