“Identify a contemporary moral issue (animal rights) and analyze the arguments (presented in the course readings) used in it. In your analysis, you will also discuss how deontological ethics and utilitarianism are used in each argument.
PART 1 – CURRENT DIALOGUE (minimum 300 words) – 60 points
Check out the moral issue as discussed by regular people on the internet, starting with social media
feeds (if applicable), [including, of course, the links to other sources (e.g. news or advocacy sources) posted on that social media] and/or Google or any other common way people get information or argue about this topic. What specifically are they are disagreeing about? What are the principle values that each side considers to be important? Identify an example of a speaker/author using deontological ethics (principles,
rights, and obligations) and utilitarianism (consequences) and state how. Give at least two examples – one
per ethical approach (deontological and utilitarianism) and include the link in the works cited.
PART 2 – PHILOSOPHICAL ARGUMENTS (minimum 1000 words) – 200 points
Choose two opposing arguments from the course readings. One of the arguments should utilize
deontological reasonings and another argument should utilize utilitarian reasoning (if possible). For each
argument do the following:
1. Identify the philosopher’s conclusion (claim/position) and premises (evidence) that are used to
convince the reader of their claim. Include short quotes from the readings for credit.
2. Identify which type of moral reasoning (deontological ethics or utilitarianism), and state specifically
how. Include short quotes from the readings for credit.
3. Analyze the argument. Is there premise(s) that is wrong and not well-supported? Is there a premise
that is right and well-supported? Explain why.
4. What would it take to make each argument better?
*Do not discuss your stance on the issue*.
4 Sources Required,1 being Regan’s & 1 being Cohen’s Articles.”