Scenario: Make two contrasting normative arguments about what one oughtto do. Both arguments will be about the same topic; thus, at least one of the arguments will contradict your personal opinion. You will compose the arguments in standard form. That is, your argument will be a numbered list of statements ending in a conclusion. Each statement, including the conclusion, will be a single sentence that asserts something is true or infers a truth from earlier statements. Do not write your arguments as an essay.
Step 1: Choose a Topic
Choose one topic from the following list:
Should people eat meat?
Should marijuana be legal?
Should pet cats be kept indoors?
Should zoos exist?
Should customers leave a tip in a coffee shop?
Should seat belt wearing be mandatory?
Should children be required to take gym/physical education?
Should public roads be used for private car parking?
Step 2. Develop Logically Contradictory Normative Conclusions
Develop two normative arguments that contradict each other. You do not need to agree with both (or either!) conclusions, but you should be able to logically support both of them. Please note that the conclusion should only be one sentence, as shown in the example below.
Argument 1: Children should be required to take gym/physical education.
Physical activity is essential for healthy development in children.
Gym/physical education classes provide a structured environment for children to engage in physical activity.
Children who are not required to take gym/physical education are less likely to be physically active.
Therefore, children should be required to take gym/physical education.
Argument 2: Children should not be required to take gym/physical education.
Children have a right to choose their own activities and interests.
Requiring children to take gym/physical education restricts their freedom of choice.
There are many other ways for children to be physically active outside of school.
Therefore, children should not be required to take gym/physical education.