Prior to beginning work on this assignment, read the required resources for the week, complete the Week 2 content in the <\/span>PHI208: Ethics & Moral Reasoning<\/em><\/span>Links to an external site.<\/span><\/span><\/a> <\/span><\/em>interactive, watch the <\/span>Utilitarianism<\/em><\/span>Links to an external site.<\/span><\/span><\/a> <\/span>video, and review the <\/span>Reading Philosophy<\/em><\/span>Links to an external site.<\/span><\/span><\/a> <\/span>video from the Week 1 discussion.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Overview<\/strong><\/p>\n In this written assignment, you will create an ethics case study based on provided topics, resources, and ethical questions. Your tasks here are to present the case study and the information necessary to consider it. You will choose one of the ethical questions provided with the case study and discuss the central moral controversy the question addresses. You will also briefly apply utilitarianism to the case study. This written assignment should be an essay and include the following sections and headings.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Part 1: Introduction, Case Study<\/strong><\/p>\n In this section, you will create the case study. To complete this section,<\/p>\n This section should be around 300 words.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Part 2: Ethical Question<\/strong><\/p>\n In this section, discuss one of the ethical questions provided with the case study. To complete this section,<\/p>\n This section should be around 150 words.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Part 3: Position Statement<\/strong><\/p>\n In this section, you will formulate a position statement that answers the ethical question, and then support the position statement. To complete this section,<\/p>\n This section should be around 150 words.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Part 4: Opposition Statement<\/strong><\/p>\n In this section, you will provide a statement that directly opposes the position statement and discuss reasons that support it. To complete this section,<\/p>\n This section should be around 150 words.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Part 5: Application of Utilitarianism<\/strong><\/p>\n In this section,<\/p>\n This section should be around 100 words.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The Case Study: Creating an Ethics Case Study paper<\/p>\n Philosopher Peter Singer argues in \u201cFamine, Affluence, and Morality\u201d that if we can donate some of our money to save other people\u2019s lives without comparable harm to ourselves, then we morally ought to do it (Singer, 1972). William MacAskill is a young philosopher who attempts to put this reasoning into practice. He helped start a movement called \u201ceffective altruism,\u201d in which people give most of the money that they make to help to save people from diseases and death in less developed parts of the world (Lewis-Kraus, 2022).<\/p>\n MacAskill himself lives in relative poverty ($26k British pounds per year) and gives the rest to help others. He estimates that a life can be saved for about $4000 (Lewis-Kraus, p. 48).<\/p>\n ETHICAL QUESTION<\/u><\/strong>: Do we have a moral obligation to donate some of our money to save other people\u2019s lives? <\/strong><\/p>\n References<\/strong>:<\/p>\n Lewis-Kraus, G. (2022). Do better. New Yorker.<\/p>\n Singer, P. (1972). Famine, affluence, and morality. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 1(3), pp. 229-243. <\/span>https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/2265052<\/span>Links to an external site.<\/span><\/span><\/a> <\/span><\/span>Links to an external site. <\/span><\/span><\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Description<\/strong>:<\/p>\n Total Possible Score<\/strong>: 10.00 Distinguished – Comprehensively, clearly, and accurately completes all components of Part I: Introduction, Case Study.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Proficient – Completes all components of Part I: Introduction, Case Study. Minor details are missing, slightly unclear, or inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Basic – Completes some components of Part I: Introduction, Case Study. Relevant details are missing, unclear, and\/or inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Below Expectations – Attempts to complete the components of Part I: Introduction, Case Study; however, significant details are missing, unclear, and inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Non-Performance – The components of Part I: Introduction, Case Study are either nonexistent or lack the requirements described in the assignment instructions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Distinguished – Comprehensively, clearly, and accurately completes all components of Part II: Ethical Question.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Proficient – Completes all components of Part II: Ethical Question. Minor details are missing, slightly unclear, or inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Basic – Completes some components of Part II: Ethical Question. Relevant details are missing, unclear, and\/or inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Below Expectations – Attempts to complete the components of Part II: Ethical Question; however, significant details are missing, unclear, and inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Non-Performance – The components of Part II: Ethical Question are either nonexistent or lack the requirements described in the assignment instructions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Distinguished – Comprehensively, clearly, and accurately completes all components of Part III: Position Statement.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Proficient – Completes all components of Part III: Position Statement. Minor details are missing, slightly unclear, or inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Basic – Completes some components of Part III: Position Statement. Relevant details are missing, unclear, and\/or inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Below Expectations – Attempts to complete the components of Part III: Position Statement; however, significant details are missing, unclear, and inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Non-Performance – The components of Part III: Position Statement are either nonexistent or lack the requirements described in the assignment instructions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Distinguished – Comprehensively, clearly, and accurately completes all components of Part IV: Opposition Statement.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Proficient – Completes all components of Part IV: Opposition Statement. Minor details are missing, slightly unclear, or inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Basic – Completes some components of Part IV: Opposition Statement. Relevant details are missing, unclear, and\/or inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Below Expectations – Attempts to complete the components of Part IV: Opposition Statement; however, significant details are missing, unclear, and inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Non-Performance – The components of Part IV: Opposition Statement are either nonexistent or lack the requirements described in the assignment instructions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Distinguished – Comprehensively, clearly, and accurately completes all components of Part V: Application of Utilitarianism.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Proficient – Completes all components of Part V: Application of Utilitarianism. Minor details are missing, slightly unclear, or inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Basic – Completes some components of Part V: Application of Utilitarianism. Relevant details are missing, unclear, and\/or inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Below Expectations – Attempts to complete the components of Part V: Application of Utilitarianism; however, significant details are missing, unclear, and inaccurate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Non-Performance – The components of Part V: Application of Utilitarianism are either nonexistent or lack the requirements described in the assignment instructions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Distinguished – Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains no errors and is very easy to understand.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Proficient – Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor errors and is mostly easy to understand.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Basic – Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors which may slightly distract the reader.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Below Expectations – Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors which distract the reader.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Distinguished – Accurately uses APA formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Proficient – Exhibits APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n Basic – Exhibits limited knowledge of APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all APA requirements. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n Below Expectations – Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of APA formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as APA.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Distinguished – The length of the paper is equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n Proficient – The length of the paper is nearly equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n Basic – The length of the paper is equivalent to at least three quarters of the required number of correctly formatted pages.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Below Expectations – The length of the paper is equivalent to at least one half of the required number of correctly formatted pages. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Distinguished – Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Proficient – Uses the required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Basic – Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Below Expectations – Uses an inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Case Study: Creating an Ethics Case Study [WLOs: 1, 2, 3, 4] [CLOs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5] Prior to beginning work on this assignment, read the required resources for the week, complete the Week 2 content in the PHI208: Ethics & Moral ReasoningLinks to an external site. interactive, watch the UtilitarianismLinks to an external site. video, and review […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":[],"disciplines":[55],"paper_types":[],"tagged":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/questions\/10984"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/questions"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/questions"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10984"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/questions\/10984\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10984"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"disciplines","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/disciplines?post=10984"},{"taxonomy":"paper_types","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/paper_types?post=10984"},{"taxonomy":"tagged","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tagged?post=10984"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Carefully review the<\/span> <\/span>Grading Rubric<\/span>Links to an external site.<\/span><\/span><\/a> <\/span>for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment.<\/span><\/h1>\n
<\/h1>\n
EFFECTIVE ALTRUISM<\/h1>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\nPart I: Introduction, Case Study<\/h3>\n
<\/p>\nPart II: Ethical Question<\/h3>\n
<\/p>\nPart III: Position Statement<\/h3>\n
<\/p>\nPart IV: Opposition Statement<\/h3>\n
<\/p>\nPart V: Application of Utilitarianism<\/h3>\n
<\/p>\nWritten Communication: Control of Syntax and Mechanics<\/h3>\n
<\/p>\nWritten Communication: APA Formatting<\/h3>\n
<\/p>\nWritten Communication: Page Requirement<\/h3>\n
<\/p>\nWritten Communication: Resource Requirement<\/h3>\n
<\/p>\n