Posted: October 18th, 2022

Philosophy of Law short essay

Philosophy of Law
Fall 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMQuDLkpWMc

Staged Short Writing Assignment Deadlines
Stage 1: Due 10/22 by 11:59 PM to Blackboard (Late deadline is 10/29)
Stage 2: Due 10/29 by 11:59 PM to Blackboard (Late deadline is 11/5)
Stage 3: Due 11/5 by 11:59 PM to Blackboard (Late deadline is 11/12)

Late papers lose points for each day past the deadline and no papers can be accepted after the late deadline. Please review the syllabus or stop by office hours with any questions. Thanks!

Instructions

Your first writing assignment considers the debate between Mill and Devlin on whether and to what degree the law should enforce morality. Specifically, you need to develop a standard form argument that answers the question: Should there be laws that criminalize hate speech?

For this assignment, you need to make sure that you’ve carefully read the articles from Mill and Devlin; watch the videos; take good notes on their arguments; and review your feedback on any of the related Discussion Forums.

Avoid outside research unless you’ve checked with me (this is to avoid bad philosophy you can find online and to minimize the risk of academic integrity violations). Also please remember to not use quotations – though paraphrasing is welcome and expected.

There are three stages to the writing assignment:

• Stage 1: Conclusion + Supporting Premises (part one of the Standard Form Argument)

For this stage, you’ll need to come up with a conclusion that answers the question: Should there be laws that criminalize hate speech. Then, you’ll need to provide four premises from the readings that support your conclusion.

• Stage 2: Objection + Response (part two of the Standard Form Argument)

For this stage, you’ll develop a strong objection (counterclaim) that challenges one of your premises. Next, you’ll debate this objection and provide a response to it that further develops your original premise.

• Stage 3: Revised Standard Form Argument

For this stage, you’ll take the feedback that you got from the first two stages, make strong revisions, and put them all together into a complete (revised) standard form argument.

Please note that in order to get timely feedback, you’ll need to meet the original due dates.

Grading Rubric
Points
Stage 1 (40 points)
Clear conclusion that fully responds to the question. 5
Four strong premises that deeply engage with the readings and support the conclusion. 20
Follows argumentation rules, grammar, spelling, organization, no quotations (definitely no plagiarism!) 15

Stage 2 (30 points)
Identifies premise that is being objected to (from Stage 1) 5
Strong, clear, compelling objection that explicitly engages with the premise as well as the course readings 10
Responds to objection with strong, clear reasoning in a way that adds to and/or revises the original premise so as to generally improve the argument 10
Follows argumentation rules, grammar, spelling, organization, no quotations (definitely no plagiarism!) 5

Stage 3 (30 points)
Makes significant improvements to the quality of argumentation – this should address any feedback you received if earlier stages were submitted on time 10
High levels of organization and clarity 10
Demonstrates developing understanding of the reading materials and philosophical argumentation 10
Total points for all stages: 100

On the following page, there is a template that you MUST use for this assignment. The purpose of this template is to 1) make sure you include all the relevant pieces and 2) to keep all the stages together so that I can evaluate your developing ideas.

Then, you’ll submit it to Blackboard (there’s a video tutorial showing you exactly where/how to submit).

For each stage of the assignment, you need to include all previous stages – so, you will just keep adding on to this template. I need to see your earlier work in order to evaluate your progress, so please ask me any questions about this if you’re confused – thanks!

Remember from our unit on arguments, that premises, the conclusion, and your objection are all only one sentence long. The response to your objection can be a few sentences long if necessary.

Name:

Stage 1

Premise 1:

Premise 2:

Premise 3:

Premise 4:

Conclusion:

Stage 2

Original Premise:

Objection:

Response:

Stage 3

Premise 1:

Premise 2:

Premise 3:

Premise 4:

Conclusion:

Objection to Premise ___(Fill in the premise #):

Response: