click here for ordinary reading | click here for a high contrast version

Module Guide

Short Description

Module Aims

This module will introduce you to the field of applied ethics through engagement in discussion of practical thinking about a wide range of pressing ethical problems.

Syllabus/Content

The following is an indicative list of the problem areas to be explored: abortion and infanticide, euthanasia, world poverty, war and peace, crime and punishment, equality, discrimination and affirmative action, sex and personal relationships.

Note: environmental ethics - including ethical questions relating to animals - will not be covered in this course as this area is covered in both the first year module pi1111 - Humanity, Values and the Environment - and the third year module pi3004 - Advanced Topics in Environmental Philosophy.

Teaching and Learning Strategy

Each topic will be the focus of a two hour seminar discussion. Each participant will take responsibility for writing up one or more topics, yielding a portfolio of papers / pages made available on the module website. Each participant will be expected to read at least one item in the Reader relating to each of at least 8 of the 12 topics. You will also prepare an essay discussing one of the topics explored in the seminars and sit an exam.

Learning Outcomes

By the end of the module you should be able to:

• explain what is involved in (most of) the problems discussed in the seminars;
• set out some of the influential argumentation that has been mounted in relation to each; and
• begin an independent evaluation of it.
  

You should also be able to participate effectively in a seminar discussion and to prepare a useful brief report of such.

You should also have taken further your ability to write a good short written study.

Assessment Strategy

The assessment strategy is split into formative and summative assessment:

Formative Assessment: Student seminar reports will be given individual feedback.

Summative Assessment: One essay (2,500 words) and one 'seen' 2 hour examination in which you write answers to two questions of which notice has been given. The two summative assessments are weighted at 50% each.

Bibliography and Learning Support Material

Core text

Lafollette, H. (ed.) (1997) Ethics in Practice. Oxford: Blackwell.

Other recommended texts

Morscher, E. and Neumaier, O. (ed.) Applied Ethics in a Troubled World, Dordrecht, 1998, Kluwer Academic Publishing
Singer, P. (ed.) Applied Ethics, Oxford, 1986, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Singer, P. (ed.) A Companion to Ethics (Part V: "Applications," pp. 273-395), Oxford, 1991, Blackwell.
Singer, P. (ed.) Practical Ethics (2nd ed.). Cambridge, 1993, Cambridge University Press.

TABLE 1

Week by Week

Coursework

Please write an essay on any of these titles:

Your essay should make use of relevant reading - using any of the papers in the Reader, or any other significant contributions to your chosen topic. A good technique is to explain the argumentation developed in your reading and then work out your own view by saying where and why you agree or disagree.

Your essay must of course be your own work. Give a detailed reference (in brackets or in a footnote or endnote) where you are reporting the argument of somebody else (or quoting of course). Give a list of the books and articles you have consulted at the end.

To go on the title page of your essay you are asked to construct a 'synopsis'. You should construct it by going through your draft a paragraph at a time and writing a single-sentence summary of each paragraph in turn.

Preparing a synopsis helps you refine your sense of structure, and gives you practice in helping your reader follow your presentation. If you prepare your synopsis in time to prepare a revised draft of the essay after you have made it, it will help you get the structure of the essay clear and simple.

Use subheadings in your essay if you feel this will help your reader follow what you have to say.

Length guideline: 2500 Words

Submission Deadline

Essays should be submitted by 4.30 Friday 23rd March. Make sure you put a cover sheet on your essay and then put your essay in the appropriate box. (Ask if you have any queries!)

Your essay should:

Remember also to keep a copy of your work, including a back-up electronic copy.

Write-up of seminar discussions

Each participant takes responsibility for writing up one of the seminars. These reports should be submitted in electronic form ( e-mailed as an attachment), within a week of the relevant seminar, and will be posted on the web site.

They are not meant to be minutes of the discussion but attempts to construct a record that is useful when participants try and take their thinking further on each topic. Length guideline: 500- 1000 words.

(Experimental - think blog?)

The person who has been responsible for a write-up is asked to make a short (couple of minutes) spoken presentation of it at the beginning of the subsequent session.

Assessment

Assessment is by one 2,500 word essay (50% ) and one pre-seen exam (50% ).

Information on the Exam

The exam will be held in the standard second semester exam period and will last for two hours. You will receive a copy of the exam paper some weeks prior to the exam. The exam paper will contain six questions and you will need to choose two questions to answer in the exam. The best strategic advice anyone can give you for the exam is, of course, to spend one hour on one question and one hour on the second question. . This is because it's always easier to get the first 50% of the marks on a question than the second 50%...

Criteria

for the award of marks on an essay, dissertation or exam answer

clarity of thought and expression
ability to marshal arguments into a sustained and well-organised statement
a good grasp of the philosophical problem being addressed
critical awareness
a tight sense of relevance

and normally

knowledge and understanding of relevant literature.

Particular strength under one of these heads is seen as compensating for weakness under another.

exceptional lucidity of argument
exceptional strength of structure
exceptional mastery of problem being addressed
a thorough and critical familiarity with challenging literature
an original approach
a creative line of argument

Marks within this class may vary reflecting

a capacity to develop arguments beyond those in the relevant literature
depth and sophistication of the argument
critical acumen

critical awareness
some coherent argumentation
evidence of serious study
a sense of relevance is exercised

and normally

some knowledge is shown of relevant literature.

distinguished from a 2/1 therefore by

lower level of coherence
lower level of critical awareness

and normally

lower level of knowledge and understanding of relevant literature.

a degree of structure
some grasp of the question is demonstrated
some attempt at argument is made
some evidence of serious study
some sense of relevance

and normally

some knowledge of relevant literature

Particular strength under one of these heads is seen as compensating for weakness under another.

Thus distinguished from 2/2 by some of

limited knowledge of relevant material
limited powers of organisation of material
absence of critical discussion
lack of clarity
lack of relevance

some clear text
some evidence of study
some evidence of an attempt to provide a relevant answer
some attempt at argument

So distinguished from 3rd by

relative weakness in the features listed and
lack of structure

inadequate or no knowledge of relevant material
no critical discussion
little or no structured argument
endemic lack of clarity

or

complete irrelevance

'critical', as in 'critical argument':
argument that shows awareness that claims are open to test and evaluation


'critical awareness':
awareness that claims are open to test and evaluation.


'material':
arguments and discussion on the topic derived from books or independent thought

TABLE 2

How your developing skills are assessed

This is how I see it anyway!

References, Plagiarism and Self-plagiarism

Warwick Fox has provided the following guide on referencing and plagiarism:

All mention of other texts and to the ideas of other people needs to be properly referenced.  You can use either the Harvard system (names and dates in brackets in the text) or the Chicago system (numbers in the text and full reference details at the end). 

See “How to Reference” for further guidance.

An important aspect of both careful note taking and good referencing is that you do not slip into unintentional – let alone intentional! – plagiarism, that is, presenting the words or ideas of someone else as if they were your own.  This is a form of theft, pure and simple, and is rightly treated as a serious academic offence.  The normal penalty for a clear instance of plagiarism is a mark of zero.  In extreme cases, including multiple offences, plagiarism can lead to exclusion from the university. 

With the availability of information on the web plagiarism is an increasingly important problem in university work.  In consequence, academics are on the lookout for any abrupt changes in style, which we are very good and spotting, and have increasingly sophisticated search engines available to locate the source of any suspicious, unaccredited work by typing in a few choice words or phrases.  Thus, the message is simple: never commit this offence.  Not only is it unethical, and subject to heavy penalties if you are caught, but you are also likely to be caught.

Note also that submitting the same text in more than one piece of work constitutes self-plagiarism and is also unacceptable. 

Please refer to the Academic Regulations for a more detailed explanation of cheating and plagiarism and the procedures by which the University deals with it.