philosophy

philosophy

ESSAY 2 PHIL 011

Topic: For your first essay, you will choose ONE THEORY OF METAPHYSICS that responds to the mind-body problem. You will write about 3 things:

1. You need to explain the mind-body problem in Metaphysics. How did this problem begin? What are the different theories philosophers have given to solve the mind-body problem?

2. You will choose one theory (for example, Cartesian dualism or Physicalism or Functionalism) as being the best theory for solving the mind-body problem. Then you need to explain why you prefer this theory over other theories.

a. What arguments are the most convincing?

b. Why are the other theories’ arguments NOT convincing?

3. Which reading you think supports your argument for this theory (such as Descartes’ Meditations, or Fodor’s Mind-Body Problem)?

a. For this section, you should use a reading discussed in the book to support your argument.

b. Be sure to use “ “ marks if you quote these readings and tell me the writer’s name.

Your entire paper should be around 1000-1500 words. That means you should answer each question with 350-500 words.

Reading: To answer these questions you should use this books—

· William Lawhead, “The Philosophical Journey”

· Pages 212-260 (this includes overview of problem, as well as theories attempting to solve the problem)

· You will find this book under “Content”

Here is a rubric I will use to grade your paper:

Excellent Good Needs Improvement Unacceptable
CONTENT
Argument
Thesis A clear statement of the main conclusion of the paper. The thesis is obvious, but there is no single clear statement of it. The thesis is present, but must be uncovered or reconstructed from the text of the paper. There is no thesis.
Premises Each reason for believing the thesis is made clear, and as much as possible, presented in single statements. It is also clear which premises are to be taken as given, and which will be supported by sub-arguments. The paper provides sub-arguments for controversial premises. If there are sub-arguments, the premises for these are clear, and made in single statements. The premises which are taken as given are at least plausibly true. The premises are all clear, although each may not be presented in a single statement. It is also pretty clear which premises are to be taken as given, and which will be supported by sub-arguments. The paper provides sub-arguments for controversial premises. If there are sub-arguments, the premises for these are clear. The premises which are taken as given are at least plausibly true. The premises must be reconstructed from the text of the paper. It is not made clear which premises are to be taken as given, and which will be supported by sub-arguments. There are no sub-arguments, or, if there are sub-arguments, the premises for these are not made clear. The paper does not provide sub-arguments for controversial premises. The plausibility of the premises which are taken as given is questionable. There are no premises—the paper merely restates the thesis. Or, if there are premises, they are much more likely to be false than true.
Support The premises clearly support the thesis, and the author is aware of exactly the kind of support they provide. The argument is either valid as it stands, or, if invalid, the thesis, based on the premises, is likely to be or plausibly true. The premises support the thesis, and the author is aware of the general kind of support they provide. The argument is either valid as it stands, or, if invalid, the thesis, based on the premises, is likely to be or plausibly true. The premises somewhat support the thesis, but the author is not aware of the kind of support they provide. The argument is invalid, and the thesis, based on the premises, is not likely to be or plausibly true. The premises do not support the thesis.
Counter-Arguments The paper considers both obvious and unobvious counter-examples, counter-arguments, and/or opposing positions, and provides original and/or thoughtful responses. The paper considers obvious counter-examples, counter-arguments, and/or opposing positions, and provides responses. The paper may consider some obvious counter-examples, counter-arguments, and/or opposing positions, but some obvious ones are missed. Responses are non-existent or mere claims of refutation. No counter-examples, counter-arguments, or opposing positions are considered.

4


Comments are closed.