Philosophy 373-Paper Assignment
Philosophy 373-Paper assignment
The purpose of this assignment is simply to present a (more) detailed elaboration of an author’s view; or to contrast two competing authors’ views; or to develop your reaction to an author’s view; or to relate an outside source (see below) to one of the topics under consideration. The content can be culled from any of the readings on the syllabus. This is not intended as a “term paper” or “research paper”. It can be adequately completed simply from the textual materials and class discussions.
The most basic form of this assignment would be to simply provide a detailed elaboration of an author’s position by reference to the explicit questions below. For example you could simply detail one of the arguments for God’s existence and an explicit line of critique: e.g Paley’s teleological argument and the problem of evil as presented either by Hume or Dostoevsky) Or you can make the major point of emphasis a critique of one of the arguments. (E.g. Rachels critique of Rand’s ethical egoism…as noted, that would require an elaboration of Rand’s view as well.) A distinct option would be that you could present your own thinking on the subject (after presenting a view- do you think it withstands rational scrutiny? Why/why not? Obviously elaborating your view involves a bit more creativity and thinking on your part but such attempts at original thinking are always encouraged (and appreciated). Your position could be detailing why you think someone’s view is just wrong (E.g. Singer’s view that animals have moral standing); or you might be in partial agreement (…some animals might be of moral significance- chimps, my dog, cute marine mammals… but lab rats?); you might be in agreement with an author, or you might be vacillating between two competing views (Singer and Cohen both make some sense…)…
On this assignment I would expect any positions being discussed to be adequately explained/detailed. To do this you can use quotes, but do so
The purpose of this assignment is simply to present a (more) detailed elaboration of an author’s view; or to contrast two competing authors’ views; or to develop your reaction to an author’s view; or to relate an outside source (see below) to one of the topics under consideration. The content can be culled from any of the readings on the syllabus. This is not intended as a “term paper” or “research paper”. It can be adequately completed simply from the textual materials and class discussions.
The most basic form of this assignment would be to simply provide a detailed elaboration of an author’s position by reference to the explicit questions below. For example you could simply detail one of the arguments for God’s existence and an explicit line of critique: e.g Paley’s teleological argument and the problem of evil as presented either by Hume or Dostoevsky) Or you can make the major point of emphasis a critique of one of the arguments. (E.g. Rachels critique of Rand’s ethical egoism…as noted, that would require an elaboration of Rand’s view as well.) A distinct option would be that you could present your own thinking on the subject (after presenting a view- do you think it withstands rational scrutiny? Why/why not? Obviously elaborating your view involves a bit more creativity and thinking on your part but such attempts at original thinking are always encouraged (and appreciated). Your position could be detailing why you think someone’s view is just wrong (E.g. Singer’s view that animals have moral standing); or you might be in partial agreement (…some animals might be of moral significance- chimps, my dog, cute marine mammals… but lab rats?); you might be in agreement with an author, or you might be vacillating between two competing views (Singer and Cohen both make some sense…)…
On this assignment I would expect any positions being discussed to be adequately explained/detailed. To do this you can use quotes, but do so