(a) Choose one argument from the uploaded articles (b) present and explain the argument as clearly, fully, and charitably as possible; and (c) develop and fully explain a single objection to the argument as clearly, fully, and methodically as possible; and (d) develop and fully explain a SINGLE response designed to address this objection.
TIPS:
(a) and (b): The goal is clarity and fullness of explanation. Assume your reader knows nothing about the topic. Clarify terms and claims. Explain how the claims support the conclusion advanced by the author. Use examples where helpful. Make sure your examples serve to sharpen rather than detract from vour reader’s understanding.
Remember to choose an argument, that is, a set of claims which together lead to or entail a specific conclusion. Do not choose a single claim or an assemblage of loosely connected claims. Which argument should you choose? How broad or how narrow should the argument be? These are challenges implicit in the assignment.
But choose an argument that is philosophically interesting.
Present the argument in the best possible light. Present what you believe to be the most persuasive version of the argument offered by the author.
Communicate the argument in such a way that you believe another undergraduate student could understand and could find convincing.
I will only talk about part (c) in this section:
When crafting a criticism of an argument the goal is to come up with some reason or worry that might make your reader hesitate to think that the initial argument is a successful argument. You may draw upon any objection that came up in the course. It may come from an assigned reading, a discussion from section, a discussion from lecture, a conversation with a friend, or something you have come up with on your own. Note that sometimes an author will consider objections to their own views! You are free to utilize even these objections.
Originality is not necessary. However, if you come up with an original objection and present it well, then I will notice. Whatever criticism you choose, the challenge is the same. Identify the claim or inference from the initial argument that is targeted by your criticism. Explain how it is that your criticism poses a problem for this claim or inference. Does your objection reveal that a claim on which the argument hinges is false? Does your objection reveal that an inference on which the argument hinges is invalid or unreliable? Be precise.
The criticism does not have to be successful. You are merely expected to come up with an objection that a reasonable person might propose. You will not be graded on whether your objection works to defeat the argument. You will be graded on how well you explain the nature of the problem your objection poses.
However, if you come up with an original objection that is presented well and is chown to successfully defeat the argument then I will notice.
Part (d) this is new:
When crafting a response on the behalf of the author, make sure you craft a response to the criticism that you have raised earlier in the paper. The goal is to craft a response that will assist the author in escaping this problem. A very good response is one in which more of the author’s position comes into view than was originally discussed in part (b). You do not have to do this. But a very good paper will treat part (d as an opportunity to explore unexamined complexities that fall within the scope of the original argument chosen for part (b).
You do not have to develop an original response. If you go through the trouble of crafting an original response on behalf of the author and this response works well, then I will notice.
Some examples. Sometimes you will find that a criticism fails to work because the criticism involves a misunderstanding of the position. If that is what you find, then explain how it is that the success of the criticism depends on a misunderstanding and why a proper understanding of the view avoids the problem being raised. Sometimes you will find that a criticism works very well against a specific feature of an argument. If that is what you find, then explain why it is that the author cannot offer a satisfactory response to the criticism. This is risky and, in the best case, will take considerable work, but this option is open to you. Sometimes you will find that a criticism works well but does not pose a severe problem. If that is what you find, then, in addition to demonstrating the need for this response, explain how the author could slightly adjust their position to accommodate the insight that the criticism brings into the discussion.
RECOMMENDED PAPER STRUCTURE:
1. Very short introductory paragraph. In the introduction state the conclusion of the argument you have chosen to talk about, explain what it means, and then tell your reader that you will present and explain an argument for this view. Add that you plan to consider a criticism of this argument and give your reader, within the space of one or two sentences, a sense of what this criticism is. Finally, tell your reader that you plan to develop a response to this criticism on behalf of the author. Give your reader, within the space of one or two sentences, a quick preview of what this response will involve.
2. Body paragraphs for argument. Identify the premises that constitute evidence or support for the conclusion of the argument you have chosen. Introduce one premise at a time and carefully explain what it means.
3. Concluding paragraph for argument. The goal is to explain why, if we accept the truth of the evidence or support, we must also accept the truth of the conclusion.
This is an essential paragraph. If you have chosen a iumble of related claims rather than an argument or if you have chosen an argument that you do not understand, this is the place where it will become especially evident.
4. Body paragraphs for criticism. One criticism! The criticism section is not a single paragraph. It is itself an argument with its own moving parts that may fill one third of the paper. Handle the criticism section of the paper in the same way that you handled the presentation of the original argument above. Make sure your reader understands what the criticism targets in the original argument, how the criticism works, and the nature of the problem introduced by the criticism.
5. Body paragraphs for response to the criticism. One response! Same strategy as in the criticism section. Think of the response section as a section wherein you develop a criticism of the criticism. The goal here is to revisit the original argument, to go into greater detail, and to present information that will assist the author in escaping or weakening the force of the criticism. This is not a short section of the paper. This is as important as the section pertaining to the original argument and to the criticism. A criticism cannot be waved away within the space of a single paragraph. The goal is to demonstrate why what initially seemed like a problem for the above argument is, upon closer inspection, not a problem at all.
6. Very short concluding paragraph. Optional.
Choose from provided readings:
