Problem: You might explain how you define the good (meta ethics). Is it real (moral realism / moral objectivism) or non-real (moral anti-realism / moral subjectivism)? You may also explain what standards are most reliably used when determining an ethical course of action (normative ethics) and how these relate to your claims about the nature of the good. Are consequences most important? Which? For whom? To what end? Are obligations more important? Which? Is the cultivation of good moral character and practical wisdom most important? You may also explain what such moral character looks like. Is some combination of these options or some other option most reliable in determining an ethical course of action? Be specific. Use examples. Be sure to use technical jargon precisely and correctly. You should address alternative perspectives and attempt to justify your view with arguments and examples.