[SOLVED] Environmental Ethics
For questions that ask you to elaborate on objections to arguments or positions or to build up the plausibility of arguments or positions using reasons not found in the textbook, please do not rely on secondary material. Rather, try to use your own thinking and extrapolate/elucidate your reasoning with your own examples/analogies/etc. o Be clear where you are glossing a view and where you are advancing a view. Examples, : according to so and so , as so and so also said, if you dont have this its assumed its your writing. According to. o Be very clear about stating how you go from one line of thinking to another. Even if it seems ridiculous. THE BOOK IS LOCATED HERE https://1drv.ms/b/s!AmQblgL037gZgUxguNSozJC0nQTP?e=QYrSRh QUESTION 1 (STARTS ON PAGE 180 IN BOOK) Considering “”Aesthetic Appreciation of Nature and Environmentalism,” (i) outline the main argument as found in the textbook, (ii) outline three new arguments raised by Sana, myself, or any of the participants in the presentation of the piece in the recorded Zoom meeting, and (iii) outline three arguments against positions raised by either the article itself, by Sana, by myself, or by any of the participants in the recorded Zoom meeting. Zoom video is here https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_Pvc3RjVf5CsqDONJWce6D-j3ICqK_mc/view?usp=sharing QUESTION 2 (STARTS ON PAGE 319 IN BOOK) With respect to “An Essay on the Principle of Population” (the written piece and the student presentation), (i) outline the author’s main argument (identify key premises, concepts, inferential links, any sub-conclusions, and the conclusion; (ii) provide two arguments not anticipated in the reading itself that challenge the one or more of the author’s premises and/or their conclusion; and (iii) provide two arguments not anticipated/suggested in the reading itself that support one or more of the author’s premises and/or their conclusion Zoom video is here https://drive.google.com/file/d/1A39mgI-HmiNZu1gTy7wrc_5-kqaa-kZ9/view?usp=sharing QUESTION 3 (STARTS ON PAGE 290 IN BOOK) Considering “Confronting Climate Change Denial,” (i) outline the main argument as found in the textbook, (ii) outline three new arguments raised by Gurpreet, myself, or any of the participants in the presentation of the piece in the recorded Zoom meeting, and (iii) outline three arguments against positions raised by either the article itself, by Gurpreet, by myself, or by any of the participants in the recorded Zoom meeting. Zoom video is here https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NPU1uApzOBThPHVPYSZ6_BcrXRhFCa47/view?usp=sharing QUESTION 4 (STARTS ON PAGE 326 IN BOOK) With respect to Can the Supply of Natural Resources Really Be Infinite? Yes! (both the written piece and the student presentation on this piece), (i) outline the author’s main argument (identify key premises, concepts, inferential links, any sub-conclusions, and the conclusion; (ii) provide two arguments not anticipated in the reading itself that challenge the one or more of the author’s premises and/or their conclusion; and (iii) provide two arguments not anticipated/suggested in the reading itself that support one or more of the author’s premises and/or their conclusion. Zoom video is here https://drive.google.com/file/d/1m82j5rVYoc93dxWo3CFwvoup8SrhPgvp/view?usp=sharing WHAT TO DO AND WHAT TO AVOID 1) When providing an elucidation of an article’s argument, do not provide a sort of summary that is written in a kind of chronological sense. This is to say, do not write it as you might a book report. Instead, try to isolate the most pertinent concepts and claims and connect them together to produce an account of how the authors premises/reasons/claims are connected to produce a sub-conclusion/conclusion, or, where applicable, a series of sub-conclusions that lead to a final conclusion. 2) While elucidating, identify potential counter-arguments that the author(s) anticipates and how those counter-arguments are addressed. 3) Try as much as possible to put ideas/arguments into your own words in elucidating the article. If you are using the article’s words, you MUST quote and cite appropriately. 4) When creating arguments, try as much as possible to come up with these arguments on your own. You may borrow ideas here and there (and if so, cite), but overall, the arguments should be your own. Anyone can use google. 5) When borrowing words and ideas, if the words are exact, they must be in quotes and a citation must follow every sentence with borrowed words. There should not just be one citation at the end of the argument/paragraph. 6) When writing arguments, you must be as explicit as possible in outlining the reasons (premises) for your overall claim (argument). An argument is a set of reasons, connected (and explain how they are connected), that lead to a conclusion or final claim. Many of you left out parts of this recipe for an argument. An argument=series of premises, inferentially linked, which lead to a conclusion. By “inferentially linked”, I mean you must explain, explicitly, how your premises lead to the conclusion you advance. 7) Many of you write using unclear referents. If you see a comment to the effect of “ref?”, this means that the marker cannot tell to what some word or concept you have written is referring. For instance, many of you write ‘it’, ‘this’, etc. in ways that leave it open as to what these words stand for or to what they refer. 8) When producing arguments, consider a few possible objections and try to respond to them. 9) When producing arguments, use analogies or examples to bolster your arguments. 10) When I’ve indicated that you should advance arguments not already anticipated or addressed by the author(s) themselves, I really do mean it! 11) In the case of some of you, your grammar really does affect the reader’s ability decipher your claims. Please use spell check, the multiple free grammar checks that are available online, or have someone proofread your written work prior to submitting it. 12) As I have separated the “questions” with sub-numbering – i.e., (i), (ii), etc. – please include the sub-numbering in answering the test so that the reader can clearly and quickly identify which part of the “question” to which you are attending. 13) Try to make it clear where your are paraphrasing someone else’s view and where your view begins/ends.
