It is possible to read the entire Republic as Plato’s attempt to find a solution to one problem: corrupt politicians. What is the key to politics, according to Plato? Why is this the key?

/in /by

Plato: Democracy

Tips for a strong paper on this question:

  1. We hear a lot of talk in the United States about the importance of freedom. On this issue, Plato seems quite alien, for the concept of freedom does not seem to come up much in the Republic. Yet one could argue that Plato is not only concerned with “freedom” but strongly in favor of it – he simply understands it differently than many of us do today. What would this argument look like?

 

  1. It is possible to read the entire Republic as Plato’s attempt to find a solution to one problem: corrupt politicians (or tyrants, in the extreme case). What is the key to  politics, according to Plato? Why is this the key?

 

  1. In the United States, in the 21st century, “democracy” is still often taken for granted as the best political system (though not always). In Athens, in the 5 the century B.C.E., this was also the case – but not for Plato. For Plato, democracy is second only to tyranny as the worst form of government. But why is democracy so bad? What is the real problem with it, according to Plato? Under what circumstances might he actually approve of “democracy” as it was understood in his time (rule by the demos)?

 

Write a paper about 2000 words in length that is a critical review of an academic article relevant to this course. Identify an article to make the focus of your paper.

/in /by

Moral Rights

The Topic is about Moral rights in the Philosophy of ethics and is supposed to be written about an article made past the year 2000.

Write a paper about 2000 words in length that is a critical review of an academic article relevant to this course. Note that direct quotes, footnotes, and references are not included in the word count.

Section 1: Identify an article to make the focus of your paper (10 points).

Section 2: (600-700 words) An explanation of the philosophical problem that the author is addressing. (150 points)

Section 3 (600-700 words) An explanation of the author’s position with respect to that problem and the arguments the author provides in defense of that position. (150 points)

Section 4 (600-700 words) An assessment of the author’s position and arguments – possible objections to those arguments (premises that may be false or inferences that may be invalid) and possible answers that the author might be able to give to those objections. (150 points)

Write an essay that addresses a philosophic issue of your choosing. Find a philosophical issue/ idea developed by a PreSocratic philosopher utilized or challenged by Plato and or Aristotle.

/in /by

What is Knowledge?

Write an essay that addresses a philosophic issue of your choosing. Your topic is any issue you would like to explore that Plato and Aristotle addressed. Find a philosophical issue/ idea developed by a PreSocratic philosopher utilized or challenged by Plato and or Aristotle. In this case, give at least two examples, one from Plato and one from Aristotle, where the PreSocratic philosopher’s ideas are utilized or modified by Plato and Aristotle.

This essay must be a minimum of 750 words but can be longer. The last paragraph or two should be your own ideas on how you might address the issues that you discussed earlier in the essay.

Be sure to show off your knowledge of Plato and Aristotle as well as at least two Presocratic philosophers or sophists that we have studied in the chapter assigned so far.

While investigating your topic, you should show off, show me that you understand the ideas of the philosophers as they pertain to your topic, showing off more philosopher ideas can earn additional points. We discussed philosophers from the PreSocratics onward through this week’s discussion of Plato and Aristotle.

The length should be at least 700 words and include any references used, of course.

 

2. Your four philosophers for this first essay should be from this list:

  • Aristotle, (must use) epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, aesthetics
  • Plato (must use) epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, aesthetics
  • Socrates Ethics (counts as part of knowing Plato)
  • Protagoras. epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, aesthetics
  • Parmenides. epistemology, metaphysics
  • Democritus, epistemology, metaphysics, ethics
  • Parmenides, epistemology, metaphysics, ethics
  • Heraclitus, epistemology, metaphysics, ethics
  • Pythagorus, epistemology, metaphysics, ethics
  • Xenophanes, epistemology, metaphysics, ethics
  • Anaximander, epistemology, metaphysics
  • Thales, epistemology, metaphysics

 

3. Your topic should come from at least one of the following:

Epistemology; How we know what we claim to know?

Metaphysics: What there is?

Ethics: How should we live? What is good?

Aesthetics: What is Beauty?

Once you know your basic question, topic, then you need to find PreSocratic philosophers who have positions that may relate to your question and find out what Plato and Aristotle said about that issue . The philosopher list is meant to assist you in identifying available philosophers that you might use in your historical exploration of your question.

 

4. Your essay could be organized as follows: (not required just a suggestion for those new to such things.)

a) In the first paragraph put forth your question and why it is important to you.

b ) Explain which philosophers you will use and why

c) Take the earliest in time and present the position as it addresses the issue you are investigating. Be sure to show off your knowledge of that philosopher’s position as it pertains to your question.

d) Take the second in time and present the position as it addresses the issue you are investigating and show off as above.

e) Take Plato’s version and Aristotle’s version and present the position as it addresses the issue you are investigating and show off, as above.

f) Put forth your position about how you think the issue should be addressed. Give at least three reasons, or at least one or two, that support your position.

g) Consider any objections that others might make to your ideas and respond to them. For example, what would one or more of the four philosophers that you cite in your essay have to say about what you are arguing?

h) Summary statement and conclusion.

Bibliography of any resources used in developing the essay other than our textbook.

 

5. Three possible essay topics you might wish to use!

Some possible topics:

Possible Epistemology topic: How do we know what we think we know? Three philosophers might be a skeptic or a Sophist, such as Protagoras, an empiricist, such as Anaximander, and a rationalist like Parmenides, and connect them with the ideas of Plato and Aristotle on how they account for the question. Then provide your ideas that can agree with some, all or none of these.

Possible Metaphysics topic: What is there in the world? What is real? The two philosophers in addition to Plato and Aristotle, might be atomists such as Democritus, change is an illusion philosopher such as Parmenides, then account for how Plato and Aristotle address these issues. Then, your ideas that can agree with some, all or none of these.

Possible Ethics topic: How should we live? How should we act? Three philosophers might be a Sophists such as Protagorus, or Divine Command Theories such as Euthyphro (in the chapter on the Trial and Death of Socrates), then account for how Plato an Aristotle would address these issues. Then, your ideas that can agree with some, all or none of these.

Focus on Kant’s belief that because we can choose to act in accordance to our Reason, we should. Do you believe that we have a duty to be rational, especially in our moral judgments? Or is morality something that cannot or should not be subject to rational argument?

/in /by

Right and wrong

To reinforce the main points presented above. Review these two concrete examples of Kant applying Reason to right and wrong:

  1. Kant believes breaking promises is wrong. Why? Because when you make a promise, you must (it is IMPERATIVE) follow through on it. This is the logical point of promise-making. Otherwise, don’t make a promise. Now, we might be tempted to make exceptions for ourselves. We might say that we were in a really tough situation, so it is ok for ME to break my promises. Kant responds, did you say that you only made your promise until things got tough or only as long as it was convenient to you? You didn’t? Well, no EXCEPTIONS (universal and absolute application of the idea of ‘the promise’). Can’t do it? Don’t make promises, you immoral jerk.
  2. Another famous example is “Love thy neighbor” as an ethical obligation (not just a feeling). Jesus famously said this, and Kant wrote about it and agreed that it was a good moral principle: we should all love our neighbors. However, Kant notes that we can’t just love our neighbors when we are all EMOTIONALLY invested, maybe over the holidays or when we are in a good mood or because our neighbors are lovable anyway. Instead, if you are being REASONABLE, you love your neighbor (treat your neighbor with love) in all circumstances, even if you are in a horrible mood or they are the worst neighbor in existence.

Ultimately, when we do what is right, because we know it is right, Kant believes we are acting morally and according to our DUTY/OBLIGATIONS as humans to be rational. His name for intentionally doing what is right, because you know it is right (using his whole system of rational testing, of course) is GOOD WILL.

PROMPT

Respond to ONE of these questions:

  1. Focus on Kant’s belief that because we can choose to act in accordance to our Reason, we should. Do you believe that we have a duty to be rational, especially in our moral judgments? Or is morality something that cannot or should not be subject to rational argument?
  2. While Kant believes that we do not always act rationally and that sometimes we cannot (for example, a brain injury would excuse us from moral responsibility for lying, etc), he thinks that our capacity to REASON is fundamentally human and a good basis for a ethical framework that universally applies across all of humanity. Do you agree that this ‘solution’ is universal or as close to universal any ethical framework could get?
  3. Should we regard someone as being moral when and only when they intentionally and rationally do what is right? If a person reacts and instinctively helps someone else, is this different than when they deliberately consider the situation and make a choice? Explain why or why not

 

Describe how you will transform, adapt, or repurpose your existing ritual to address one of the topics on your private list. Write with as much insight and detail as you can.

/in /by

Philosophy

  • Personal list #1: list aspects of yourself that you would like to change
  • Personal list #2: list aspects of your life that you would like to change
  • Personal list #3: list situations in the world that you would like to change make your lists with focus and a determined personal commitment to seriously engage each of the aspects and situations that you name.

These lists are your private, personal meditation for your own use and should not be shared or handed in.

On the first page, describe a ritual that is already part of your life.  This ritual can be an unconscious or semiconscious element of your life.  Perhaps you’ll only become aware of it by looking deeply.  It could be an activity or series of gestures that you’ve inherited, it could be something that you’ve seen or heard that has inspired you, or it can be a ritual that you yourself have created for yourself and the circumstances of your life.  Write with as much insight and detail as you can.  Perhaps there is a ritual you’ve created in response to stress, panic, or a moment in your life where you needed to break through to deeper meaning, to a different kind of fulfillment, in the face of failure, or abandonment, or despair.  Perhaps this ritual is crucial to your survival, your wellbeing, your self-confidence and your sense of direction.  Perhaps it is a shared ritual that joins you to family or friends or to a supportive community.  Perhaps this ritual is organized, regular, repetitive, cumulative, and consistent, or perhaps it is random or something that you’ve only done once in your life.  Write with as much insight and detail as you can.

On page two of the 2-page assignment, describe how you will transform, adapt, or repurpose your existing ritual to address one of the topics on your private list.  Write with as much insight and detail as you can.

 

Why does Descartes, in Meditation 1, need the Dream Argument to show that he cannot trust the deliverances of his senses if he already has established that his senses sometimes deceive him?

/in /by

Meditations On First Philosophy

Why does Descartes, in Meditation 1, need the Dream Argument to show that he cannot trust the deliverances of his senses if he already has established that his senses sometimes deceive him?

Is Descartes just proving what we already know, or have we discovered something important on this journey from doubt to absolute certainty?

/in /by

Meditations On First Philosophy

”from page 23 meditation number 5 begins until the last one which ends in meditation 6”

So Descartes spends the whole time in this book, which you’ve now finished reading, trying to prove two simple things and one not-so-simple (rather huge) thing. The simple things: I exist; and a whole wide world apart from me exists, including other people and other things. The not-so-simple: God exists.

But at the end of the day, do you think that Descartes achieves his goals? What do you think of how he tries to achieve his goals — first, doubt everything; then, come to be convinced that at least I exist; then prove that God exists and doesn’t deceive me or anyone else (the ultimate non-fake news source); and then, since I’m “strongly inclined” to think there are real objects external from me, I’m able to be convinced, finally and at long last, that there really is a whole wide world out there, waiting for me to explore to and to know it more deeply. Is Descartes just proving what we already know, or have we discovered something important on this journey from doubt to absolute certainty?

Compare and contrast the ethical theories of Kant and Mill, as outlined in Chapter 6. Discuss some of the strengths and weaknesses of each of these theories. Which theory makes more sense to you? Explain your answer.

/in /by

The paper must be based upon YOUR CHOICE of one of the following topics:

  1. Discuss your own philosophical perspective on religion in comparison with ideas shared in Chapter 7. Include a discussion of TWO OR MORE of the following topics: Theistic and Non-Theistic Religions; The Problem of Evil; The Existence of God; Faith and Religious Experience.
  2. Compare and contrast TWO views on reality that are discussed in Chapter 6. Discuss some strengths and weaknesses of each of these positions. Which perspective aligns best with your own? Explain your answer.
  3. Choose and compare TWO perceptions of the “self” that are discussed in Chapter 3. Which view seems the most reasonable to you? Explain your answer.
  4. Compare the Buddhist Simile of the Chariot with Plato’s Chariot Analogy. Discuss their similarities and differences.
  5. Compare and contrast the ethical theories of Kant and Mill, as outlined in Chapter 6. Discuss some of the strengths and weaknesses of each of these theories. Which theory makes more sense to you? Explain your answer.

 

Write an essay that focuses on one of the arguments found in any of the assigned readings for modules 2 or 3. Offer your own argument in response to one of the arguments assigned for the class.

/in /by

Follow the instructions given below carefully. Write an essay that focuses on one of the arguments found in any of the assigned readings for modules 2 or 3. The primary goal is to offer your own argument in response to one of the arguments assigned for the class.

1. Submit your essay as an attachment. Use a word document file extension of some sort (rtf, doc, docx, odt, etc.) do not submit a pdf file.

2. Do not quote or cite (or plagiarize) the PowerPoints from the course—they should only be used to help you understand the material. All citations and quotations should come directly from the readings.

3. The essay should be 3 pages. 4. Do not use outside sources—only use the readings that were assigned for the course—do not go out on the internet and look up sources. Your essay must follow this format:

1. Begin with an introductory paragraph that;

  • a) presents your thesis,
  • b) identifies which text and author you will discuss, and

c) Prepares the reader for the organization of your paper. Your THESIS is a clear and exact statement of the claim you will support in your essay. a.

Thesis Statement:

You must tell the reader specifically what position you will defend. Example of a thesis statement: “Carl Cohen’s claim that reason is required to justify the extension of moral consideration is flawed. One’s capacity to suffer, should be the only requirement necessary to justify the extension of moral consideration.”

2. The body of the paper should consist in a focused discussion on the author’s argument from your chosen reading. Your paper should provide a clear exposition of one of the arguments offered by the specific author from the text you focus on. Following the exposition, give one or two objections to the author’s claims. Discuss your objection(s) carefully. Provide the strongest possible counter-argument or counterexample. Be sure that your objection(s) are specifically linked to the arguments given by the author whose work you have exposited. Next, offer possible responses to your objections. In other words, examine and discuss possible responses/issues/problems with your objections/argument.

3. The conclusion should not simply repeat what you have already said in the body of the paper. The concluding remarks may reiterate briefly the structure of your foregoing argument and the conclusion(s) you have reached. But, crucially, concluding remarks should say something more than this. Are there still further, related questions that you have not addressed? Does your discussion have an important implication for the topic, for philosophical theory, for life in general? In other words, try to show how your work in this particular essay reaches out to other topics of interest or paves the way for further argument or analysis. Remember that philosophy papers rarely solve problems once and for all time, so resist the temptation to overstate or exaggerate your conclusions. It is reasonable, even admirable, to acknowledge the limitations of your discussion in your concluding remarks.

4. Quote and cite the text to support your discussion (Footnotes or parenthetical citations are preferred). All verbatim quotation must use quotation marks. Citations are also required for paraphrases of the text. The goal is to point the reader to the appropriate passages of text where the claims are made. Use quotations selectively; most of the paper should be written in your own words. Use a works cited page. In a nutshell:

  1. Tell the reader what text you will discuss, identify the specific author you will address, offer a thesis statement (the position you will defend), and give a brief overview of how the essay will proceed.
  2. Explicate the specific author’s argument from the text you have chosen—explain the argument in detail, walk the reader through the argument step by step.
  3. Offer objections to the argument—point out problems with the author’s argument, and offer your own argument in an effort to justify your claim that the author’s argument contains these problems. Do not ignore the author’s counter arguments—for example, if the author addresses a particular objection in their piece, and offers (a response) a reason to think these objections are not problematic for their position, then be sure that you do not simply offer that very same objection without addressing why their response does not work.
  4. Examine possible responses to your objections—discuss possible weaknesses/problems with the argument you present in section three. What sorts of issues might one raise against your argument? Note the weaknesses and/or limitations with your original argument.
  5. 5. Conclusion (see above)

* Be sure to read “How to Write a Philosophy Paper” in Blackboard. OTHER IMPORTANT INFORMATION: • You need not do additional research. Focus on the essays we have read, or any of the others in Blackboard (provided they were assigned and we have discussed them). • Your work must be your own, original writing. There are severe penalties for plagiarism and cheating. See the syllabus for details. • Your paper should be double-spaced in 10 or 12-point font. Use standard margins. Do not use a cover page. • Spell-check your paper. Proofread and edit your work to check for mistakes that computer programs cannot catch. • At the top of the first page provide the following information single spaced: Student Name PHI 1010:

Introduction to Philosophy Date • Give your paper a title. DO NOT USE A COVER PAGE! • Quote and cite the text to support your discussion. (footnotes or parenthetical citations) All verbatim quotation must use quotation marks. Citations are also required for paraphrases of the text. The goal is to point the reader to the appropriate passages of text where the claims are made. Use quotations selectively; most of the paper should be written in your own words. • The exposition should provide a clear, accurate, precise, and selective account of the author’s position.

CLEAR: Write in complete, grammatical sentences. Organize your thoughts.

ACCURATE: Give a fair and reasonable representation of the author’s position. PRECISE: Avoid offering vague claims and mere generalities. Make your discussion detailed, specific, and focused on the exact claims the author gives in support of the particular arguments you will examine.

SELECTIVE: In a short paper you cannot cover all of the arguments or claims the author gives. Select only those ideas, reasons, arguments that are directly relevant to your discussion. • As a guideline, your first, introductory paragraph should not be more than ½ a page. The exposition should take about 1 page and the presentation of your objection(s) and response(s) should take about 1 page.

NOTE: This paper assignment focuses on exposition AND on critical thinking. The first goal is to demonstrate that you have a solid understanding of the text, that you can explain specific arguments from the text, and that you can appropriately cite and quote the text in support of your discussion. The second goal is to critically evaluate the text. In formulating your objection(s) to the text, you are attempting to provide reasons why we might reject the author’s argument or claims. These reasons should identify specific problems with the author’s claims, not merely a general difference of opinion or view. The reasons you offer in formulating your objection should be reasonable, clear, intelligent, and as convincing as possible.1