Need Help With your assignment? Get expert academic writing assistance! We can write any paper on any subject within the tightest time.
So I got this essay done from somewhere else and the writer didn’t follow the rubric so below I attached my essay which is called Phil essay PED and I also attached a sample paper of the same topic which got an A to use as reference.
Two to three sentences about the issue in general
A sentence that mentions the author’s name and the title of the article (italicize the title)
Thesis statement: In this paper, I plan to argue that X’s argument on issue Y is both strong and cogent.
Map of paper: First, I will summarize X’s argument, including the dominant bioethical principle which underpins it as well as the one least emphasized. Next, I will present the argument in its standardized form, and carefully explain why it is both strong and cogent. Then I will present a possible and specific challenge to X’s argument, and then answer it. I will conclude with some final thoughts.
“Nutshell” summary of the author’s argument. *If you were successful with the annotated bibliography on the issue, you can just use that here!
Dominant bioethical principle that underpins the argument (Respect for persons? Beneficence? Justice?) and one or two sentences that support this claim.
Which bioethical principle seems to be less emphasized than the others? Offer a sentence or two to support this claim.
Transition statement: I will now present X’s argument in its standardized form:
Insert the premise/conclusion breakdown here, word for word, from the PowerPoint. Single space this part and indent it a bit, like you were presenting a block quote.
Explain why the argument is logically strong: The premises are relevant to the conclusion and provide good grounds for it.
Explain why the argument is also cogent: Each premise is true or at least rationally acceptable. No fallacies of cogency are committed, and each premise is adequately supported with explanations and illustrations.
IV. Anticipation of Potential Counterargument
Transition statement: Some may claim that X’s argument is strong but uncogent.
Explain the specific problem one of these detractors might pose: They might say that premise Z is unacceptable because (it commits a fallacy of cogency, like false dichotomy, false cause, or slippery slope? Because it’s just plain false or unreasonable? Because it’s supported by bad evidence?)
Counterargue that claim: To them, I would say that this is not the case because…and then carefully defend the argument from this attack.
You can conclude by simply summarizing what you have accomplished in this paper, or you can conclude by taking a more personal tone and discussing the issue in general for a bit, or you can do both.
^ this is the rubric I need it rewritten, please follow the rubric