I have attached the syllabus where you will find the recommended books to aid in completing this assignment.
Note that YOU MUST HAVE THE REQUIRED BOOKS BEFORE YOU SEND YOUR OFFER TO WORK THE ASSIGNMENT. If I find out that you do not have the sufficient resources, I will mark you as a potential scammer and you will be reported to an administrator.
With that being said, here is what I need help with:
• Read the first five chapters of Mere Christianity (Lewis pages 15-37 in the Signature softcover). Try to outline the flow of his argumentation as you make notes. Look for the big picture as well as the points he makes in getting there. (You get a helpful overview of some of the same concepts/issues that Lewis addresses in the presentation on “Relativism.”)
• As always, keep in mind the purpose of this assignment: you are to demonstrate that you understand C. S. Lewis’ view of the Moral Law, and why he thinks contrary views fail. This should jump out at me when I read your thread. Beyond the generality, you also need to meet the specific things mentioned below….
• You should divide your Thread into two portions. The first and longest part of what you’ll write will be a summary of Lewis’ main objections to moral relativism. (You should use that bold heading for this first part.)
o When you read the assigned pages, you will not actually see the phrase “moral relativism.” So just think about what Lewis is up to: trying to convince us that moral law is objectively real. To do this, he tackles the major counter-claims that moral relativists would have, objecting to them one by one. You have to interpret each. Those are the “objections” you are summarizing. You will critique/defend him later, but right here just show that you accurately understand his positions.
o Along the way, be sure to address his distinction between moral laws and moral law . If you are having trouble finding that, here is a hint. One of the relativist claims, that particular moral laws differ between cultures, is objected to by Lewis on two grounds: (1) it is a historical exaggeration, and (2) beneath the many particular laws there is an underlying law, which is… what? This is what I want you to discover!
I want to see, under this first heading, 250 words minimum.
• Next, state your own position on moral relativism. (You should use the bold heading, My position, for this second part.) It is essential that you state a logical case (not just unsupported opinion/feeling) forwhether or not it makes any difference (in ethics) if there is “moral law” which is objective rather than merely subjective . Under this second heading spend 100 words minimum to articulate your case clearly and with precision.
• In total, you will write at least 350 words for your Thread. But that’s the very minimum. There is no maximum.
• Integrating other course material (that is relevant, not forced) into the discussion is one characteristic of excellence in DB threads. However, to avoid plagiarism, be sure to properly reference and cite all sources, including outside material. Never present someone else’s work as your own.