Suggested approach to Assignment 2 We do not require a particular format or template for this assignment. It is possible to structure this assignment in a variety of ways. But if you would like some...

There are resources for this assessment that I am able to attach.


Suggested approach to Assignment 2 We do not require a particular format or template for this assignment. It is possible to structure this assignment in a variety of ways. But if you would like some guidelines, this is one approach that would cover the essentials:  1. Introduce the assignment. It would make sense to treat this assignment as an essay, with introduction, body and conclusion. Be brief and avoid repetition.  2. Briefly introduce the scenario you have selected – but DON’T just retell the story (some students waste a lot of space doing this). Provide a preliminary identification of the features and issues that make the situation look like an ethical problem, and perhaps some possible responses. Some of the details of the scenario are not going to be essential here, while some will be very important and worth elaborating upon.  3. Introduce and apply each of the four ethical perspectives to the scenario. You can start with a brief explanation of the perspective in your own words, using references in support. These references can be from the Learning Guides, Readings (in the Learning Guides) or from independent research. Then, apply the perspective to the relevant aspects the scenario. For example, if you are applying consequentialism, what consequences can you identify and for whom? If you are applying deontology, what duties and rights come into play, and so on. You could break this part of your assignment into four sections using headings if you wish.  4. Identify the major ethical issues. Some of these you may have flagged earlier, some will have emerged in your analysis using the various perspectives. There might be a clash between perspectives (providing different advice), or a clash within them (there might be a clash of duties, for instance). In other words, what makes the scenario an ETHICALLY difficult situation? What’s the problem or dilemma? This is more than a summary. Instead, your analysis should be diagnosing the ethical difficulty. 5. Evaluate the reasons and insights provided by the various perspectives. How relevant is each perspective to your scenario? You might argue that not every perspective is equally helpful or germane. This involves going a step beyond APPLYING the perspectives. In this step you ‘weigh up’ what each perspective offers. Which produces the most compelling or persuasive reasons? 6. Decide what to do. Your decision may involve a few different actions (e.g. negotiating with more than one person, doing more than one thing). You need to describe what you are going to do and justify it. This justification will involve a final comparison of the contribution of each perspective, a critical evaluation of the considerations and reasons each provides. Which perspectives provide the most direct support for your decision, and which suggest otherwise? Explain why you have decided as you have. You should try to be even-handed here. Not every reason will point the same way. Your final decision should be defended as the one best supported by reasons, all things considered.