Not what I wanted to wake up and see!!!! I have NEVER EVER gotten less than an A on a paper!!!!! This guy is going is tough... and I can expect a C in this class!!! There goes my perfect average.... :( Hally – You do a good job briefly addressing the topic, but you should have provided much more critical discussion and analysis and much more critical discussion of theory. You do a good job briefly defining relativism, as per the text, but do not really explore the theory at all in depth. Based on a deeper understanding of relativism, you should then analyze the strengths and weaknesses of Goodman’s argument. So-called “relativists” (really a pragmatist) like Richard Rorty, for instance, would argue that Goodman (very much a traditional ethicist) simply does not understand these newer theories labeled as “ethical relativism” and creates a strawman that is easier to knock down, thereby committing a logical fallacy in ethics. Does Goodman make a compelling case, or are there flaws in his analysis? Every argument has strengths, but also weaknesses – what are both the strengths and weaknesses in Goodman’s case? 1) Submit paper – 2/2 points 2) Addresses topic – 2/2 points 3) Uses text/outside source(s) – 2/2 points 4) Applies to theory – 1/2 points 5) Addresses issue critically/in depth – 0.5/2 points 6) Grammar/structure of paper – 1/2 points TOTAL = 8.5/12 points (71%) – C-
Posted on: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 12:44:28 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015