Deadlines
Writing Help
Grading rubric:
For writing tips, go to
A Rulebook for Arguments Purdue Online Writing Lab The Elements of Style MLA Handbook |
Important files to download:
|
Instructions
Short writing assignments and final project must be submitted to
|
|
**NOTE: Turnitin.com only accepts files up to 20 MB and the following file types:
MS Word, WordPerfect, PostScript, PDF, HTML, RTF and plain text.
MS Word, WordPerfect, PostScript, PDF, HTML, RTF and plain text.
Discussion Leadership:
In the first week, you will choose a day in the term to lead discussion. You need to have discussion questions and a handout prepared for one reading. The handout should include a breakdown of the main argument and some potential problems with the argument. You must submit the handout and discussion questions to Blackboard (look under ‘Assignments’) by 8 PM the day before your assigned date. Your classmates will be able to access your documents once you upload them.
Short paper # 1:
This paper is purely expository; you should not critique the position or bring in your own analysis or research. Your task is to provide a clear and focused explication of the relevant parts of the philosophical position presented in the indicated reading. Here's the specific prompt:
In the "Good of Trees," Robin Attfield argues that trees can be harmed, and, ultimately, she concludes that trees have rights. How does she reach this conclusion? Keep in mind that her article addresses several issues, not all of which are strictly relevant for this question. Make sure you identify the crucial steps of her argument and pertinent definitions of terms. Explain how the conclusion follows from the premises.
You have 500 words to explicate this argument, and you must submit to turnitin.com.
Short paper # 2:
This paper is purely compare/contrast; you should not critique the positions or argue for the superiority of one view over the other. Carefully explain how the philosophers' views differ or where they agree--keeping an eye on the prompt. There are certainly many ways in which they could agree or disagree, but you need to focus on the specific issue below:
Explain how Bryan Norton and Gary Varner disagree on the role of intrinsic value in environmental ethics. Is it possible for them to agree at any point? What are some implications of this disagreement? (In other words, what does it matter?) Define relevant terms, and be careful not to spend too many words summarizing their points. The focus of your paper needs to be analyzing the ways in which they disagree and agree (if they can agree).
You have 500 words, and you must submit to turnitin.com.
Short paper # 3:
In this paper, your task is to provide a single criticism of a philosophical position. Do not waste words giving too much in the way of exposition or context for the debate; focus on developing one nicely nuanced and precise counterargument to the stated position:
One could argue that environmentalists and animal activists are at odds, at the level of theory and policy. We can either advocate for the environment or for individual animal members, but not both.
In your critique, you must bring in a particular animal ethics issue, such as hunting, meat-eating, or medical testing. You have 500 words, and you must submit to turnitin.com.
Reflection post:
Regardless of whether you attend the Dust Bowl event or watch a film from home on July 26th, you need to make a blog post. Your post should be a thoughtful reflection on the film, given what we have discussed in class. The post should be between 2-4 paragraphs (roughly 1 page).
Final project:
You should find a topic within environmental ethics that excites you. The topic should be manageable; in other words, “climate change” is not a manageable topic because it is too vast. Narrow in on a smaller topic that you can lay out and discuss critically. Once you find an alluring ethical problem, you will need to research some of the necessary facts related to the topic, and you will also need to reflect on the relevant arguments that philosophers/ethicists/activists have published. Then you need to make your own contribution to the debate. Bring up at least one solid objection against your position, and respond to that objection. Your project can be in one of three formats: 1) a traditional term paper, 2) a website, or 3) an extended Power Point/Keynote (which you would not present). Regardless of which format you choose, your project should have the equivalent of 4-5 pages of double-spaced text. This project is meant to serve as a launching pad in case you wish to pursue environmental advocacy. You are free to take up any well-argued and well-researched position you find compelling.
On the last day of class, August 9th, you will give an informal 5-minute presentation on your topic, so you can solicit some feedback from your classmates before you turn in the final draft.
You will submit the project through turnitin.com:
1) If you wrote a paper, upload it to the site like normal.
2) If you created a website, copy and paste the written content (excluding tab titles, sidebar content, and links) into a document, and upload this document.
3) If you made a Power Point/Keynote, you can either a) copy and paste the written content into a document, or b) save as a PDF, and upload it.
In the first week, you will choose a day in the term to lead discussion. You need to have discussion questions and a handout prepared for one reading. The handout should include a breakdown of the main argument and some potential problems with the argument. You must submit the handout and discussion questions to Blackboard (look under ‘Assignments’) by 8 PM the day before your assigned date. Your classmates will be able to access your documents once you upload them.
Short paper # 1:
This paper is purely expository; you should not critique the position or bring in your own analysis or research. Your task is to provide a clear and focused explication of the relevant parts of the philosophical position presented in the indicated reading. Here's the specific prompt:
In the "Good of Trees," Robin Attfield argues that trees can be harmed, and, ultimately, she concludes that trees have rights. How does she reach this conclusion? Keep in mind that her article addresses several issues, not all of which are strictly relevant for this question. Make sure you identify the crucial steps of her argument and pertinent definitions of terms. Explain how the conclusion follows from the premises.
You have 500 words to explicate this argument, and you must submit to turnitin.com.
Short paper # 2:
This paper is purely compare/contrast; you should not critique the positions or argue for the superiority of one view over the other. Carefully explain how the philosophers' views differ or where they agree--keeping an eye on the prompt. There are certainly many ways in which they could agree or disagree, but you need to focus on the specific issue below:
Explain how Bryan Norton and Gary Varner disagree on the role of intrinsic value in environmental ethics. Is it possible for them to agree at any point? What are some implications of this disagreement? (In other words, what does it matter?) Define relevant terms, and be careful not to spend too many words summarizing their points. The focus of your paper needs to be analyzing the ways in which they disagree and agree (if they can agree).
You have 500 words, and you must submit to turnitin.com.
Short paper # 3:
In this paper, your task is to provide a single criticism of a philosophical position. Do not waste words giving too much in the way of exposition or context for the debate; focus on developing one nicely nuanced and precise counterargument to the stated position:
One could argue that environmentalists and animal activists are at odds, at the level of theory and policy. We can either advocate for the environment or for individual animal members, but not both.
In your critique, you must bring in a particular animal ethics issue, such as hunting, meat-eating, or medical testing. You have 500 words, and you must submit to turnitin.com.
Reflection post:
Regardless of whether you attend the Dust Bowl event or watch a film from home on July 26th, you need to make a blog post. Your post should be a thoughtful reflection on the film, given what we have discussed in class. The post should be between 2-4 paragraphs (roughly 1 page).
Final project:
You should find a topic within environmental ethics that excites you. The topic should be manageable; in other words, “climate change” is not a manageable topic because it is too vast. Narrow in on a smaller topic that you can lay out and discuss critically. Once you find an alluring ethical problem, you will need to research some of the necessary facts related to the topic, and you will also need to reflect on the relevant arguments that philosophers/ethicists/activists have published. Then you need to make your own contribution to the debate. Bring up at least one solid objection against your position, and respond to that objection. Your project can be in one of three formats: 1) a traditional term paper, 2) a website, or 3) an extended Power Point/Keynote (which you would not present). Regardless of which format you choose, your project should have the equivalent of 4-5 pages of double-spaced text. This project is meant to serve as a launching pad in case you wish to pursue environmental advocacy. You are free to take up any well-argued and well-researched position you find compelling.
On the last day of class, August 9th, you will give an informal 5-minute presentation on your topic, so you can solicit some feedback from your classmates before you turn in the final draft.
You will submit the project through turnitin.com:
1) If you wrote a paper, upload it to the site like normal.
2) If you created a website, copy and paste the written content (excluding tab titles, sidebar content, and links) into a document, and upload this document.
3) If you made a Power Point/Keynote, you can either a) copy and paste the written content into a document, or b) save as a PDF, and upload it.