Ethical Problems in Biomedical Sciences
Draft 2, end of Week 5 (due by Monday by noon): Application of one ethical theory (for instance, virtue ethics, deontology, utilitarianism, care ethics, etc.) to the topic analyzing and explaining the ethics of the issue using at least three key components of that theory.
PROPOSED STRUCTURE FROM SYLLABUS:
Application of ethical theory (30 points): I am looking for One treatment of the issue from an ethical approach studied during the term. The section is worth thirty points so this section must be in depth.
Check Tips on How to Do Your Essay Writing Services.
Here is a suggested strategy for handling that section in four paragraphs:
Paragraph 1:
Describe the general approach of the philosophical theory (deontology, utilitarianism, virtue ethics etc.)
Identify at least three principles from the theory.
Paragraphs 2 through 4:
Assign each of the three principles its own paragraph and explain the principle. Then use the explained principle to analyze a feature of your topic (in that same paragraph).
Ethical Problems in Biomedical Sciences
Grading Rubric
Your final research paper assignment will be graded according to the grading rubric. Your first draft will not be graded according to this rubric. It is included here below only as a reference.
15/15: Composition: Is paper written well with attention to syntax, grammar, clear thesis statement, consistent paragraphing and proper citations style or are there recurring problems with any of these?
15/15: History of topic: Does paper develop historical context for the moral issue from 1960 onward in a clear and chronologically coherent manner or does the paper fall short of doing this in specific ways?
20/20: Pro versus Con: Does paper spell out clearly conflicting sides of the issue or does it only show one side or is it entirely missing a pro/con section?
30/30: Application of ethical theories: Does author treat issue with one ethical approach studied during the term in depth)?
20/20: Personal Conclusion: Does author develop a concluding personal analysis that expresses their standpoint on the subject in a thorough and clear way or does it sum up the issue superficially or is the paper missing a genuine personal conclusion?