PHIL 230: Philosophy of the Human Person, S2016

Essay 1

PHIL 230: Philosophy of the Human Person, S2016

Office Hours: W/F 2:15 – 3:00 and by appointment

Due: Monday, 3/7/2016, 11:59pm

All papers must be on Canvas, no emailed copies or hard copies accepted. Papers in Pages format won’t be accepted, please convert to .docx, .doc, .pdf, .rtf, or .txt. Please include a works cited page, even if you are only using the class textbooks.

Late Papers and Extensions: Extensions will not be given as a matter of course; you must contact me in advance and have a good reason (e.g. illness, personal problem) in order to receive an extension. In general I do not give extensions for foreseeable problems, e.g. general workload, assignments for other classes due at the same time. Papers handed in late without an extension will receive a 3-point grade deduction per 24 hour period late. Papers of at least D-quality received after 7 days will automatically receive a grade of 60. Incomplete papers will not be accepted.

Assignment instructions:

This option has three parts, PLUS an introduction and conclusion.

A1. (about 350-500 words) Select one of the quotations below. Explain, in your own words, the author’s claim in this quotation and his argument in support of it. Since these quotations boil down the author’s main point to a sentence or two, you will need to explain a fair bit of background to show how the author arrives at this conclusion. Support your interpretation of the author’s view with quotations from other parts of the primary text.

A2. (about 100-200 words) Formulate and explain one narrow counterargument to the argument you’ve explained on behalf of an imaginary opponent. Do not try to discuss everything that might be wrong with the author’s view; focus on one specific point. Make your counterargument as strong as possible. This section can be very short, just make sure you explain the counterargument thoroughly.

A3. (about 350-500 words) Offer a rebuttal to your counterargument on behalf of the author. In this section you should go beyond what the author actually said in his writings, and use your own philosophical thinking to generate a rebuttal that the author could or should have made if he had the chance to respond. Thus this response is consistent with what the author actually said, but is not something that appears in the primary text.

you are finished with these three tasks, write a short introduction and conclusion to your paper (about 100 words each). See below for instructions on how to write the intro and conclusion. The complete paper should be about 3.5 to 5 pages, 1000-1500 words.

This option has four parts, PLUS an introduction and conclusion (but this option does not require you to write a longer paper).

B1. (about 350-500 words) Select one of the quotations below. Explain, in your own words, the author’s claim in this quotation and his argument in support of it. Since these quotations boil down the author’s main point to a sentence or two, you will need to explain a fair bit of background to show how the author arrives at this conclusion. Support your interpretation of the author’s view with quotations from other parts of the primary text.

B2. (about 100-200 words) Formulate and explain one narrow counterargument to the argument you’ve explained. Do not try to discuss everything that you find to be wrong with the author’s view; focus on one specific point. Make your counterargument as strong as possible. This section can be very short, just make sure you explain the counterargument thoroughly.

B3. (about 200-350) Offer a rebuttal to your counterargument on behalf of the author. In this section you should go beyond what the author actually said in his writings, and use your own philosophical thinking to generate a rebuttal that the author could or should have made if he had the chance to respond. Thus this response is consistent with what the author actually said, but is not something that appears in the primary text.

B4. (about 200-350 words) Respond to the rebuttal you explained in part B3. That is, say why the author is still wrong, even after he has tried to defend himself.

you are finished with these four tasks, write a short introduction and conclusion to your paper (about 100 words each). See below for instructions on how to write the intro and conclusion. The complete paper should be about 3.5 to 5 pages, 1000-1500 words.

The introduction and conclusion should each provide an overview of the entire body of the paper (Parts A1-A3 for Option A, Parts B1-B4 for Option B). The introduction provides an outline or abstract of your argument so the reader has some idea what is coming; the conclusion ties the entire paper together so the reader can review what he/she has just read. One way of putting this is: say what you’re going to say (introduction), say it (body), say what you said (conclusion).

The Upanishads: “‘The wise who knows the Self as bodiless within bodies, as unchanging among changing things, as great and omnipresent, does never grieve.’” (HN p. 7)

The Dhamapada (Buddha): “‘These sons belong to me, and this wealth belongs to me,’ with such thoughts a fool is tormented. He himself does not belong to himself; how much less sons and wealth?” (HN p. 14)

Plato, the Republic: “So a just soul and a just man will live well and an unjust one badly…And surely anyone who lives well is blessed and happy, and anyone who does not is the opposite.” (Republic 353e-354a; pp. 34-35 in the file on Canvas)

Important: In this class we are focusing on how harmony of the soul (which Plato calls justice) leads to happiness or fulfillment. Do not try to incorporate the everyday, moral sense of just/justice into your paper. In particular, do not choose for your counterargument the objection that a person with a harmonious soul might do immoral things.

Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics: “…happiness evidently also needs external goods to be added, as we said, since we cannot, or cannot easily, do fine actions if we lack the resources.”

Important: This quotation actually is a fairly specific point that Aristotle makes and not his main point, but you will need to explain some of the main parts of Aristotle’s view in order to explain why he thinks this is true.