Midterm instructions The main reason that some students don’t do well on this is because they do not follow the instructions. Please read them, COMPLETELY. In the film, Peter Singer – A Dangerous Mind, several of the issues we’ve discussed so far are highlighted in the film, such as euthanasia and care of disabled infants, among other things. Singer’s views are controversial, and you will undoubtedly have strong feelings about them, one way or the other. Also, please keep in mind that Singer’s views, should you decide to research them further, are often misquoted and taken out of their full context. Also, please note, your paper should: be submitted in .doc, .docx, .pdf, or .rtf format 11 or 12 point font, double spaced use proper MLA citation and formatting as to length, it should be no less than 4 pages, and no more than 8. Also… MAC/iOS USERS… Neither the Turnitin service nor I can open the Mac “Pages” format. Please be sure to convert it to one of the above specified formats, before submitting. For this assignment, you are to choose and focus on one of Peter Singer’s arguments in the film that deal with one of the bioethical issues we’ve discussed thus far. You will then write an essay in two parts, that addresses the following: Part 1 A.) State ONE argument of Singer’s that you are addressing. If possible, use direct quotes from Singer to illustrate it, and state whether you agree or disagree with Singer’s argument, and to what extent. IMPORTANT: Please note: choose ONE issue, and one issue only. If you choose the issue regarding Singer’s comment about an infant not having the right to life, just discuss that particular topic – do not group it with the issue that follows it, about euthanizing severely disabled infants, and vice versa. You may refer to either in your points, if necessary, but just focus on one as your main issue of Singer’s. Also, please note, as many people seem to miss this – Singer is not advocating, anywhere, for the euthanasia of healthy infants, or of doing anything against the parent’s will. B.) Defend your viewpoint regarding the one issue you chose above, using at least three ethical arguments, issues, and critiques used in our text and other sources you choose (no Wikipedia!). Clearly lay out your three issues with headings so I can differentiate between them (Issue 1, Issue 2, Issue 3). Points will be taken off if I can’t differentiate what the three distinct issues are. Go into detail. One short paragaraph on each is not sufficient. C.) You should also address one of the criticisms in the film of Singer’s position, and critique it, meaning, examine what one of Singer’s critics say about him and analyze and critique what they are saying. Do you agree or disagree with it, and why? For some reason, some students forget to include this part, so don’t forget it! Note: Be sure you watch the entire film before making judgments. Many students have strong reactions to Singer’s views, and don’t look at them in the full context, and end up focusing on one aspect instead of considering the greater meaning. DO NOT do that. If you write a paper that is not considering everything in the film, or you make it from completely emotional arguments, you will not be happy with your grade. Remember, as always, you need to make persuasive, convincing arguments. There are many topics covered in this film. I STRONGLY recommend that you choose one that you can make convincing arguments for… if you feel yourself getting emotionally caught up in a particular argument, I’d recommend choosing a different one. I can’t emphasize how important this is. There are certainly certain points in the film that are easier to analyze and defend than others, so CHOOSE WISELY. Part 2 Referring to the handout on principlism, analyze Singer’s argument that you chose in Part 1, according to the four principles (regardless of whether or not you agree with his position). -Autonomy: How does the autonomy of the patient factor into Singer’s argument? Does it respect their autonomy? How? Remember, infants cannot be autonomous… the autonomy lies with the mother. -Beneficence: Is what Singer proposes a promotion of what is best for the patient? How so, or why not? -Non-maleficence: Does Singer’s proposal help the patient avoid harm? This is not an easy question, as one must ask what the greater harm is. This can often stand in opposition to beneficence. -Justice: (distributive)How does Singer’s solution relate to the allotment of resources to other patients? Does it take from them? Free them up? (legal) What are the legal ramifications of Singer’s argument? Please organize your paper so that I can see the distinctive points I’ve outlined above. Making headings for each section is a good way to do this. Be sure to answer ALL parts of the assignment. No points will be given for missing parts, and you will not be able to revise them after the due date. If you have any questions, please post them in the questions for instructor ( thread at the top of the class page. Also, be sure to check your originality score, a few hours after turning it in. If it’s higher than 25 percent, make sure you cited all of your sources, properly, and make sure you didn’t use too many lengthy quotes. Brief background on the film – please read Please note, if you go to the Films on Demand site (link here (Links to an external site.)), there is a transcript of the film .You may find this helpful for getting quotes and such. —— Born in 1946, Professor Peter Singer is a world-renowned utilitarian philosopher who specializes in the field of bioethics. He was educated at Melbourne and Oxford Universities and held senior positions in the Department of Philosophy and the Centre for Human Bioethics at Monash University before accepting an appointment as Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics, University Center for Human Values, Princeton University (USA) in 1999. The personal portrait of Peter Singer in SingerA Dangerous Mind traces the development of some the philosophers most influential ideas. Singer is not some remote theorist of life. We learn, for example, that his experience as the father of three daughters and of his mothers suffering from Alzheimers Disease have been formative. Rather than seeing a monster, as Singer is sometimes portrayed, we meet a warmly engaging human being who thinks deeply about serious ethical problems and suggests pragmatic, if confronting, solutions. Singers opponents sometimes describe his ethics as Nazi-likea label he regards as both inaccurate and ironic. For one thing, he has special reason to remember the Nazi regime with abhorrence because he has Jewish heritage. Singers book Pushing Time Away records his exploration of Vienna in his effort to trace the history of his grandfather who died in the Theresienstadt ghetto during the Holocaust. Singer specifically objects to comparisons between his ethics and the gruesome Nazi experiments. He says in the documentary: To run these ideas together as if there were no difference between them, I just think is really camouflaging such huge differences between them that it degrades the whole level of the debate. Singer attempts to live his life in accordance with the moral principles he believes we should all follow. As the author of Animal Liberation, he firmly rejects speciesism and is a rigorous vegetarian who does not wear leather. He donates twenty per cent of his income to charity, particularly to Oxfam, on the principle that you should not give your own interests greater importance than those of strangers. SingerA Dangerous Mind is a thought-provoking and challenging film. -commentary on the film, by Terry Hastings link to the movie https://fod-infobase-com.hartness.idm.oclc.org/p_ViewVideo.aspx?xtid=33059
Hide
