>Article writing homework help.
Topic: Compare and contrast metaethical theories
Thread: Now that you have learned about competing ethical theories, write a 500-600 word thread that compares and contrasts a Christian ethical theory with a competing ethical theory. Since we have already looked at ethical relativism in DB 1, you should choose from any theory in the Moral Reasoning textbook except ethical relativism. That means you can choose from Virtue Ethics, Natural Law, Ethical Egoism, Utilitarianism, Duty Ethics, Social Contract Theory, and Moral Realism (or any combination of these) in contrast to a Christian ethical theory such as Divine Command, Divine Nature, or Christian Revelational Ethics (or a combination of these).
- How do these each system define “the good?” How does each claim to know “the good?”
- What, if anything, do these systems have in common? What, if anything, are their key differences?
- Which theory do you think is the stronger ethical theory? Defend your answer. This final question should take up the majority of your thread.
Be sure to carefully define your terms. You are expected to support your position with rational arguments, fitting examples, and expert sources. Any quotes or information used from sources other than yourself must be cited using footnotes in current Turabian format and will not count towards the total word count.
You will be penalized for falling short or exceeding the word count. This is a university-level writing assignment and therefore it must be carefully proofread, free of grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Do not use slang, emoticons, or abbreviations (as if you are texting or sending an email to a friend).
You are expected to cite at least one academic source in your DB threads and replies. These sources would include the course textbooks, books, journal articles, periodicals, and similar publications. Sources such as Wikipedia and online dictionaries do not count as academic sources and should not be used. Biblical references are encouraged, but will not count as an academic source.