Please write a 3-5 page double-spaced paper on one of the questions below. Since these are all exegetical questions, make sure to provide supporting passages from the text. Make citation clear with quotation mark and page number.
Summarize Mill’s ethical system. How did Mill answer the question, “How can I know what is right?” Do you agree with Mill’s answer or not? Present an argument to support your position. Some people object to utilitarianism on the grounds that it allows us to do things that are immoral. Think of an example of something that would be immoral that utilitarian theory would say is good? What is it?
Why did Descartes doubt that he was a man? Explain Descartes’ epistemological constraint. Do you find Descartes’s epistemological theory to be persuasive? Why, or why not? Present an argument to support your claims. Give reasons in order to support your views.
Explain Anselm’s argument. Explain Gaunilo’s argument. In your explanation, make sure to quote at least once from our textbook (Kessler). Who do you think is right, Anselm or Gaunilo? Why? Give reasons to support your claim.
Final Paper standards and Grading Rubric
3-5 pages, double spaced
Content & Style:
Divide your paper into four sections:
Introduction
Explanation of the philosopher’s views
Your own argument for or against the philosopher’s views
Conclusion
Clearly identify each section (for example “Introduction”) in your paper.
I do not need a long introduction. Your conclusion should also be quite brief (you don’t have a lot of space to waste).
I am most interested in clarity and correctness in your writing. It should be relatively easy for me to tell what you are trying to say, and what you are trying to say should be correct or well defended.
It is very important that you back up everything you say with reasons and evidence. Use examples.
Organize your paper (sentences and paragraphs) so that everything flows logically. When I am reading, I should not ever wonder “Why is he or she saying this now?” If I am puzzled why you are making a point, or discussing some issue, either at all or in that particular place, this is not good.
Grading Rubric
An A paper will: Address each aspect of the question. Be clear (see discussion above). Make no significant grammar, spelling errors, or vocabulary errors. Be well organized into sections (see discussion above). Back up all important claims with reasons which make senses and give a reasonable amount of support for your claims (I don’t expect you to prove every point beyond a shadow of doubt, but I do expect you to give me enough evidence that I say “That makes sense,” even if I don’t agree with you). Be correct in what is said, where appropriate (Don’t say things like “Anslem rejects the Ontological argument for God’s existence). Some significant part of your paper should demonstrate some original thought on your part. Demonstrate that you have done your own thinking about the paper.
B papers will: Address each aspect of the question. Be mostly clear, and no vital parts of the paper should be wholly unclear. Make very few significant spelling, grammar, or vocabulary mistakes. Be sufficiently well organized (see above). Back up all important claims with reasons which make sense; most of your arguments should be reasonable. Don’t make significant errors about things we discussed in D2L.
I’ll assume none of you is interested in what a C paper looks like.