These are just samples; you may argue for one of these if you wish, but you aren't restricted to them.
In this paper, I will argue that we have obligations of justice toward some animals, because we do have implicit agreements with them, even though they can't talk.
In this paper, I will argue that if death is annihilation, it is something terrible for the person who has died.
In this paper, I will argue that Aristotle is right when he says that happiness is a kind of activity, not a feeling.
In this paper, I will argue that Socrates' does not typically benefit those that he cross-examines, but that his activity is nonetheless useful and justified.
In this paper, I will argue that the Myth of Metals expresses important truths and that the rulers of the Republic would be justified in promulgating it.
In this paper, I will argue that Socrates in right when he thinks that the only thing that matters of happiness is the health of your soul, but that worse people are able to harm the soul of a better person.
In this paper, I will argue that Epicurus' proto-evoltionary story doesn't succeed in showing that we don't need Aristotelian final causes in order to explain the functioning of organisms.
In this paper, I will argue that Epicurus has not shown that death is annihilation.
In this paper, I will argue that Aquinas' arguments for why happiness is impossible to attain in this life succeed.
Mail Tim