FALL 2012 CLASSES
PHILOS 101 -
SYLLABUS AND SCHEDULE
Guide for Test #1 (October 3rd)
PAPER - DUE NOVEMBER 28th
PHILOS 250 -SYLLABUS AND SCHEDULE
106 - SYLLABUS AND SCHEDULE
WINTER 2010 COURSES:
PHILOS 120 - Paper Assignment, January 31st, 2011
Study Guide for
PHILOS 120, FINAL (FEBRUARY 3rd)
Study Guide for FINAL, August 11th
Study Guide for Test 1 -- Thursday, June 23rd
STUDY GUIDE FOR FINAL, WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 7th
Study Guide for the Midterm -- Wednesday,
101 Paper 2 - Due November 30th
PHILOS 110 SYLLABUS AND SCHEDULE
Study Guide for the Final, Wednesday, December 7th
110 Paper 3 --
Writing Assignment #2 - Due July 5th
SPRING 2011 COURSES:
Hardin's The Case Against Helping the Poor
Paper Assignment #2
Due Date: May 24th, 2011.
Instructions: The purpose of this
writing assignment is to test your ability to explain and evaluate a
topic of contemporary interest using your skills as a critical thinker.
Clear, logically developed writing is essential for completing the
assignment successfully. In your own words, explain the
arguments specified in the topic description.
Papers must be typed, stapled, and have clear
print/typing. Papers should be in the 1,200 - 1,400 word range (roughly
5-7 single-sided pages with a 12 or 14 double-spaced font). Papers with
poor spelling and/or grammar will not be received favorably. Papers
that show evidence of original thinking and personal reflection on the
material will be received favorably. You must cite all sources. Any
standard formatting, e.g. MLA, APA, is acceptable, so long as it is easy
for the instructor to track down sources, if required.
It is often claimed that ethics is relative, either
to individuals or cultures or even historical periods. This essentially
means that there is no universal ethical code. Is this claim true? If
it is, then certain practices that are condemned in one context, may
well be deemed acceptable—even morally obligatory—in others. A good
example of such a disagreement is found when we examine the practice of
female genital mutilation (also called “female circumcision” or “F.G.M.”).
While this practice is virtually unheard of in Western cultures, it is
widely practiced in others. But is relativism an adequate response to
the problem of F.G.M.? Can we treat moral disagreements over such an
issue as merely a cultural or subjective hang-up, a preference or bias
in favor of our (or my) way of behaving? Or does
relativism fail to address the reality of F.G.M.?
At some point in your essay, you should make sure
you answer the following questions:
- What is relativism? What is the difference
between individual and cultural relativism?
- What the evidence is used to support
- What are the main objections to relativist
ethics? How might a relativist respond to these objections?
- What is F.G.M.? What justifications are
typically given for this practice?
- How would a relativist evaluate F.G.M.? Is
this response convincing? Why or why not?
- Do you think relativism is a good theory? Why or why not?
Here is one source on F.G.M. to get you started: