Write an argumentative essay that responds to "Lifeboat Ethics" by Garrett Hardin. The point of the essay is to refute a counter
claim and offer your own claim as an alternative. In this case, the counterclaim is Hardin's main argument. Your arguments — whether you're promoting your own claim or arguing against the counterclaim — must be supported by evidence from sources you find through research. Each source must be credible and relevant to your topic. When responding to the counterclaim, you must take care to be respectful and fair. Your essay should include the following elements: Your response to the counterclaim in Garrett Hardin's "Lifeboat Ethics" A claim that opposes the counterclaim Evidence from researched sources that supports your claim and helps you refute the counterclaim An introduction that grabs readers' attention and introduces both the claim and the counterclaim Body paragraphs that go into detail about your position and that present the evidence you found in sources A conclusion paragraph that reminds readers of your arguments and leaves a lasting impression You should have completed a draft of this assignment in the activity before this one. If you haven't done so, go back and complete that activity now. Giving away 100 points to whoever does it.
Garrett Hardin argues for a very harsh thesis: we simply should not provide aid to people in poor countries. His argument is consequentialist: he claims that the net result of doing so would be negative -- would in fact be courting large-scale disaster. One of the things that we will notice about Hardin's essay, however, is that whether he is right or wrong, he paints with a very broad brush. This makes it a good essay for the honing of your philosophical skills; you should notice that there are many places where the reasoning procees with less than total care. Hardin begins with metaphors. He points out that while the metaphor of earth as a grand spaceship has a certain popularity (or did 23 years ago) .
