5 marks are alotted for accurately stating Rachel’s thesis, in your own words, as to the value of privacy.5 marks are allotted for describing, in your own words, the argument(s) that he gives to support this conclusion. You must clearly describe how the argument is connected to Rachel’s thesis.5 marks are allotted for an original argument of your own, for or against Rachel’s thesis.NOTE 1: Many students new to writing philosophy papers mistake an example for an argument. An example supports an argument that has already been made, whereas an original argument gives a new reason for the same conclusion.i.e. If an author writes: “You shouldn’t eat junk food because it is not healthy.” and you add “My cousin ate junk food and he is unhealthy”, this is not a new argument, it is an example of what the author is describing. Whereas, if you say “If you eat junk food your teeth will fall out and you will lose your beautiful smile.” Now, you have a new reason/argument for the same conclusion ‘Don’t eat junk food’.NOTE 2: Rachels considers the views of other philosophers in his paper and goes on to show how these views are incorrect or insufficient. Be careful not to confuse his presentation of these views with his own view that he is arguing for in this paper.500-word maximum: 1 mark deducted for each 10 words over (509 words = no penalty, 510 words = -1 mark)Write discursively (not in point form) but do not write an introduction.Do not use quotations, but do use citations. Everything must be written in your own words but cite the page numbers from the reading to support your summary, i.e. (Rachels, 27).There are no specific marks allotted for spelling and grammar but marks will be deducted when this interferes with clarity.Readings:http://www.jstor.org.cat1.lib.trentu.ca:8080/stable/2265077
