If you have a paper idea about any of the issues we have covered in class, but you do not it see here, please compose a paper proposal, and submit it to me, via email, before the 28th. I am open to student created prompts, but the standards of rigor are much higher for such papers.
All papers are expected to be 3-5 pages, double spaced, Times New Roman, 12pt font.
Philosophy of religion prompts:
1.) Of the arguments for god discussed in class, select your favorite argument. Briefly (no more than a paragraph) summarize the argument; remember, we did this in only a few lines in class, when we put the arguments into logical form. Don’t forget to discuss which sort of god is argued for. Discuss the impetus for this argument. What objections to this argument are most salient? In your estimation, do any of the objections decisively defeat the argument you selected? Why or why not? Do you have a response to any of these objections?
2.) Discuss the difference between the logical problem of evil, and the evidential problem of evil. How are these arguments different; how do they utilize different sorts of reasoning? What are the strengths and weaknesses of each. Discuss potential objections to the evidential problem of evil. Are these objections decisive defeaters (hint: this is a bit of a trick question)? Do you have a response to any of these objections?
Descartes and the Modern Debate
3.) Why does Descartes begin Meditations? What is his goal? Identify and discuss the three stages of doubt, and why he finds the objects of his doubt…doubtful. What is the one thing that Descartes finds indubitable, and why? Discuss cartesian skepticism. Are you now a cartesian skeptic? Why or why not?
4.) 4.) In the quest for knowledge, what position do Rationalists take? Why do they take this position? In the quest for knowledge, what position do Empiricists take? Why do they take this position? Describe both positions. Which argument do you find most persuasive? This is to say, does knowledge comes from sense experience, and thus is fundamentally uncertain; or does knowledge come from a priori thought, and thus produce certainty? Take a position, and argue for it. Are there potential objections to your position? What are they, and why do you hold your position, in the face of these objections?
Questions to consider: what source of knowledge, other than experience or sense perception, could we possibly have? Can this source of knowledge really exist “before” experience? Do we ever actually have sense experiences of things like the law of non-contradiction? Can’t we know about laws, such as that one?
(This is by far the most challenging of the prompts. There is no middle ground; you must take a position. Doing so may involve some research into philosophers we did not cover in class. If you choose this prompt, I strongly suggest you read the SEP entry on the modern debate: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationalism-empiricism/ (Links to an external site.))
Below are some tips to writing philosophy papers. We will discuss them in class, but I thought I should include them here for reference.