COMMUNICATING MORAL ISSUES

PHIL 213  Spring 2024  Google Drive link here

Professor Mary G. Nickel Sign up for office hours here

[email protected] in Professor Nickel’s office, Close-Hipp 523

PHIL 213 is a component of Carolina Core. This course satisfies the Effective, Engaged, and Persuasive
Spoken Communication (CMS) and Values, Ethics, and Social Responsibility (VSR) requirements.

Overview of the Course

Disagreement is an inevitable part of American life today. Conflicts abound about when life starts and
ends, about what we owe to our fellow citizens and all humans, and about what kinds of limits might
fairly be put on our freedom. They resurface on our TVs and in our reels, on our campuses and at our
dinner tables. Somehow, they seem to intensify by the day, or even the minute.

Yet, despite these enduring disagreements, we must—somehow—live together. How might we

navigate these difficult topics? How might we figure out the rules that could govern our shared lives?
Most importantly: how can we even begin to talk about these contentious topics when the
temperature is already so high? This course invites students to reflect on these questions. Over the
course of fourteen weeks, we will learn about some of the most controversial topics in ethics today. At
the same time, we will learn about the means by which we might talk about these issues together. Our
major goal will be to learn how to listen to and move one another.

The course will focus on four major human values: dignity, freedom, community, and equality. We
will think about why those values are valuable; we will discuss ethical debates that relate to each
value; and we will also consider how we might embody these values in our speech and writing.

Objectives for the Course

Students who successfully complete this course will be able to:
 identify the source and function of values through the investigation of contemporary moral issues;
 demonstrate an understanding of the importance of values and ethics for the self and for
contemporary society;
 reflect on how values shape personal and community ethics, and decision-making;
 identify and demonstrate appropriate means of communication for varied audiences and purposes;
 demonstrate the ability to reason clearly in speaking and writing to inform, persuade and exchange
views; and
 articulate a critical and informed position on an issue and engage in productive and responsible
intellectual exchanges that demonstrate the ability to grasp and respond to other positions as well
as set forth their own.

In + beyond the classroom

Attendance. You are expected to be in class. Attendance will be monitored with sign-in sheets that you
will sign as you walk in. If you need to miss class for an excusable reason, fill out this form to let me
know. I will follow up with you about whether and how to make up for your absence. You will be
completing self-evaluations halfway through the semester and at the end of the semester. If you have
excessive absences, I expect that your self-evaluation grade will reflect those absences.

Communicating Moral Issues  Spring 2024 1

Technology. Devices can impede learning. They can also enhance it. I expect students to be honest
with themselves about when and how to use devices to facilitate their learning in class. Please also be
aware of the needs of those around you. Note that we will use our devices in class to collaborate and
engage with one another at times. Students should let me know if this is an issue for any reason.

Communication with the professor. I am here for you! Please schedule an appointment here if you
would like to meet with me, or email me about another time that would be better for you. You can
email me at [email protected]. Note that it may take up to 24 hours for me to respond, so plan ahead if
there is a pressing matter that you need to email me about regarding an upcoming assignment.

Ten classroom commandments:

1. This classroom is your classroom, a place where you might be formed together.
2. Thou shalt not dominate discussion but ensure that all are able to contribute.
3. Thou shalt not feel the need to be profound or to impress anyone.
4. Thou shalt respect one another’s time by being concise in language and by ending on time.
5. Thou shalt honor one another: show one another decency and charity.
6. Thou shalt not hesitate to ask a simple, unsophisticated, or clarifying question.
7. Thou shalt not assume others’ knowledge of material that has not been assigned in class.
8. Thou shalt not overlook the role of various biases (like gender biases) in discussion.
9. Thou shalt not dismiss your opponents’ views wholesale.
10. Thou shalt not hesitate to acknowledge your own mistakes.
If you feel your classmates have broken these rules, you may mention that in class or any time
thereafter. You may let the professor know anonymously about troubling patterns using this form.

Inclusion and diversity in the course

Mutual dependence and expertise. All of us ought to remember, as we read and discuss the material,
that we can and must lean on one another as we try to make sense of the moral issues at hand. To be
clear, no student is expected to be an expert in ethics or theory. Yet we must also remember that
insights don’t always come from experts. We always have something to learn from one another.

Diversity statement. It is my goal to create a learning environment that empowers students of diverse
backgrounds and perspectives to participate and become ethical citizens of the world. This can be
difficult to do, frankly, in the world in which we live, where the views of white, male, straight,
cisgender, able-bodied, and wealthy persons are privileged. I have worked resolutely to create a
course that addresses this issue. However, as someone shaped by that same world, I know that my
own enjoyment of privilege means that I, too, have much personal work to do. Please contact me or
submit anonymous feedback here if you have any suggestions for enabling me to be more inclusive or
better honor your various identities. I also appreciate your help enabling me to make our course as
inclusive as possible by informing me about:
 a preferred name or identification you would like me to use;
 something you may have heard (from a classmate or the professor) that troubled you; or
 limitations of the course that could or should be addressed.
If your concerns that would be best addressed by a third party, please see USC’s Title IX coordinator.

Special needs. If you have any special needs, academic or otherwise, or if you are having a difficult
time in the course, please do let me know. Students with disabilities, in particular, should let me know
as soon as possible what their specific needs are, so that their rights can be upheld in accordance with
the Americans with Disabilities Act. If you are having any other difficulties—moral, spiritual, or
personal—that impede your participation in this course, please let me know.

Communicating Moral Issues  Spring 2024 2

Graded assignments
Students will be primarily graded on the following five speeches. Further details about each of the
speeches, as well as rubrics, will be offered when the projects are discussed in depth on the first day of
class. For many of the speeches, a written manuscript will be due ahead of time. Each speech will be
evaluated on the degree to which it is logically sound, clear, creative, engaging, and effective. Note that
your speeches will be assessed by the professor and your colleagues.

The award presentation

Introductory speech: in-person and scripted (10%)
First, all students will deliver a two-minute speech in the form of an award presentation. You will
meet a student in your section and learn about their life. Then you will invent an award that you
believe the student deserves and draft a 250-word speech you will use to present that award in class.

The Pecha Kucha talk

Informative speech: in-person, extemporaneous, and using audiovisual aids (15%)
This talk can be about anything that pertains to the class—and it should be clear how it relates to the
class. As will be discussed in further detail, Pecha Kucha talks always last 6 minutes and 40 seconds,
and involve twenty slides that are presented for twenty seconds each. These will be delivered in class.

The explainer video

Informative speech: recorded, scripted, using audiovisual aids (15%)
Students will develop a video of about seven minutes that explains differing views and information
related to one of the topics discussed in class. Students should be creative about how to convey
information in their videos. Videos will be due two days before we discuss that topic in class.

Court case -or- Rally speech

Persuasive speech: in-person and scripted (15%)
Students will choose between the following two options:
1. A court case. This assignment requires students to present the closing arguments of a case before a
judge. The specific context of the cases will be discussed in detail on the first day of class. OR
2. A rally speech. Students who choose to do this module will prepare a campaign rally speech. These
rally speeches will be presented in a specific context, also to be discussed in detail on the first day of
class.

The Toast
Commemorative speech: in-person and scripted (10%)
Finally, all students will also deliver a 3-5 minute toast on the exam day of the course. These toasts
will commemorate a thing, event, or person relevant to our course for the semester. They should be
toasts—not roasts!—and should be generally enjoyed by your classmates.

In addition to these speeches, students will be asked to respond

before each class to the assigned reading, video, or podcast. This Grades at a glance
will be done in a Google form with 2-4 questions. Students should Award presentation 10%
complete their responses by the midnight before class. The first Pecha Kucha talk 15%
response (as an example) is linked here. There are 32 days with Explainer video 15%
assignments you must respond to, and each student will get two Court case or rally speech 15%
freebies over the semester. Each response will count for ½% of Toast 10%
your grade, such that responses count for a total of 15% of your 30 responses (½% each) 15%
grade. You may receive extra credit if you do all 32 responses. Attendance + participation 20%

Communicating Moral Issues  Spring 2024 3

Reading assignments
No textbook purchases are required for this course. All materials are free or on the course website.
The only “textbook” that will be used is The Public Speaking Project’s Public Speaking.

Theme Readings/assignments Tasks

Introduction
Jan  Prepare to introduce
8 Introductions  Review syllabus before class
yourself
Jan Civility:
10  Teresa Bejan, “Is Civility a Sham?” (14 min)  Response
How to disagree
Jan Eschewing  Response
12  George Orwell, “Politics and the English Language”
obfuscation  Sign up for speeches
Jan 15: MLK Day – No class
Dignity
Jan The value of
17  Sandel, “Torture & human dignity” (7 min)  Response
dignity
Jan  Response
19 Hate Speech  Waldron, “Approaching Hate Speech” (17 pp)
 Award manuscript due
Jan  Aviv, “What does it mean to die?”, mp3 link here
22 End-of-life issues  Response
(24 pp or 60 min)
Jan Dignity in speech
24  Meade, “Engage Your Audience”  Response
& writing
Jan Introducing …  Rehearse your award
26  No assigned reading: award presentations all day
your classmates presentation!
 Tollefsen, “Capital Punishment, Sanctity of Life,
Jan The dignity of
29 and Human Dignity” (~3 pp)  Response
convicts + victims
 Feser, “In Defense of Capital Punishment” (~3 pp)
Jan Two kinds of
31  Darwall, “Two Kinds of Respect” (14 pp)  Response
respect
Feb  No assigned reading: court cases on life support &
2 Court cases
hate speech
Freedom
Feb The value of
5  Berlin, “Two Concepts of Liberty” (16 pp)  Response
freedom
Feb  The Experiment podcast, “The Crime of Refusing
7 Vaccines  Response
Vaccination” (36 min)
Feb  Philosophy Bites podcast with Jeff McMahan (19
9 Gun control  Response
min)
Feb
12 Abortion part 1  Ezra Klein’s podcast with Kate Greasley (72 min)  Response

Feb
14 Abortion part 2  Ezra Klein’s podcast with Erika Bachiochi (87 min)  Response

Feb Pecha Kucha

16  No assigned reading: Pecha Kucha talks
talks
Feb Complicating  NYTimes podcast, “The Mother Who Changed: A
19  Response
autonomy Story of Dementia” (64 min)
Feb  Heather Box and Julian Mocine-McQueen, “How
21 Telling your story  Response
Your Story Sets You Free” (59 min)
Feb  No assigned reading: Rally speeches involving
23 Rally speeches
abortion, vaccines, and gun control

Communicating Moral Issues  Spring 2024 4

 Community & Common Goods
Feb The value of
26  MacIntyre, “Is Patriotism a Virtue?” (18 pp)  Response
community
Feb  Macedo, “The Moral Dilemma of U.S. Immigration
28 Immigration  Response
Policy” (19 pp)
Mar  NYTimes podcast, “A Mother, a Daughter, a Deadly  Response
Immigration pt 2
1 Journey” (41 min)  Mid-semester eval
Mar Environmental
 Bisht, “Free-Rider Problem Explained” (10 min)  Response
11 commons
Mar
Gene editing  Ezra Klein’s podcast on CRISPR (58 min)  Response
13
Mar Pecha Kucha
 No assigned reading: Pecha Kucha talks
15 talks
Mar  Fourth Branch podcast, “Medicare for All?” (65
Health care  Response
18 min)
Mar Community in
 Ramsey, “Using Language Well”  Response
20 speech & writing
Mar  No assigned reading: court cases on gene editing,
Court cases
22 environment, and immigration
Equality
Mar The value of
 Nagel, “Equality” (22 pp)  Response
25 equality
Mar
Global equality  Singer, “Famine, Affluence, & Morality” (15 pp)  Response
27
Mar Distribution of
 Radiolab, “Playing God” (59 min)  Response
29 resources
Affirmative  NYTimes podcast, “How Affirmative Action
Apr 1  Response
action Changed Their Lives” (37 min)
Apr 3 Reparations  Coates, “The Case for Reparations” (17 pp)  Response
Moral status of
Apr 5  Norcross, “Puppies, Pigs, and People” (17 pp)  Response
animals
Equality in
Apr 8  Dhanesh, “Speaking to a Global Audience”  Response
speech & writing
Apr 10 Equality of what?  Sen, “Equality of What?” (26 pp)  Response
 No assigned reading: rally speeches involving
Apr 12 Rally speeches
affirmative action & animals’ rights
Integrating values
Apr 15 Balancing values  Charles Taylor, “The Diversity of Goods” (16 pp)  Response
Crucial  Joseph Grenny, “Mastering The Art of Crucial
Apr 17  Response
conversations Conversations” (30 min)
Pecha Kucha
Apr 19  No assigned reading: Pecha Kucha talks
Talks
Apr 22 Final review  No assigned reading  Final self-eval due

Note: this syllabus, assigned readings, rubrics, and other materials for the course are available on
Blackboard and on our course’s Google Drive site at this link.

Communicating Moral Issues  Spring 2024 5

 Sign-ups for Pecha Kucha talks, 6 minutes 40 seconds each (for reference)

Seven students:
February 16

Pecha Kucha talks

on various topics

Seven students:
March 15

Pecha Kucha talks

on various topics

Six students:
April 19

Pecha Kucha talks

on various topics

Sign-ups for explainer videos (for reference)

Due Date Topic Two students each

Explainer video on
February 5
vaccines
Explainer video on
February 7
gun control
Explainer video on
February 12
abortion
Explainer video on
February 27
immigration
Explainer video on
March 13
health care
Explainer video on
March 16
environmental issues
Explainer video on
March 18
gene editing
Explainer video on
March 27
resource distribution
Explainer video on
April 1
affirmative action
Explainer video on
April 3
reparations

Communicating Moral Issues  Spring 2024 6

Sign-ups for court cases and rally speeches: in-person persuasive speech (for reference)

First court case Two students, on opposing sides:

on ending life support
February 2

(14 min, 7 min each side)

Second court case Two students, on opposing sides:

on hate speech
(14 min, 7 min each side)

Rally speeches Two students, on opposing sides:

on abortion
(7 minutes each)
February 23

Rally speeches Two students, on opposing sides:

on gun control
(7 minutes each)

Rally speeches Two students, on opposing sides:

on vaccines
(7 minutes each)

Third court case Two students, on opposing sides:

on gene editing
(14 min, 7 min each side)
March 22

Fourth court case Two students, on opposing sides:

on environmental commons
(14 min, 7 min each side)

Fifth court case Two students, on opposing sides:

on immigration
(14 min, 7 min each side)

Rally speeches Two students, on opposing sides:

on affirmative action
(7 minutes each)
April 12

Rally speeches Two students, on opposing sides:

on animals’ rights
(7 minutes each)

Communicating Moral Issues  Spring 2024 7

Contexts for court cases and rally speeches (for reference)

Event Context
Aden Hailu, a freshman at University of Nevada, was declared braindead after
1st court case she did not wake up from an emergency surgery. Her father is objecting to the
on ending life hospital’s plan to remove her from life support in Nevada state court. What
support should be done? One student will argue on behalf of Hailu’s father; another will
February 2

argue on behalf of the hospital.

In 2016-7, high school students Cedric Epple and Kevin Chen shared insulting
and racist posts on a private Instagram account. These included photos of Black
2nd court case
classmates with nooses photoshopped around their necks. After their posts were
on hate speech
discovered by the school district, they were suspended and later expelled. Did
those penalties violate their rights?
The state of South Carolina has just passed a ban on abortion after six weeks.
Rally speeches Some think this is a major victory in the movement to end abortion; others think
on abortion it is an unconstitutional and/or unethical restriction of many Americans’
autonomy.
A former member of Parkland High School shot and killed seventeen people and
February 23

wounded 17 others in a matter of minutes. In the aftermath of the shooting,

Rally speeches
many young people are calling for increased gun control measures. On the other
on gun control
hand, others argue that those measures are unconstitutional and unjustly
constrain Americans’ freedom. What should be done?
As vaccines become available in the aftermath of COVID, the legislature of South
Carolina is considering laws that would prohibit vaccine mandates. Some claim
Rally speeches
that requiring those on campus be vaccinated violates their bodily autonomy.
on vaccines
Others claim that it unfairly marginalizes those who are or have family members
who are immunocompromised. Which approach should voters support?
(Note: this is a fictional scenario.) Similarly to the Chinese scientist He Jiankui, an
American scientist, Jerome Watters, edited the genomes of two embryos to
3rd court case
prevent them from suffering from mitochondrial disease. Watters has pioneered
on gene editing
a promising cure to a deadly and tragic disease, but broke the law in doing so.
What penalties should this scientist face?
Sixteen teenagers in Montana are suing their state government for approving
4th court case
March 22

projects that are likely to exacerbate climate change. They claim that in
on
permitting these developments the government is violating their right to a “clean
environmental
and healthful environment,” per the state’s constitution. Has the state violated
issues
their rights?
The President has instituted a rule that asylum seekers in the United States must
5th court case demonstrate that they have applied for asylum in another country. Some claim
on that this violates US and international law. Biden’s administration says the policy
immigration is necessary to deter illegal immigration. Is the policy constitutional? Does it
contravene the US community’s values, or does it keep the US community safe?
The Supreme Court just outlawed admissions practices at a slew of universities.
Rally speeches Those schools who design their admissions decisions to foster racial diversity in
on affirmative their institutions will no longer be allowed to do so. Some argue this ruling
action exacerbates racial inequality; others say it promotes fairness. Is affirmative action
April 12

morally acceptable or not?

(Note: this is a fictional scenario.) Following other European nations and the
Rally speeches European Commission, the United States is considering whether to institute a
on animals’ ban on factory farming. The ban would eliminate animal caging and chick
rights culling, which some say are cruel and unethical practices. Farmers worry that this
would drastically increase food prices. Should the U.S. outlaw such practices?

Communicating Moral Issues  Spring 2024 8