Matter of two historically important philosophers

Assignment Help Other Subject

Reference no: EM133764204

Content: Your paper should examine an issue of philosophical import in some depth. This may be done in a variety of ways, but the paradigmatic example would be to discuss what one philosopher says about the issue, discuss how another philosopher disagrees, and finally offer your own evaluation of these two differing views--for example, by synthesizing them, denying them both, or arguing that one is more plausible than the other for whatever reason. Fortunately, you have a rough draft of precisely that paper already written, so the best way to complete this assignment will be to go back to your three short papers, edit them in accordance with the feedback you've been given, add an introduction, conclusion, and transition paragraphs, and polish it until it shines. The final product should be about 2000 words.

The issue you examine may be a metaphysical claim, a value claim, or an epistemological claim, but it should be one of those! Your paper should cite few sources--obviously you should cite the original or translated work of any philosopher you discuss, but beyond that you should not use more than three or four other sources. Your bibliography should not be included in your word count. I do not have a citation format preference beyond "consistent."

Your paper will be graded across five areas:

Did you identify a specific argument about metaphysics, values, or epistemology? (0-10 points)

Did you clearly and accurately explain the positions on this matter of two historically important philosophers? (0-30 points)

Did you provide your own conclusion on the matter, backed by careful reasoning and evidence and grounded in the thoughts of the philosophers you've cited? (0-20 points)

Did you cite the original text(s) of those philosophers, along with no more than four other academically appropriate sources, in a consistent and recognized citation style (e.g. APA, MLA, Chicago)? (0-20 points)

Is your paper grammatically correct, proofread, formatted as instructed, and otherwise linguistically coherent? (0-20 points)

Reference no: EM133764204

Questions Cloud

Approach genetic counseling : Approach genetic counseling? Do you think you should have the right to obtain any sequence in your genome and decide on your own what to make of it

Suggest ways to help these people avoid abusing these drugs : What types of people are most likely to abuse CNS depressants and Suggest ways to help these people avoid abusing these drugs

Analyze how step of strategic communication plan are address : Analyze how the steps of the strategic communication plan are addressed in the campaign you chose by conducting in-depth research.

Describe the barriers about favoritism in the workplace : Describe the barriers about favoritism in the workplace. People of color and women and how many participants do you think you'd want to recruit to interview.

Matter of two historically important philosophers : Did you identify a specific argument about metaphysics, values, or epistemology? (0-10 points) Did you clearly and accurately explain the positions

Explain how you will know the culture really must change : Explain how you will know the culture really must change rather than change the people. How might the scriptures support your stance?

How cultural misunderstandings may impact a conflict : Your example may be one of how the cultural difference or misunderstanding resulted in or prolonged a conflict.

How are lgbtq individuals automatically in positions : How are LGBTQ+ individuals automatically in positions of vulnerability, and how might this shape leadership skills, if safety for vulnerability is established?

Describe the mood captured through camera angles : Describe the mood captured through camera angles throughout the film. Give at least three specific examples. Make sure the explain the meaning and impact

User Account

All Pages