Philosophy - Business Ethics

In this paper you can choose your own topic, so long as it has some relation or other to business ethics, and so long as you say a bit in the paper about how it relates. It should be 5 pages, double spaced, with a 12-point font and margins of no more than 1.25". It should start with a paragraph that introduces the topic, preferably outlining two or more different views one might have about it (as in: "...some hold that X, while others argue Y," etc.), and which also contains a thesis statement - i.e. what *you* will be arguing in the paper. The rest should develop your argument, though of course you can do so by presenting, and then responding to, some other view (perhaps opposed to yours in some way).

Below is the grading rubric for this paper

The topic is understood well and addressed clearly, thoroughly and succinctly; the paper is well-organized and does not digress from the topic or leave loose ends (important points introduced with no follow-up) or contain any passages where various ideas are jumbled together to no clear purpose; editorial mistakes (spelling, word choice, usage) at a minimum; ideas are put into student's own words in a clear and fluid manner, with little to no reliance on simple regurgitation of class notes and text; quotation is used in helpful and illuminating ways and is not overdone; argumentative inferences are present, and are clear and compelling. In short, the main point is clear and the support given to it in the paper is also clear and well-developed; a paper in this range will never leave its reader scratching her head, wondering "OK, so what is the main point of this paper?" or "...why exactly should I believe it, according to this writer?" or "How does this paragraph relate to the author's argument?"

The important points and inferences will not be marred by vagueness or "puffed up" language that does not really convey anything (for example, "So and so's argument is just outstanding; every premise and reason is correct and fits perfectly together with the conclusion, which is also compelling" or "So and so argues X;

but I for one am very skeptical, and this is because I'm not sure it's true, since it might well be false," and the like, with no specific reasoning provided in support of any of those claims beyond more vague praise or criticism.) Further, the paper - if it is one written in response to another essay - will actually engage in useful, interesting, and constructive ways with that essay, and will not simply mention it and move on to the writer's own views. Papers in this range also completely avoid the following three common problems with expository papers: question-begging (arguing in a circle, arguing X on the basis of X, where the conclusion just restates the premises in different words, or where the reason given in support of X is...X);

appealing to ignorance (arguing that X is false, or that writer P is wrong to argue that X, because no one can prove X is true, or no one really knows whether X is true, or that X is false because "who is to say" it is true, etc.); and appealing to authority (X is true merely because some expert, or some important or famous or influential person said so). A-papers also avoid "cop out" style responses (where the "what do you think?" part of the paper is answered by saying things like "...but ultimately, who's to say?" "I don't think this can ever be answered, since people always disagree," etc.)