CRITICAL POSTION PAPERThis paper topic is on a theoretical issue (e.g., intrinsic value, anthropocentrism). In this paper you need to identify your main thesis, define the main terms used to describe it and develop a supporting argument.this assignment is supposed to be a critical discussion of a theoretical issue. This means it will resemble the various readings in this course. You need to choose an issue like anthropocentrism, or sustainability, or animal rights/value, or ecocentrism, or any of the other issues discussed in the readings. For example, you mention Baxter in your paper so you could use his paper as the basis of your discussion. You would then explain his position, evaluate his arguments, discuss how it is or might be criticized, and then give an overall evaluation of his view. “you will need to explain what he says, identify and discuss the arguments he makes to support his position, evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of these arguments, consider what might be said to make his position stronger, consider what might be said against her position or against any of his particular arguments (preferably by discussing what is said against his view by other authors), and then end with your assessment of what you have just discussed. Is this a reasonable position? Is it necessary for or does it contribute to the topic? Is it more or less effective than other approaches?”PAPER NEEDS TO BE ABOUT 2000 WORDSYOU NEED TO BE VERY SPECIFIC IN TERMS OF POSITION AND ARGUMENTS.ATTACHED BELOW IS THE RUBRIC, ARTICLE, AND SAMPLE PAPER
CRITICAL POSTION PAPER This paper topic is on a theoretical issue (e.g., intrinsic value, anthropocentrism). In this paper you need to identify your main thesis, define the main terms used to describe
A Critical Essay on Ecological Feminism 11 A Critical Essay on Ecological Feminism May 24th, 2020 Phil 375 – AU A Critical Essay on Ecological Feminism Ecofeminism makes one of the latest forms of feminism, and it comes out as one of the most significant varieties. The combination of ecological concerns and feminism brings about a unique appeal that presents the opportunity to end the suffering and oppression of women, along with nature oppression. Ecofeminism claims that human culture has contributed to the development of a connection between nature and women, which has some consequences. Nonetheless, even though ecological feminism seems logical and appealing, the argument presented by Ecofeminism has some problems. The problems associated with the point of view of Ecofeminism challenge the status of ecological feminism as a defensible philosophical ideology. In this sense, this essay seeks to critically evaluate the idea of ecological feminism by focusing on its strengths, weaknesses, along with consideration of Karen Warren’s perspective of ecological feminism. ‘The Power and the Promise of Ecological Feminism’ presented by Karen Warren (1990) discusses Ecofeminism and all issues associated with ecological feminism. Warren explains and argues in favor of the Ecofeminism perspective and she opines that humans are wrong in taking control of nature whether partly or wholly. The ecological feminism point of view presents that dominating nature is wrong just like dominating women by subjecting them to the purposes and will of men. Warren (1990) proceeds to explain that feminists must come forward and object to domination of women and nature since both are one and the same and are founded on similar domination logic. The continuous enlightenment of women promoted the start of discrepant varieties of feminism. It offered a model that points out the wrong of men’s domination of women as a form of injustice. However, from this perspective, nature domination cannot be linked to the domination of women by men in society as Warren supposes. Karen Warren (1990) presents an argument that feminism and ecology are interconnected and are based on the notion that ending the oppression of humans will consequently end nature exploitation. The idea that human culture stands to be superior compared to non-human nature, from a moral perspective, justifies the fact that humans dominate and mistreat nature. Warren tends to explain the fact that oppression is linked to the assumed or perceived inferiority of women in the society. For this reason, Ecofeminism presents that the association of women with nature brings about the consideration of women as an inferior party to the masculine party. Such an argument makes its point in the sense that since nature is contemplated as inferior to culture in the culture-nature connection, then women are considered inferior in the women-men connection. For this reason, the two connections both contribute to the oppression of women and the abuse of nature as they are both considered inferior. Therefore, it becomes impossible to achieve the objectives of feminists without tackling the issues of nature exploitation. In other words, nature and women’s connection cannot be altered, and to end the oppression of either, or then both must be accomplished in society. However, most feminists reject this idea that the oppression of women and nature cannot be achieved. The goal of ecological feminism, as presented by Warren (1990), is to establish a new attitude when looking at nature, an attitude that perceives the association between nature and humans rather than viewing nature as a resource meant to facilitate the needs of humans. The motive behind coming up with such an attitude is to eliminate the abuse of nature and oppression of women. The interconnection between nature and women, as presented by the Ecofeminism argument, is brought about by patriarchal ideology. In this sense, any framework that confirms the existence of a connection between the two is also confirming the existence of the patriarchal ideology . Such an argument may seem unreasonable, but it is a credible logic as it turns on the identification of some characteristics of a patriarchal model as describing and other features as opportunistic in the sense that patriarchy promotes the oppression of women in the society. On the contrary, the feminist frameworks stand to challenge the patriarchy as a system that destroys the ideology. For this reason, any framework that affirms the existence of a connection between nature and women ceases to be feminist (Ruether, 2004). In this sense, it is logical to reject some theories that tend to support Ecofeminism while acknowledging the fact that a patriarchy ideology exists along with the interconnection between women and nature. Several reasons can be presented in rejecting the Ecofeminism ideologies. To begin with, evidence points out that the claim that women are better nature carers due to their feminine features is wrong. The nature of women and their ways of life itself contributes to the abuse of nature. For example, the spray cans that women use for their hair contributes to the damage of the ozone layer due to the fumes (Pellow, 2014). Additionally, the fact that cosmetics are usually tested on animals points out why the Ecofeminism theories do not stand a chance to be accepted. Argument Against Ecological Feminism Ecofeminism is an ideology that seeks to unify the concern for ecology and its future, along with the concern for women’s status in society. However, this essay presents an argument against ecological feminism by pointing out that it comes out as a false seduction and a philosophically irrational framework. The central claim made by ecological feminism is that due to socio-historical connection involving nature and women, feminism and ecology are interconnected. For this reason, both must take in and contemplate the other’s ideology and objectives to be politically active or philosophically absolute in the sense that the issue of interconnection between nature and women can be proved scientifically and through political discourses. The ecological feminism claim can be argued against from two central criticisms. First, that the argument of essential embracing is not actual. Secondly, that the claim made by Ecofeminism is not complete and displays some inconsistency. The first criticism of ecological feminism is based on the theory’s provision that feminism and ecology must work hand in hand to accomplish the set objectives. That is, the oppression of women will not be eliminated without eliminating abuse of nature and that abuse of nature cannot be eliminated without doing away with the oppression of women. Such an argument from ecological feminism is simply not valid since it is possible to think that the ecology objectives can be met without meeting those of feminism ( Kogilavani & Leelavathi, 2014). Additionally, it is imaginable that society can come to the comprehension that people can avoid the destruction of self if the people change the way they treat their natural world. Moreover, it is also conceivable that, due to this understanding, people can change their behaviors, reforming behaviors that bring destruction to nature. As an illustration, people can reduce the use of electricity, eliminate the production of harmful chemicals, and execute recycling initiatives. For this reason, it is imaginable that such procedures can be completed without ending the oppression of women in the least. In reality, if the role of feminism is maintained and expanded to accommodate the changes in the ideology, the lives of women in society could end up becoming worse (Mayer, 1994). Similarly, it is conceivable that the objectives of feminism could be reached without meeting the ecology objectives. However, there is a possibility that the occurrence of feminism or the ecological revolution may positively influence either. Even so, this does not change the fact that the interconnection of nature and women does not have to happen at the same time. The second criticism opposes the argument that the nature-women connection needs the domination of nature and women to be done away with at one time, but for different reasons. Such a proposition is inconsistent with the first claim of ecological feminism that the nature-women connection is entirely sociological and historical. In this sense, if the connection between women and nature has been created by sociological processes, then it should be dismantled in a similar way (Cuomo, 1992). Cuomo seeks to explain that sociological processes can help do away with the relationship between nature and women if they are responsible for its existence. Even Karen Warren points out that the feminist ideologies that fail to affirm the interconnection between nature and women are incomplete and cannot be considered. Both criticisms point out the incomplete nature of the ecological feminism theory and present the philosophical unsoundness and the fundamental flaws of Ecofeminism. Ecological feminism should be taken into consideration, particularly feminism and its connection to ecology. The revelation and examination of the nature-women connection have a significant to establish the feminist ideology. For instance, on a simplistic magnitude, the ideology proposes an easy answer for the ending of women’s oppression in the sense that, if the oppression of women is brought about by their connection with nature, then eliminating that association will mean that women will not be oppressed. Sandilands (1999) presents that the link between abuse of nature and oppression of women can be done away with through elimination of the connection. Additionally, on an in-depth magnitude, ecological feminism points out that all feminist theories must focus on the connections between attitudes regarding the issue. Ecological feminism is not the answer but should be contemplated at all times. Ecofeminism contributes to environmentalism in the sense that it views environmentalism along with the nature of women relationship as a basis to the practice of ecological feminism. Ecofeminism provides an observation of the reasons for the oppression of women and the abuse of nature. Perhaps, ecological feminism can be best comprehended as an interesting observation that offers more regarding society challenges. In conclusion, Ecofeminism, as presented by Karen Warren, comes out as a promise of other ways of conceiving that affirm instead of critiquing the ideology of feminism and ecology. However, several issues must be covered under the issue of ecological feminism. For example, besides presenting a world that considers changing the definition of nature, its essence to humans, and how it is dealt with the framework must present how and why such should be dealt with to offer a solution to end the oppression of women in the society and the abuse of nature. Solving the issues that affect nature can contribute to solving the issue of the oppression of women in society. In this sense, ecological feminism tends to provide a solution to solve severe societal problems, which are the abuse of nature and oppression of women. Meeting the objectives and goals of ecology will contribute to the meeting of feminist goals. In summary, ecological feminism seeks to present new ways that help the world to reason for a creative conceiving procedure to come up with prosperous ways of dealing with modern societal and environmental challenges. References Cuomo, C. J. (1992). Unraveling the problems in Ecofeminism. Environmental Ethics, 14(4), 351-363. Kogilavani, B., & Leelavathi, M. (2014). The Power and Promise of Ecological Feminism in Gloria Naylor’s Novel “The Women and The Brewster Place” and” Mama Day. “. IMPACT: International Journal of Research in Humanities, Arts and Literature, 2, 169-172. Pellow, D. N. (2014). Total liberation: The power and promise of animal rights and the radical earth movement. U of Minnesota Press. Ruether, R. R. (2004). Integrating ecofeminism, globalization, and world religions. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Sandilands, C. (1999). The good-natured feminist: Ecofeminism and the quest for democracy. U of Minnesota Press. Warren, K. J. (1990). The power and the promise of ecological feminism. Environmental ethics, 12(2), 125-146. Mayer ’94, Elizabeth, “The Power and the Promise of Ecofeminism, Reconsidered” (1994). Honors Projects. Paper 4. http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/phil_honproj/4
CRITICAL POSTION PAPER This paper topic is on a theoretical issue (e.g., intrinsic value, anthropocentrism). In this paper you need to identify your main thesis, define the main terms used to describe
MARKING RUBRIC FOR PAPERS Christina Hendricks’ courses The following provides a rough guide for what “A” papers, “B” papers, etc., might look like, according to the categories in the “Guidelines for Writing Papers” document. Note that the statements below are not exhaustive for what may occur in each category, but serve as common examples. The most important categories are “Strength of Argument” and “Insight,” though problems in “Organization” can weaken your argument because the reader may not be able to follow or understand it. This rubric is not intended to allow you to calculate your mark for the paper as a whole based on how you did in each category, as marking papers is not mechanical enough to allow for that. Rather, this should be considered a tool to help you think about what should be in your paper before you turn it in, and what you might need to work on for the future. Grade Strength of argument Insight Organization Style & Mechanics A 1. Thesis is supported excellently—the arguments in the essay work well together to support the thesis; the claims in these arguments are themselves supported well 2. No significant objections emerge upon reading, or they are answered well 3. Adequate textual evidence provided for your claims about the text 4. No inaccuracies in discussion of texts, &/or non-standard interpretations defended well 5. Explanation of arguments in texts adequate to clarify the views, or to use them well in your argument, or for audience requirement 1. Creative, original thesis, argument, and interpretations of texts that spark new ideas and questions in the reader beyond what is in the texts and lectures; takes risks and reflects deep thought and effort 2. The insightful thesis, argument, interpretations are supported well and/or fit well with the text(s) 1. Thesis is clear and accurately reflects the main argument in the essay 2. Points are linked in an order that reveals well how they work together to support the thesis 3. Paragraphs are coherent 4. Excellent transitions btwn. paragraphs 5. There is an engaging introduction and a conclusion that rounds out the essay well 1. Few to no typos, spelling, grammatical or punctuation mistakes 2. Style is clear and easy to read; sentences flow well; little to no awkward wording 3. Citations given where needed and formatted consistently (and accurately, if a particular citation format is required) 4. All parts of the topic addressed (if applicable) B 1. Thesis is mostly defended well, but a few important claims in the thesis or in the arguments for it need further support or explanation 2. A minor objection seems immediately clear that weakens the argument, and that should be addressed 3. Adequate textual evidence provided for your claims about the text(s) in most places, but need more in a few places 4. Accurate discussion of claims and arguments from texts, but could use more explanation to clarify the views, or to use them well in your argument, or for audience requirement 5. Controversial or non-standard interpretations of texts need more defense by reference to the texts 1. Thesis, argument, &/or interpretations of texts reflect some original thought, but not as much as there could be 2. There are some issues with how well the creative solution to a proposed problem fits with the text(s) or works as an argument 1. The thesis statement is vague, or the essay argues something slightly different 2. One or two paragraphs could be better organized internally or moved to improve the argument flow 3. Missing some transitions btwn. paragraphs 4. One or two problems with intro or conclusion (e.g., one includes parts of arguments that should be in body of essay) 1. Some typos, spelling, grammatical, or punctuation mistakes 2. A few awkward sentences or words 3. Citations given where needed and formatted consistently (and accurately, if a particular citation format is required) 4. All parts of the topic addressed (if applicable) Grade Strength of argument Insight Organization Style & Mechanics C 1. Some parts of the thesis need further evidence/argument to support them (either textual evidence or other evidence/arguments) 2. Several claims are given too quickly, with little support (by reference to the text or through other arguments) 3. Two or more points in the argument are in tension (though this might be resolved, the essay doesn’t discuss how) 4. Numerous and/or very serious objections to the argument weaken it considerably and need to be addressed 5. A few inaccuracies in the discussion of the texts 6. Controversial or non-standard interpretations of texts not defended adequately 7. Explanation of the texts inadequate to clarify the views, or to use them well in your argument, or for audience requirement 1. The arguments in the essay mainly repeat what was given in the texts and/or class lectures and discussions, rather than reflecting original ideas 2. The essay attempts to provide an original argument, but it is not well supported or explained 1. Thesis is hard to find and/or difficult to understand 2. The essay sometimes goes off track and makes points that are largely disconnected from the main thesis 3. It’s hard to see why the paragraphs are organized in the way they are, though with effort the reader can see how they support the thesis 4. Serious problems with intro or conclusion (e.g., both include arguments that should be in the body of the essay; they don’t read like intro or conclusion at all) 1. Somewhat frequent typos, spelling, grammatical, or punctuation mistakes 2. Numerous awkward sentences and words 3. Some citations not given where needed and/or formatted incorrectly 4. Some parts of the topic not addressed well D or F 1. The points given in the paper do not work to support the thesis, or there are major gaps in the argument where aspects of the thesis are left undefended (whether by reference to the texts, other evidence, or other arguments) 2. It is difficult to tell what you are arguing for and how 3. There are objections that weaken the argument for the thesis so much that thorough revision is required to fix it 4. Parts of the argument are inconsistent with other parts and it’s not clear how this could be resolved without major revision 5. Many points in discussion of texts are inaccurate 6. Controversial interpretations hardly or not defended at all by reference to texts 7. Little to no explanation of the texts to clarify the views, or to use them well in your argument, or for audience requirement 1. The essay attempts to repeat arguments or ideas from texts or lectures/discussions, or attempts to give an original argument, but shows a serious lack of understanding of the material 1. There is not a clear thesis statement 2. Points seem to be listed somewhat randomly rather than having clear transitions and a logical order 3. The essay is not broken up into coherent paragraphs for different points 4. There is no intro or no conclusion; (e.g., the essay may stop seemingly in the middle of an argument) 1. Enough typos, spelling, grammatical or punctuation mistakes to make the essay difficult to read at times 2. Very frequent awkward sentences or words 3. Few to no citations given where needed and/or formatted incorrectly 4. Several parts of the topic not addressed at all 80% to 100% (A- to A+) Exceptional performance: strong evidence of original thinking; good organization; capacity to analyze and synthesize; superior grasp of subject matter with sound critical evaluations; evidence of extensive knowledge base. 68% to 79% (B- to B+) Competent performance: evidence of grasp of subject matter; some evidence of critical capacity and analytic ability; reasonable understanding of relevant issues; evidence of familiarity with the literature. 50% to 67% (D to C+) Adequate performance: understanding of the subject matter; ability to develop solutions to simple problems in the material; acceptable but uninspired work, not seriously faulty but lacking style and vigour. 00% to 49% (F) Inadequate performance: little or no evidence of understanding of the subject matter; weakness in critical and analytic stills; limited or irrelevant use of the literature.
Why Choose Us
- 100% non-plagiarized Papers
- 24/7 /365 Service Available
- Affordable Prices
- Any Paper, Urgency, and Subject
- Will complete your papers in 6 hours
- On-time Delivery
- Money-back and Privacy guarantees
- Unlimited Amendments upon request
- Satisfaction guarantee
How it Works
- Click on the “Place Order” tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
- Fill in your paper’s requirements in the "PAPER DETAILS" section.
- Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
- Click “CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
- From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.