This research-based analysis paper has two parts.
In the first part, you will state a specific moral dilemma PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED in the past, clearly indicating the nature of moral dilemma, person(s) and institution(s) involved, and how you handled it. Explain the moral reasoning for those decisions and actions? What results? Were you able to resolve the issue(s) in a morally satisfactory manner?
In the second part, you will reappraise the past dilemma, discussing such questions as “Would you approach this past dilemma in the same manner as you did in the past, or would you deal with it differently?” “Why or why not?”” What theoretical, philosophical perspectives would help you re-evaluate the case?” In this section, you will identify prominent ethicists and theorists who could offer both perspectives and resolutions to the case in point.
The paper must demonstrate your ability to critically examine the moral issue(s) with philosophical insight and theoretical understanding. Your current coursework in ethics should help you in this. The quality of the essay will be determined by the kind of analysis you offer, supported by credible academic, scholarly sources.
Some general subject areas may include breaking promises, experience of being bullied, handling relational problems, disputes and conflict with coworkers, abortion, allowing someone to die, human rights violation, racial and social discrimination, employment discrimination, sexual harassment, and truth telling. These topics are only a few examples, but you may choose any topic that has a bearing on your moral awareness. Yet, please note that you cannot pick up a story from someone else or elsewhere else; but it must be drawn from your own personal experience, and it must focus on you.
An appropriate introduction and conclusion are required.
The presentation of the moral dilemma must not exceed a page, so that you can give more space for analysis. People and institutions must remain anonymous in the paper.
You are allowed to consult only peer-reviewed academic Journal articles and book chapters in philosophy and ethics within the past 20-years. No encyclopedias, videos and audios can be used. All non-academic sources such as ChatGPT, Wikipedia, Ethics news, news magazines, popular internet sources (.com; .org; .edu and others) must be avoided. You are encouraged to utilize COD databases and search engines for both print sources and electronic sources. See Appendix-A for a list of ethics-related journals.
Topic proposal
A written proposal must be provided with the following information to get your topic approved:
The past ethical dilemma described in a paragraph.
A tentative bibliography of minimum five peer-revied academic sources in philosophy and ethics under 20-years, following MLA bibliographical format.
A proposal without proper MLA format and tentative bibliography will be rejected. Proposals beyond two working days will not be accepted except in extraordinary cases. A paper written without pre-approval of the topic will not be graded. See the syllabus for due date.
The final paper must provide 3-4 pages of discussion excluding a cover page, and a bibliography (double spaced, font size: 12). In-text citation must match with the bibliography. Bibliography must have a minimum of five academic sources. Full bibliographical information is required (name of the author, title of the source, place of publication, date of publication, & page number(s). Due date: 04/15/25
My younger brother stole $10.00 from my dad’s wallet to get food with friends. My dad noticed the money missing and totally freaked out, and immediately blamed my brother. He started going after my brother to hit him, as he often does. I stepped up to say that I took the money, not my brother. I didn’t want to see him be beaten again.
From here, brainstorm/Google for keywords that might describe your concepts -
I was under a lot of pressure to do well on an entrance exam to get into a good high school. My family doesn’t have a lot of money, and it would be hard to pay the tuition. If I do well on this exam, I’ll get a full scholarship, so I cheated on it. I figured that it was okay to cheat because in the long run I’ll make more money for my family, pay more taxes, stay off financial assistance, and in general I'll contribute to a better society.
From here, brainstorm/google for keywords the might describe your concepts -