Assignment:
Please choose ONE of the following paper topics. Papers should be 6-8
pages in length, due by class
Wednesday,
November 11.
I am flexible about
paper topics and length only
if you discuss it with me first. Rough
drafts are
strongly encouraged, but not mandatory. I will be accepting rough
drafts no later than
Monday, October 9. Also,
drafts will only be accepted in person, so please make an appointment
to see me. No
late papers will be accepted. Electronic submissions required;
additional hard copies optional. Go here for
some advice on
writing a philosophy paper. Please email me
or talk to me if you
have
any questions.
1. Discuss the Eliminativist view of Personal Identity (i.e., either
Hume or Unger). Lay out the relevant argument for the Eliminativist
view (i.e., Hume has an argument from the non-continuity of
first-person facts, Unger has the Sorites argument to the conclusion
the
he doesn't exist. Are either of these arguments convincing? What are
some objections? Discuss.
2. Lay out and explain the arguments for and against the existence of
holes (as discussed in the Lewis and Lewis article "Holes"). Do you
think that holes exist? If so, how does this square with the rest of
your ontology? That is, if you are a materialist like Argle, do you
have to paraphrase our statements about holes as something friendly to
a materialist ontology? If you think holes do not exist, is all of our
talk about holes just flat-out false? Elaborate on any parallels
between your view of holes and your view of some other metaphysical
entity (i.e., personal identity, the mind, free will, etc.). Discuss.
3. Prepare a dialogue based roughly on "Holes", in which you discuss
the ontological status of something we have not yet (nor will) discuss
in class. Model your arguments for and against the existence of the
entity you choose off of course material. It should be evident what
arguments you are mimicking, only applied to a novel topic. Be creative
yet systematic. The point is to demonstrate a grasp of the
generalizability of the debates we have (and will) discuss.
4. Carefully lay out and explain the Free Will Problem (as presented it
out in class). Why is it a problem? Discuss the three available
positions we've discussed in response to the problem (Libertarianism,
Hard Determinism, Compatibilism). Which one do you favor and why?
Discuss.
5. Lay out and explain one of the positions of the Free Will debate
(Libertarianism, Hard Determinism, Compatibilism). Discuss at least one
of the arguments for and against this position (as presented in class
and in the readings). Is this a good argument? Why or why not? What are
some objections? Thoroughly discuss.