Shaun Miller Email:
[email protected] Office Hours: Tues. and Thurs. 1:30 - 2PM and 4:30 – 5:30PM at Coughlin Hall #245 PHIL 4320 – Contemporary Ethical Problems Course Description: What are the important considerations in contemporary ethical issues such as human rights, social and racial justice, war, international relations, expressions of dissent, and sexual conduct? What constitutes a good ethical theory with respect to such issues, and how should we put such ethical theory into practice? These are only a few of the fundamental questions that we will address during our time together. Toward this end we will discuss major ethical problems covering a diverse range of philosophical topics within areas that include politics, law, society, psychology, and human history. The course has two main aims: 1) to interact critically with major views and thinkers associated with important contemporary ethical problems, and 2) to work towards formulating our own coherent ethical views and applying these views in practical engagement with the issues we consider. As part of the course requirements, students have the opportunity to participate in discussions, to read and analyze texts, as well as to engage with the course material through writing assignments and exams. You cannot learn how to do philosophy simply by reading the text and listening to the lectures. Philosophy is an activity so I expect participation and discussion from you. Thus, I expect you to be prepared to discuss the issues in class. The point of philosophy is to put your perspective in your own words, seeing how arguments stand, and finding examples and counter examples to every position. Philosophy is an enjoyable experience as well as a great exercise for critical thinking. Indeed, you have most likely thought or discussed these issues in your lifetime. Why have a course on Ethics? A recent study shows that when college students give an answer on ethical issues, they were not able to offer a well-reasoned judgment for their position. Since ethics deals with how to live our daily lives, learning about ethics is an important priority. This class will help us gain the critical skills to analyze the issues as well as the theoretical underpinnings for the positions of certain moral issues. By doing so, you will be able to defend your position effectively. The aim of this course is not to teach you what to think, but rather how to think about morality. The learning outcomes of this course are the following: 1) Assess views of important contemporary ethical problems from various perspectives. When I ask most students their perspective on an ethical issue, they tell me that the issue is morally right or morally wrong. When I next ask why is it right or wrong, they have difficulty explaining their position. By the end of this class, my expectation will be for you to explain and justify your position and get a better understanding of why you believe what you believe. 2) Argue for one major ethical theory over others in terms of philosophical cogency and practical outcome. You may have a better understanding of your position, or you may find out that your idea was wrong and may change your mind. Whatever the case may be, figuring out what you believe in is the first step on being a moral person. 1
3) Use philosophical reasoning to develop the student’s own position on contemporary problems in ethics, including such topics as human rights, social and racial justice, war, international relations, expressions of dissent, and sexual conduct. Many students find the opponents view just flat-out wrong, but they cannot give well-reasoned answers on why they are wrong. By the end of this class, my next expectation will be for you to understand the other side. This does not mean agreement with the other side, nor does it mean respecting the other side. It simply means having an attitude of, “oh, now I see where they’re coming from” even if you don’t agree with them. Course Objectives: By the end of the course: 1) The student will be able to state and provide reasons for the basic positions of the major philosophical theories within contemporary ethical discussions. Writing assignments and exam essays will require students, in part, to provide arguments outlining and explaining major philosophical theories. 2) The student will be able to state and provide reasons for principal objections to major ethical theories. Each of the writing assignments contains a critical analysis section, whereby students will be required to work through objections to moral theories. 3) The student will be able to compare and contrast positions of the ethical theories studied in the course. Various writing assignments require that students compare and contrast different ethical theories. 4) The student will be able to take and defend a position that addresses significant objections to the position under consideration. In-class writing assignments, papers, and exam essays, all require that students defend ethical positions in direct response to principled objections. Course Requirements: Student course grades are calculated on a 500 point scale. The requirements and breakdown per assignment are listed below. The justification for the assignments is as follows:
(1) Reading Responses (24%) Over the course of the semester (beginning in week 2), students are given the opportunity to turn in six (6) reading responses of length no less than 1.5 pages but no more than 2 pages (Times New Roman, double-spaced, 12pt font, standard margins of 1”). These should be 2
well-polished and address the question for the week through formulation of a unique argument. You will hand in two before exam 1, hand in two before exam 2, and hand in two before the final paper. *Please see the handout for more information. (2) Case Studies (7%) Case Studies consist of small and large group work in engagement with a specific case study. We will discuss the case studies when we switch to a different ethical issue. The students will be required to formulate their thoughts and put these in writing according to the format of the Case Studies Worksheet. Any missed case studies will unfortunately be counted as a zero. *Please see the Case studies worksheet for more information (3) Exams (40%) There will be two exams (20% each). They will include an objective section, a short answer section, and an essay section. It is your responsibility to ensure that the exams do not conflict with religious observances or university activities. In the event of such a conflict, you should make arrangements with me at least one week in advance to schedule a make-up exam. If a severe illness, family emergency, or other significant event prevents you from taking an exam at the scheduled time, you should make every effort to contact me as soon as possible. Alternate arrangements will be made, provided the reason for the absence is both sufficiently important and properly documented. *Please see the study guide for more information. (4) Final Paper (25%) The final paper is an opportunity for students to narrow down their thoughts into a sustained and focused argument concerning any of the issues, articles, and authors in our readings, or other views we discuss during the semester. Students will be required to develop a clear and concise thesis, exposit an issue/view related to a contemporary ethical problem, and argue for a position in relation to this issue/view. Please come and talk to me for any topic or thesis you would like to go over with me. Your final paper will be 2500-3000 words. More details will be provided. This paper will be due during finals week. Included in this assignment are two additional components: 1) possible paper topics, and 2) paper outline. *Please see the instructions for more information. (5) Self-Assessment (5%) Students will be asked to assess their own participation in the course with respect to their pre-class preparation and in-class engagement. *Please see the self-assessment sheet for more information. The breakdown goes as follows:
Reading Responses (6 @ 20 points each) Case Studies (7 @ 5 points each) Exams (2 @ 100 points each)
120 points (24%)
Final Paper (100 points) Self-Assessment
100 points (20%)
35 points (7%) 200 points (40%)
45 points (9%) 3
TOTAL:
500 points (100%)
To get an “A” in this class you need to accumulate 467 points. To do that will require a high level of commitment and thought from you.
Grading Scale:
The following is the grading scale for the class. A = 93 – 100%
(467 – 500 points)
C = 73 – 76.99%
(365 – 384 points)
AB = 87 – 92.99%
(435 – 466 points)
CD = 67 – 72.99%
(335 – 364 points)
B = 83 – 86.99%
(415 – 434 points)
D = 60 – 66.99%
(300 – 334 points)
BC = 77% – 82.99% (385 – 414 points) F = 0 – 59.99% (0 – 299 points) Good in-class participation will help raise borderline grades. I will also take into consideration trajectories of improvement. This means that if a student does poorly early on in the semester but shows steady improvement over the course of the class, I may weigh the grade according to this trajectory. There will be no extra credit offered during the semester. Attendance/Tardiness/Late Work Policy: Attendance will be taken at every regular class session (not only to account for absences, but also as a form of greeting and recognition.) Students with more than five absences (including excused absences) may find their final course grade reduced by up to 1⁄∕2 a letter for each additional absence. For example, a student who has achieved a ‘B’ grade for the course but who has been absent six times could actually receive a ‘BC’ grade for the course. I make exceptions for serious cases (e.g. serious illness) with proper documentation. You should also be aware of these two University policies concerning absences: Regardless of the faculty’s policy on attendance, students who miss an exam or a deadline must contact their instructor as soon as possible and failure to do so may result in a withdrawal from the course by the college office. In addition, regardless of the faculty’s policy on attendance, students who are absent from class for a week or more must inform the college office in which they are enrolled and, failure to do so may result in a withdrawal from the course by the college office. (MU Undergraduate Bulletin, p. 39) If you miss class, it is your responsibility to learn what you missed in class. In addition, there is no longer any distinction between excused and unexcused absences, and the university no longer provides documentation for illnesses and the like. Thus, absences for sickness or family emergency count just the same as all other absences. More info can be found at: http://bulletin.marquette.edu/undergrad/academicregulations/#attendance. 4
I trust that you will arrive to class on time out of respect for your fellow classmates. Should tardiness become a habitual problem, I reserve the right to count each late day as an unexcused absence. Texts: Bonevac, Daniel (ed.). Today’s Moral Issues: Classic and Contemporary Perspectives, 7th edition (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012-2013). ISBN: 13 9780078038211 Additional readings posted on D2L Rated what? A Disclaimer Both the content and expectations of this class are college level. We will be discussing themes and issues that are controversial and have bearing to our current age. Thus, I may show clips from media that are rated “R”. These are chosen for their artistic quality and relevance to our studies and may contain content which have themes and sometimes language suitable only for mature adults. You may be exposed to sexual themes, violence, and course language. All materials are chosen carefully and students are provided with ample background to appreciate and understand them in an academic setting. The course does not shy away from controversy and expects that you, as mature college students, will have the appropriate critical faculties necessary for engaging with the material in an objective manner. If you will have problems with such materials, then I suggest you find another course more suitable to your values. Classroom Environment: I expect that the classroom will be an open and accepting environment where students are respected and feel secure enough to venture ideas, discuss freely and honestly, as well as to offer edifying criticism of one another as peers. Towards this end, I will tolerate no hate speech or hate acts, which may include (but are not limited to) racism, sexism, classism, gay bashing or religion/atheism bashing. Such topics as race, gender, class, homosexuality and faith/atheism are certainly not off-limits, but these topics may not be used as a way to oppress or attack others within our classroom. If you are unsure about whether something you plan to say or do could possibly be offensive, please talk to me first before sharing it with the class. Considering that philosophy is not only based on writing and reading the material, but it’s also figuring out your own beliefs and ideas on the topics. Therefore, discussions will be important in the class and it is expected of you to participate in order to truly philosophize. This includes reading and thinking about the assigned material and completing any provided reading questions. This will apply to your writing as well. Justification for answers and explanations are needed. Talking, texting, or MP3 listening is considered lack of participation. Please turn off all cell phones and other electronic devices when you enter the classroom. Laptop or personal computers are not allowed in the classroom;; if you have a specific need that requires use of a computer, please talk with me in person about exceptions to this rule. Please keep food and drink within reasonable limits. Academic Dishonesty 5
I expect students to take responsibility for their work and actions. Simply put, plagiarism is stealing and constitutes the most serious form of academic dishonesty. For this reason, no form of plagiarism will be tolerated. Plagiarism includes (but is not limited to): 1) Downloading papers from the web 2) Quoting from a book, article, website, movie, or lecture without proper citation 3) Paraphrasing an author’s work without credit 4) Copying the structure of another author’s work and “inserting” your own material without giving proper credit for the author’s influence 5) Taking someone else’s idea and claiming it as your own 6) Copying parts of websites and pasting them into your paper without citation 7) Dishonest conduct or dishonest correspondence with the instructor concerning work
Students unclear about how to cite sources or how to give credit should see me before turning in any assignment. Ignorance is not an excuse for plagiarism. If a person is caught plagiarizing, the minimum penalty will be to fail the assignment and further penalties will be assessed following a meeting between the student, myself, and the department chair. In addition, the College of Arts and Sciences also retains the right to impose stricter penalties at its own discretion that may include expulsion. Please familiarize yourself with the university’s academic misconduct policy so that we may avoid any such problems. For more information on Marquette procedures in the case of academic dishonesty, see: http://bulletin.marquette.edu/undergrad/academicregulations/#academichonestypolicy. Good to note: The most common type of plagiarism is when someone uses a website (and sometimes copies and pastes sections into his or her work). A good policy to follow regarding the internet is that it should NOT be used as a resource on any of your assignments, even if cited properly. If you choose to use the internet as a research tool, avoid websites that do not offer consistent information, such as Wikipedia.org. A few suggestions for good websites include: The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://www.rep.routledge.com) The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://www.iep.utm.edu/) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu/ ) The Marquette Library Philosophy Homepage (http://www.mu.edu/library/find/phil.shtml)
***All writing may be submitted by the instructor to turnitin.com. Statement on Special Needs: Your success in this course is important to me. I recognize that there are *multiple* ways to learn and that this multiplicity should be acknowledged in the structure of university courses and the evaluation of their participants. Thus, I encourage students registered in the course to discuss their learning styles and comprehension requirements with me during my office hours or at another arranged time, if necessary. Every student is entitled to a meaningful and stimulating learning experience. Disabled students are also strongly encouraged to avail themselves of the services provided by the campus the Services for Students with Disabilities (SSD) in room 181, including the provision of note-takers, transcribers, and sign-language interpreters. SSD can also arrange to provide course materials (including this syllabus) in alternative formats if necessary. 6
Reading Responses Instructions 25% of the final grade Assignment: Over the course of the semester, you will be given the opportunity to turn in six (6) reading responses (beginning in week 2). You may choose the weeks for which you would like to write responses, but you may only turn in one reading response for each week. (This means that you cannot wait and turn in multiple reading responses for previous weeks. For example, if we do animal ethics and it happens to be on week 4 and you write a reading response on animal ethics in week 4, then you must turn in the response that week.) Simply put: from weeks 2-15, you should turn in six responses total, but only one response for each week. You will hand in two before exam 1, hand in two before exam 2, and hand in two before the final paper. A good idea is to use these responses as a way to focus your thoughts in preparation for your exams and final paper. I will provide a few questions for the week on Sunday. You only answer one question for 1.5 to 2 pages. These will be due (unless I announce otherwise) in the D2L dropbox by 11:59pm on each Friday of weeks that we have readings. Unfortunately, I will not accept late responses. Content: Responses should engage with the question for the week while remaining focused on the required reading and the ideas in the text. Please remember that these are not stream-of-consciousness responses in which you use the text simply to discuss unrelated matters. Neither are these responses simply restatements or summaries of the reading. In each response, you will be required to give a clear thesis statement and to develop a clear and appropriate argument. What I am looking for is original, thoughtful, insightful, and deep interaction with the text, the author, and the ideas. Here are some guidelines to help you with your paper. 1. Do not give me a simple “I liked it” or “I didn’t like it.” I am mainly looking for an engagement with these thinkers. Your response needs a critical justification. Give a well-reasoned justification of what you thought of the reading and the argument behind it. Ask yourself: What did you think of the text? Is it a good argument? Is it a bad argument? If it's a bad argument, where's the flaw? With the counter-arguments that you present, make sure that it's justified and consistent. What helps me is to imagine the philosopher sitting in front of you actually saying this to you out loud. How would you respond then? What could you imagine a counter-response would be? By thinking these issues through, your argument can become stronger and improving your thinking as well as your reflection. 2. Don’t fall back on “I believe” or “I feel.” I’m not interested in your autobiography, but the argument for your conclusion. 3. I would suggest by looking at the readings carefully to see what the arguments are. Make sure that we aren’t mis-reading them so that we can have an accurate account of these ideas. Next, pretend that you’re not writing to me, but that you’re writing to someone who’s unfamiliar with the topic. That way, you have to go into more details and examples so that your argument is clear, concise, and explanatory. It’s to ensure that the other person knows the debate and can understand what your argument is and why you're arguing the way you are. Finally, re-read the paper to yourself. You’ll be surprised that by doing so, you’ll catch yourself re-looking at the paper to make the arguments tighter or to restate what you meant. I can’t tell exactly what you mean;; I can only read what you wrote. If something may sound ambiguous, try to clarify it by giving an example or going into more details. These are the tips that I use when I write a philosophy paper. (Please see the sample on p. 10 of the syllabus for an example of very good content;; the response could still be expanded to 1.5 pages.) The question for each week will be posted on D2L by Sunday evening. Grading: 7
With respect to assessment, I draw primarily on the grading rubric;; however, below are a few additional broad criteria that I will take into account in the assessment process. [*I provide extensive feedback on the first reading response, and I give you the opportunity to re-write this response for a grade improvement. The re-write is due exactly one week after you receive back your original response.] (A)Excellent response: creative, insightful, interesting, original, thought-provoking. Excellent thesis and excellent argument. No spelling or grammatical mistakes. (AB) Same as A, but to a lesser degree. (B) Good response: understands the material well, but could be stronger. Good thesis and good argument. (BC) Same as B, but to a lesser degree. (C) OK response: misunderstands parts of the reading and does not contribute much that is interesting or creative. Does not interact well with the reading itself. Weak thesis and weak argument. (CD) Same as C, but to a lesser degree. (D-F) Severely misrepresents the text. No effort to engage the text. Unintelligible. No thesis and no argument. Formatting: These papers are to be typed 1.5-2 pages (please do not turn in papers that are less than 1.5 pages and please do not exceed 2 pages), double-spaced, 12pt. Times New Roman font, standard 1” margins. Improper formatting may lead to a grade reduction.
8
9
Case Studies Worksheet Template 7% of final grade (seven cases total;; five points each) Case Study Number: __________ Position (circle): IN FAVOR OF // AGAINST Name(s): _____________________________________________________________ I. In three to five sentences, describe what you take to be the crucial ethical issue(s) in this case study. II. In three to five sentences, outline what you take to be the strongest reason(s) in support of your position. III. In three to five sentences, outline what you take to be the strongest possible objection to your argument. How could you respond to this objection?
10
Grading Rubric for Course Work Phil 4320: Contemporary Ethical Problems, Marquette University Presentation of Issue
Presentation of Author’s Position
A
The student’s presentation of the issue highlights the important aspects of the issue, clearly defines terms in the issue at stake, and is an unbiased representation of the issue. The student clearly has an excellent grasp of the issue.
The student’s reading of the text is consistently accurate and insightful. The student does not merely restate the author’s position, but also develops it in a way that draws out its most relevant aspects for the thesis of the writing project.
The student’s argumentation proceeds in accordance with traditionally accepted rules of inference, is creative and philosophically insightful. The student makes an excellent argument for a position.
The student’s paper is well organized, well argued, has no grammatical/spelling errors and presents the issue and the author with philosophical creativity. Where applicable, the writing project meets all structural requirements.
AB
The student’s presentation of the issue highlights the important aspects of the issue with minor omissions, defines terms with few minor errors and is an unbiased representation of the issue.
The student’s reading of the text is mostly accurate with a few minor misrepresentations of the author’s position.
The student’s argumentation proceeds in accordance with traditionally accepted rules of inference, is well- reasoned, thoughtful and displays efforts at originality. The student makes a good argument for a position.
The student’s paper is well organized, well argued, has a few grammatical/spelling errors and makes attempts at presenting the author and issue with philosophical
B
The student’s presentation of the issue highlights the important aspects of the issue with omissions, does not clearly define terms, and is an unbiased representation of the issue.
The student’s reading of the text is mostly accurate, with a mixture of minor misrepresentations and more serious errors.
The student’s argumentation proceeds in accordance with traditionally accepted rules of inference and displays a competent understanding of the material. The student makes an acceptable argument for a position.
The student’s paper shows attempts at organization and has the form of an argument, contains some grammatical/spelling errors and does not make any efforts to creatively engage the author or the issue. Where applicable, the writing project meets most structural requirements.
BC
The student’s presentation of the issue highlights the issue at stake, while perhaps missing crucial pieces of the issue, confuses the terms of the issues, and might be presented with bias.
The student’s reading of the text contains some serious misrepresentations.
The student’s argumentation displays some logical errors, some lack of comprehension of content, or is weak or trivial in some respects. The student dedicates insufficient attention to developing an argument.
The student’s paper has organizational and argumentative flaws, contains many grammatical/spelling errors and does not creatively engage the author or issue. Where applicable, the writing project meets most structural requirements.
C
The student’s presentation of the issue highlights the issue at stake, but is missing crucial pieces of information, does not define the terms of the debate and might be presented with bias.
The student’s reading of the text is compromised by a number of misrepresentations.
Same criteria as BC, but to a greater The student’s paper has severe extent. organizational and argumentative flaws, contains many grammatical/spelling errors and does not engage the author or issue. Where applicable, the writing project fails to meet all the structural requirements.
CD
The student’s presentation of the issues misses the important features of the issue, ignores important terms, and is presented with bias.
The student’s reading of the text suffers from fundamental misrepresentations.
The student’s argumentation is riddled with logical fallacies and/or errors in philosophical content.
The student’s paper lacks organization and argumentation, is riddled with grammatical/spelling errors, and does not creatively engage the author or issue.
D-F
The student’s presentation has The student has completely completely misrepresented the misunderstood the text or has issue, ignores crucial features of failed to engage with the text. the debate and/or shows clear bias.
The student does not present an argument.
The student’s paper shows no attempt at organization or argumentation, has consistent grammatical/spelling errors, and does not creatively engage the issue or author.
Argumentation (weighted heavily)
11
Presentation: Grammar, Coherence, Creativity
creativity. Where applicable, the writing project meets all structural requirements.
Note: This is varying and subject to change. Considering that these issues are extensive, we may not cover everything that day. Unless otherwise indicated, all page numbers will come from our textbook, Today’s Moral Issues . Otherwise, the articles will be on D2L.
Introduction to Ethics Date
Readings
Tues. 08/26
First Day: What is Contemporary Ethical Problems? Introduction to the Course and Syllabus
Thurs. 08/28
Reviewing Ethical Theories: Deontology and Utilitarianism – p. 31 42, 43 49, 50 54
Tues. 09/02
Reviewing Ethical Theories: Virtue Ethics, Natural Law, and Ethics of Care – p. 17 22, 23 26, 55 59 Last Day to Drop Without a “W”
Thurs. 09/04
Setup for Class: Evidentialism, Argumentation, and Letting Go of False Beliefs – William Clifford, “The Ethics of Belief” Maria Konnikova, “I Don’t Want to Be Right”
The Moral Status of Animals Date
Readings
Tues. 09/09
Animals can feel Pain – Peter Singer, p. 123 129
Thurs. 09/11
Animal Experimentation – R.G. Frey, p. 136 141 (Note: start at “Moral Community” and end before the “Conclusion”)
Tues. 09/16
Animals have Rights – Tom Regan, “A Defense of Animal Rights” Cheryl, Guest Speaker
Thurs. 09/18
Do Animals Have Rights? Carl Cohen, “Do Animals Have Rights?”
Tues. 09/23
Case Studies #1
Part II: Liberty Date
Readings
Thurs. 09/25
Liberty – John Stuart Mill, p. 168 176
Tues. 09/30
Developing Virtue, Purpose of Laws, and Paternalism – Aristotle, p. 165 166 Gerald Dworkin, “Paternalism”
Same Sex Relations and Marriage Date
Readings
Thurs. 10/02
Samesex Relations are Unnatural – The Vatican, “Declaration on Sexual Ethics”
Tues. 10/07
Shared Moral Codes is Vital to Society – Stanley Kurz, p. 102 105 SameSex Marriage is Not a Civil Rights Issue – Richard McDonough, “Is SameSex Marriage an EqualRights Issue?”
Thurs. 10/09
What does “Unnatural” Mean Anyway? – John Corvino, “Why Shouldn’t Tommy and Jim Have Sex? A Defense of Homosexuality”
Tues. 10/14
SameSex Marriage Will Weaken Marriage – Maggie Gallagher, p. 112 118 Case Studies #2
Thurs. 10/16
NO SCHOOL
Drug Usage and Legalization Date
Readings
Tues. 10/21
There’s No Problem with Drugs – Thomas Szasz, “The Ethics of Addiction” Milton Friedman, p. 178 179 EXAM #1 (From 10/21 to 10/26)
Thurs. 10/23
Drugs are Bad, M’kay – William J. Bennett, p. 181 182 James Q. Wilson, p. 190 196
Tues. 10/28
Drugs and Context – Daniel Shapiro, “Addiction and Drug Policy”
Thurs. 10/30
Drugs are Awesome – Douglas N. Husak, “A Moral Right to Use Drugs” Ethan A. Nadelmann, p. 184 189
Tues. 11/04
Case Studies #3
Sexual Ethics Date
Readings
Thus. 11/06
Sex Should be Based on Pleasure – Bertrand Russell, “Our Sexual Ethics” – p. 61 65
Tues. 11/11
Sex Should be Based on Consent – Thomas A. Mappes, “Sexual Morality and the Concept of Using Another Person” – p. 66 72
Thurs. 11/13
Sex Should be Based on the Virtues – Roger Scurton from Sexual Desire – p. 73 76
Tues. 11/18
There is no Special Meaning Behind Sex – Alan Goldman, “Plain Sex”
The Ethics of Humor Date
Readings
Thurs. 11/20
Introducing Theories of Humor Selections from Comic Relief EXAM #2 (from 11/20 to 11/24)
Tues. 11/25
Case Studies #4 and #5
Thurs. 11/27
NO SCHOOL
Tues. 12/02
Racist and Sexist Jokes are Immoral – Michael Philips, “Racist Acts and Racist Humor” Laughing at Jokes and Your Attitudes – Ronald de Sousa, “When is it Wrong to Laugh?” TURN IN OPTIONAL FINAL PAPER DRAFT
Thurs. 12/04
Sousa cont. Offensive Jokes can be Funny – David Benatar
Final Paper Due Dec. 10
