Paper Three

Your paper should include:
About 500 words
A short introductory paragraph, with a clear thesis statement (e.g., I shall argue that Plato's argument is unsound…).
A brief statement of the ethical issue you intend to solve.
A charitable reconstruction of the argument as presented by the author (you may, but need not, use standard form). In such a short essay, it is best to confine your analysis to a small argument, from within the larger article that you read.
An brief explanation, in your own words, of the argument itself.
An evaluation of the argument in terms of logical validity and truth/soundness. That means that, for any premise, if you think it's false, you should explicitly show why, as well as consider counter-examples to your criticisms. Since this is an argumentative essay, this evaluation is the most important part of the essay, and will constitute your principle objection. Take some time to develop it carefully.
A brief answer to your principle objection, on behalf of the author.
Your reply to the answer on behalf of the author.
A suitable concluding paragraph.
At least one outside source, and at least as many non-internet sources as internet sources (Read that sentence again to be sure you understand it).
No direct quotations. It is not necessary to directly quote any author. When it is important to do so, simply explain the position which he/she is defending. It is, however, necessary to cite all authors whose ideas you reference. Thus, if you begin a sentence with, e.g., "According to Plato…", you should end that sentence with a citation. Essays that include "direct quotations" will not receive a grade higher than a D.
A clear and complete bibliography

There are three options for Paper Three:

From module eight – Compare and contrast objective ways of knowing and subjective ways of knowing. Is there really any such thing as objectivity? Or is all knowledge just subjective interpretation? Is any knowledge objective?

From module nine – William James in "The Will to Believe" (in the textbook but not on the reading list) says that one must believe "ahead of the evidence." If you don't trust a new friend until you have definite irrefutable proof of his/her trust you may lose them as a friend. If you wait to marry that special person until you have definite irrefutable proof that he/she is the "right person" you may wait forever.

If you agree with James, give me at least two examples of where you would be compelled to "believing ahead of the evidence" and explain how they fit into the three criteria: 1) the choice is momentous (much hangs on the choice), 2) the choice must be made quickly (time is of the essence and you cannot wait for more or better evidence), 3) the choice is live (you could see yourself making the choice or not making the choice) that we can and must choose beyond or without (not despite) the evidence.

If you disagree with James give me at least two example of choices that fit James' three criteria and then tell me why the decision should be postponed until further evidence is gathered and what that evidence might be.

From module ten – King, in the Letter from Birmingham Jail, makes a distinction between just and unjust laws. Do you agree with King? Justify your answer. If you agree, give an example of an unjust law that is on the books today. Be sure to justify your analysis of this law as unjust.

Are you looking for a similar paper or any other quality academic essay? Then look no further. Our research paper writing service is what you require. Our team of experienced writers is on standby to deliver to you an original paper as per your specified instructions with zero plagiarism guaranteed. This is the perfect way you can prepare your own unique academic paper and score the grades you deserve.

Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.