Need help? We are here

Carefully read Theodore Dalrymple’s Reader, She Married Him–Alas and type a 750 word (minimum) response in which you address EACH of the following four questions in your own words:

  1. What is the author’s main argument?
  2. How does he support his main argument (evidence, ancillary arguments, etc.)?
  3. How does the author respond to the theories of cosmopolitanism and anti-cosmo politalism (discussed in Chapter 7)?
  4. Do you agree or disagree with Dalrymple’s analysis? Why or why  not? (Feel free to include observations from your own experience or that  of friends, relatives, or acquaintances.)

 

Connect with a professional writer in 5 simple steps

Please provide as many details about your writing struggle as possible

Academic level of your paper

Type of Paper

When is it due?

How many pages is this assigment?

Lesson 5 Reflection

 

Write a short reflection statement (350-500 words) after reading Chapter 12. Use complete sentences and correct academic writing to complete this assignment.

Respond in writing to these items:

  1. What are the two messages that would be sent by abolishing the  death penalty according to Nathanson? How does he reply to the objection  that murderers forfeit their right to be respected as human beings? Do  you agree with his argument? Why or why not?
  2. Why is deterrence not a decisive factor in the debate about the  morality of the death penalty according to van den Haag? Explain your  answers. Do you agree with his argument? Why or why not?
  3. Why is “an eye for an eye” an attractive view according to  Nathanson? What are the two main problems he raises for this view, and  what are the possible replies an advocate of such a view might make?

 

Lesson 6 Reflection

 

Write a short reflection statement (350-500 words) after reading Chapter 13. Use complete sentences and correct academic writing to complete this assignment.

Respond in writing to these items:

  1. How does Sinnott-Armstrong reply to Rodin’s claim that  consequentialism is useless in addressing preventive war? Do you agree?  Why or why not?
  2. Walzer examines excuses for terrorism while granting that  terrorism cannot be morally justified. What is the distinction between a  justification and an excuse?
  3. According to Valls, what are the two difficulties that arise when  one is trying to define “terrorism”? What final definition of the term  does Valls stipulate that he will use in his arguments?

 

Lesson 7 Reflection

 

Write a short reflection statement (350-500 words) after reading Chapter 14. Use complete sentences and correct academic writing to complete this assignment.

Respond in writing to these items:

  1. Explain the Libertarian view with respect to whether we have a  duty to help others. How does Singer argue that wealthy nations and  their interests have caused harm to developing nations and their people?
  2. Arthur mentions three ways in which a moral code must be  practical. State those three ways. Which of the three do you consider to  be the most compelling, and why?
  3. How can we treat others as an end in themselves according to O’Neill? In what ways are human beings limited by their finitude?