Third Party Coercion
ARTICLE THAT IS BEING CRITIQUED IS “FAMILY COERCION AND VALID CONSENT” by Stephen D. Mallary, Bernard Gert, and Charles M. Culver
paper topics: Any paper you write for this course will have two primary goals: to explain and critique a particular argument for a particular conclusion. So any paper topic you choose for this course should have the following form:
Explain and critique [name of philosopher]’s argument in defense of [the philosopher’s substantive conclusion]”
For example:
Explain and critique Marquis’s argument in defense of the claim that abortion is seriously immoral”
Explain and critique Thomson’s argument in defense of the claim that abortion is morally permissible”
If there are qualifications or limits to the conclusion that the author is defending, thoseshould be made clear, too. If they are against cloning, are they against all cloning or just human cloning? If they are against human cloning, are they against it under all circumstances?
