Explain the kind of reasoning you think is the best way to approach this question, and how that reasoning supports the position you think is strongest
In this paper, you will
Present a revised formulation of the ethical question and introduction to the topic.
Explain the kind of you think is the best way to approach this question, and how that reasoning supports the position you think is strongest.
Raise an objection, and be able to respond to it.
InstructionsWrite an essay that conforms to the requirements below. The paper must be 1500 to 2000 words in length (excluding the title and reference pages) and formatted according to APA style.
The paragraphs of your essay should conform to the following guidelines:
IntroductionYour first paragraph should begin with the topic question, suitably revised. It should be focused, concrete, and on a relevant moral problem.
Follow this with a thesis statement that states your position, and a brief description of the primary reason(s) supporting your position. Finally, provide a brief preview of the overall aim and procedure of your paper.
Explanation and Demonstration of Moral ReasoningThis section of the Final Paper will explain and demonstrate what you believe to be the best way of reasoning about the question you have chosen, and showing how that reasoning supports the position you have taken on the question. You might explain the principles, rules, values, virtues, conceptions of purposes and ends, and other general ideas that you find persuasive, and show how they support concrete judgments.
In the course of doing so, you must make reference to at least two of the approaches that we have examined in the course (such as deontological, utilitarian, or virtue-based), and utilize at least one resource off the provided list for each of the two approaches. One of these theories may be the theory you discussed in your rough-draft, but your discussion here should be more refined.
For example, you might find the reasoning associated with Aristotelian virtue ethics to be the most compelling, and reference Aristotle in the process of showing how that reasoning supports a certain conclusion. In the course of this, you could contrast that with a utilitarian approach, referencing Mill for instance.
Objection and ResponseAfter explaining the ethical reasoning that supports your position, you should raise an objection and respond to it. An objection articulates a plausible reason why someone might find the argument weak or problematic. You should explain how it brings out this weakness, and do so in a way that would be acceptable to someone who disagrees with your own argument. Then, provide the best response you can to the objection, showing how it does not undermine your position. Your response should not simply
restate your original position or argument, but should say something new in support of it.
ConclusionProvide a conclusion that sums up what you presented in the paper and offers some final reflections.
Resource RequirementYou must use at least four scholarly resources.
Should physician-assisted suicide be legalized?
Throughout the medical profession, a question arises revolving whether physician-assisted suicide should be legalized or not. This is a very controversial and emotional subject that even today, no conclusive answer have been provided on the way forward. In this research paper, I seek to address the ethical issues that revolve around the physician-assisted suicide. This is a situation that arises when a physician helps….
Get instant access to the full solution from by clicking the purchase button below Added to cart