writing an ethics paper

creative writing tools

April 27, Staff Writers. With all the things you have going on as a student, writing a paper can seem like a daunting task. This image and list-based, step-by-step best dissertation service is the closest thing to writing a plug and chug paper you can get. So, are you ready to ace this paper of yours? The answer to this question is easy: look at the materials the prof gives you. The first important step in writing a paper is taking some time to understand what the professor is looking for. If you know that, you can write to the rubric and pick up easy points along the way.

Writing an ethics paper the best college essays

Writing an ethics paper

Key elements that define an ethics paper include ethical arguments, ethical dilemmas, and ethical and legal implications. In this case, writers make ethical arguments to support their perspectives on an issue raising ethical or moral questions, such as fraud. Also, authors are torn between two options with one option having severe ethical or moral implications.

Like any other essay, an ethics paper follows a structure that underscores its outline. Basically, this structure comprises three sections: introduction, body, and conclusion. When writing these sections, students must ensure they address all the essential defining features stated previously in their ethics essays or papers. When doing so, writers should confirm that the introduction and conclusion sections take 10 percent of the total word count of an ethics paper or essay, while the body, which is the main text, should be 80 percent.

Hence, an essay outline of an ethics paper should look as below:. Hook sentence. Background information on an ethical dilemma. Restate a thesis. Sum up on the argument, counterargument, and rebuttal. State a final claim. When writing the introduction section, authors of an ethics paper should be brief and concise. Here, students should inform the audience about the purpose of writing by accurately expounding on an ethical issue that they intend to address.

In essence, this aspect means highlighting their stand concerning an issue. Moreover, formulating a thesis statement helps to accomplish this goal. In this case, writers frame their minds and structure their ethics papers via the use of arguments that defend their stand on an issue of profound ethical or moral implications. TIn turn, this sentence can be a popular misconception or a question that writers intend to answer when writing an ethics paper or essay.

When writing the body of an ethics paper or essay, students should use a thesis statement as a reference point. In other words, they should use a thesis statement to come up with several ideas or arguments in defense of their stand on the ethical or moral issue identified in the introduction part. Basically, rules of academic writing dictate that students should begin each body paragraph with a topic sentence, whose purpose is to introduce a claim or idea that they intend to elaborate on in the section.

Then, it is advisable that, when writing the body section, learners should use different paragraphs to separate arguments logically. Also, students should follow a sandwich rule when writing every body paragraph of an ethics paper or essay. The conclusion part is the last section of an ethics paper. In particular, an ethics essay should capture several themes in this section. Firstly, writers should restate a thesis statement.

Secondly, they should summarize the main points made in body paragraphs. Besides, students need to avoid providing new information in this section. Terminal illness is a condition of profound pain and suffering for those affected, including the patients and their families.

Today, some scientists support euthanasia, the aspect of assisting terminally ill patients in ending their lives. While health professionals should do everything to help their patients to avoid suffering, assisting them in ending their lives is unethical and immoral. Life is a sacred thing, and no human being has any justification for ending it, regardless of whose it is.

For example, the premise of a debate about euthanasia, which refers to assisted suicide, is the prevalence of terminal illnesses that subject individuals to a life of pain, suffering, and dependence. Without any hope of recovery, some individuals have opted to end their lives through the help of their loved ones or health professionals. In turn, the sanctity of life does not allow human beings to end life, no matter the circumstances. If there seems to be no hope of recovery, ending life is counterproductive in an age of significant scientific and technological advancements.

Basically, scientists are working round the clock to find cures to incurable diseases that have proven to be a threat to humanity. For example, today, smallpox is no longer a threat because a cure is found Persson, Therefore, the fact that there may be no cure for a disease today does not mean that there will not be a cure tomorrow.

Naturally, human beings rely on hope to overcome moments of darkness, such as a terminal illness diagnosis. Nonetheless, it is the effort of the scientific community that has always bring hope to humanity. In this light, there is no ethical or moral justification for euthanasia. Euthanasia is not only a solution to terminal illness but also a sign of hopelessness and despair. When patients take the root of assisted suicide, it means that they give up on looking for alternatives in dealing with a problem.

In this case, the fact that a terminal illness does not have a cure does not imply that it cannot be managed. Moreover, individuals who love a terminally ill person, such as family members and friends, hope to spend more time with them before an inevitable time happens. As such, terminally ill patients should use their families and health professionals to live longer. In essence, this aspect reflects true humanity — standing firm and determining amid of insurmountable odds.

On that truth alone, euthanasia is an idea that deserves no thought or attention. There is nothing more devastating than a terminal illness diagnosis. Basically, such news punctures the hope of many individuals, families, and communities.

Does it indicate very briefly my main line of argument? Does it explain the overall structure of my essay? After setting out your thesis, and outlining your overall approach in the introductory paragraph, you need to have a section in which you offer reasons for accepting the view that you are advancing.

Each reason should be set out in the form of an explicit, step by step argument, so that the reader can see right off both what your assumptions are, and how they are supposed to support your conclusion. Moreover, if you are offering more than one consideration in support of your thesis, it is important that different considerations not be mixed together in a single paragraph.

Different arguments require at least separate paragraphs - and preferably, separate subsections, each clearly labeled with an appropriate heading. For the latter will not only help the reader to follow your argument: it will help you to think more clearly about the arguments you're offering. How many reasons should you offer in support of your thesis? It is best to confine yourself to either one, or at most two, supporting arguments. If you offer more arguments, there is a serious danger both that you will not set out any of the arguments in a sufficiently detailed way, and that you will not discriminate between interesting arguments in support of your thesis, and arguments that are at best marginal.

In short, choose your best one or two arguments, and develop that argument or arguments in a detailed and circumspect way. Have I set out an argument or at most two arguments to provide reasons for thinking that my thesis is true? Have I made all of my premises clear and explicit? Have I developed my argument in a full and detailed way, so that all of my reasoning is clear to the reader? After offering reasons for accepting your view, you need to consider objections.

The crucial point to note here is that objections come in two forms. First, there are objections that are directed against the reasons that you have offered in support of your thesis, and which claim, therefore, either that some of your assumptions are implausible, or that some of your reasoning is unsatisfactory. Secondly, there are objections that are directed against your conclusion, and which attempt to provide reasons for thinking that the view which you are advancing is false.

Objections of the first sort are especially crucial, and your main obligation is to address such objections. The reason is that if all that you do is to rebut objections to your thesis, and you fail to consider objections to your argument, then you haven't shown that you have made out a satisfactory positive case in support of your thesis. How do you arrive at interesting objections to your own arguments? The crucial thing is to look carefully at the assumptions that you have made, and to ask yourself which of those are controversial, in the sense that they might well be questioned by an intelligent, thoughtful, and well-informed person.

Having located a controversial assumption, you need to consider why a thoughtful person might disagree with it, and then try to respond to that objection. Have I carefully set out the most important objection to each of my arguments? Have I then responded, in a careful way, to that objection or objections?

After you have carefully considered objections to your argument or arguments , the next important task is to consider objections which, rather than being directed against the reasons that you have offered in support of your view, are directed instead against your view itself, and which attempt to show that your view is incorrect. Here you need to set out any such objection or objections in a clear, careful, and dispassionate fashion, and then indicate why you think the objection in question is unsound.

How many objections to your thesis should you attempt to consider? Here, as elsewhere, trying to cover too much ground can result in a weak and superficial discussion. Try to find the strongest objection, and address it in a detailed way.

Have I considered the most important objection against the thesis that I am defending? Have I responded carefully to that objection? At the heart of a paper that examines some moral issue in a critical fashion is the setting out of arguments - both arguments in support of your positions, and arguments directed either against some of your assumptions, or against your position itself. Whenever one is setting out an argument, one needs to do so in a careful step-by-step fashion, so that it is clear to the reader both what assumptions the argument involves, and what the reasoning is - that is, how one is supposed to get from the assumptions to the conclusion.

One thing that it is very important to avoid is the setting out of more than one argument in a single paragraph. For this usually results in too brief an exposition of the arguments in question, and often in a muddling together of the two arguments, thereby obscuring the structure of the reasoning. Are my arguments carefully and explicitly set out so that both all of my assumptions, and my reasoning, are clear?

Have I, at any point, set out more than one argument in a single paragraph? Are objections and responses set out in separate paragraphs? A crucial factor that makes for a good essay is the presence of a logical and perspicuous structure. So it's important to ask how one can both organize one's discussion in a logical fashion, and make that organization perspicuous to the reader.

The structure will be clear to the reader if you begin with an introductory paragraph of the sort described above, and then go on, first, to divide your essay up into sections and possibly also subsections , and secondly, to use informative headings to mark out those sections and subsections. The reader will then be able to see at a glance how you have structured your discussion.

What makes for logical organization? If you do the things mentioned above, in sections I through IV, in the order discussed, the result will be an essay whose overall logical organization is very strong. That is to say, start by setting out your thesis, and outlining your overall approach in the introductory paragraph.

Follow this with a section in which you offer reasons for accepting the view that you are advancing. Then go on to devote two sections to a consideration of objections. In the first, set out, and respond to, objections that are directed against any controversial assumptions that you have made in arguing in support of your own view.

Then, in the second, consider objections that might be directed against your thesis itself. Individual sections also need to be organized in a logical fashion. This is primarily a matter of setting out arguments in a step-by-step fashion, and of discussing different arguments in different subsections, as discussed above in section V.

Is my essay organized into sections in a logical fashion? Are the sections divided into appropriate subsections? Have I made the overall structure of my essay clear by using informative headings for sections and subsections? Suppose, for example, that Mary is considering whether there should be a law against the sale of pornography. There are various ways in which she can formulate this question, some of which will strongly suggest one answer rather than another. She might, for example, ask herself whether people should be allowed to amass fortunes as purveyors of filthy and degrading material that will corrupt people, and destroy the moral fiber of society.

Вами согласен where to buy essays online нужно пробовать