Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, At affordable rates

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now

This longer argumentative essay is 2500-3000 words in length (not including title page and bibliography). It will require more research than the first essay. 3000 words is your maximum limit. It must include a thesis statement and an argument defending it. Define all key terms and relevant conceptual distinctions. In defending your thesis, acknowledge and attempt to rebut at least two strong counterarguments to the position you take. You must engage with the readings in the course text that pertain to your chosen topic. Specify the influence of any of the general normative theories where relevant. See the handbook for writing a philosophy essay noted below. It is posted on the eClass course website. The essay must be double-spaced and include a title page. The title page must contain your name, the course title as written above, the title of your paper, its word count and date of submission, and your TA’s name. Please number your pages starting with the first page of text. All quotations and sources should be cited as either footnotes, endnotes or parenthetical references. Avoid block quotations, i.e., quotations of more than 40 words from a source. Paraphrase carefully. You must also use at least two other philosophic sources that are not listed in the course syllabus. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Online is an acceptable internet source. Otherwise, stick with the Yorku Library system. Do not use blogs or study-guide web pages. The additional sources must be either philosophic books or philosophic journal articles. Please include a bibliography for all sources you cite in the paper. Remember, the bibliography and the title page are not included in your word count. Pick one of the questions!
1. Should we legalize, or at least decriminalize, the use of other recreational drugs besides cannabis, e.g., cocaine, heroin, or ecstasy? If so, then why? If not, then why not? Defend your answer by starting with the analyses of James Q. Wilson and Douglas Husak. Clarify how your analysis relates to John Stuart Mill’s thinking in “Freedom of Action,” i.e., does your analysis reflect Mill’s thinking or contest it?
2. Should freedom of speech and expression allow the unregulated use of hate speech and racist epithets? If so, then why? If not, then why not and how should this issue be regulated? Make sure you address the offense/harm distinction, and clarify how your analysis relates to John Stuart Mill’s thinking in “Freedom of Thought and Discussion,” i.e., does your analysis reflect Mill’s thinking or contest it?
State your own opinions! don’t quote most of the work!!!!!
the book attached is the 4th edition it should be ok but some minor pages changes. the required is 5th
read this for more info: http://www.yorku.ca/hjackman/Teaching/handbook.pdf

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now