business ethics and social responsibility

Order Description

Unit 2 Essay: A Framework
An Objective Overview of a Current Debate

Law clerks regularly write “legal memos” to help prepare sitting judges for upcoming court cases. Such memos need to describe the disagreement thoroughly and

objectively (without bias/opinion) and to make sure the judge is fully informed about all of the persuasive arguments on both sides. For “legal memos” clerks also

provide a summary of important court cases and legal opinions that might provide insight or set important precedents the judge should be aware of.

For our Unit 2 essay, I’m essentially asking you to write a “legal memo” about a controversial issue (inspired by Radioactive), which means you’ll need to approach

this carefully:

This is not a persuasive essay, this is an “Objective Overview of a Current Debate” so save the emotion, the persuasion, and the solutions for the Unit 3 essay. Be an

UNBIASED reporter!
This must be a CONTROVERSY and not a 1-sided issue (inspired by Radioactive, hopefully).
You must find “status quo” research that helps us understand the CURRENT state of your debate now, in 2015 and what the controversy is today (like the smaller nuclear

weapons we use today as bunker busters, for example, and NOT a 80 year old debate about Hiroshima)
You must be THOROUGH when detailing the Pro and Con arguments, and not just state the obvious (this should take you a full page alone, if you’re being thorough and

fair to both sides).
You must be THOUGHTFUL with your analysis without choosing a side, so consider my advice about how to use the Asma, Sandel and Singer “perspectives.”

The Framework for the Rough and Final Drafts:

Explain the debate itself and use research about the “status quo” to provide context. Get us up to speed on the issue with credible and current research. You may need

to provide information about how nuclear waste is disposed/stored, or what laws surround animal testing, for example.
Detail all of the persuasive arguments on both sides of the issue. Be very thorough, and be fair to both sides. Just present the most important arguments used by both

sides and explain them individually.
Draw conclusions about the values in conflict and/or the “stakes” or “stakeholders” in conflict, anything that can provide some analysis of what people are “fighting

for” on both sides of an issue.
In other words: What does each side believe is at stake? What values are in conflict? Stay unbiased here- just report based on what you observe to be the “bigger

picture.”
Give each thinker (Asma, Sandel, Singer) their own paragraph, and in each paragraph consider how each would respond to the specific arguments and larger values in

conflict on both sides, using their own words, directly or indirectly.

 ??