Submit Your Second Essay Here

Submit your essay here. Please use only doc, docx, pdf, or txt files.

Second Essay: 50% of grade (200 points), 6-8 pages, due by Thursday (NOT Saturday), May 24th, 11:59pm.

You have a one week window to submit your essay. All essays should be in MLA format, double spaced, with a 12 point type. Absolutely no late essays allowed.

It is fine to use outside sources like the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (SEP online) when studying philosophers, but when you write your papers don’t directly use material from any source. Close all your books, put them away, and write your essay. Do not quote from sources in your essay. I can tell if you are rewriting a passage, lifting a passage, using something from another source. I want your words, not the words of somebody else. The more you write on your own, without sources, the quicker you will find your own voice and think more critically about the material you study. I would rather get a paper where you are working it out, struggling, than a smooth paper with canned quotes.

Introduction to Philosophy - Second Essay Topics (choose one):

1. Discuss the current debate over artificial intelligence. Is it possible for a computer to have mental states like human beings or can computers only simulate mental states?
2. Evaluate one of the arguments for God’s existence. Is this argument successful, why or why not?
3. Explain the debate between creationists and evolutionary theorists. What are the key arguments and objections on both sides of the issue? Who makes a better case and why?
4. Explain the problem of evil. Explain the main solutions to this problem. Are these solutions successful?
5. What are the strengths of ethical relativism? What are the strengths of ethical objectivism? Which position do you think is more plausible and why?

Grades will be posted with feedback on Monday.

Please take some time and review MSJC's policy on Academic Honesty and Plagiarism. (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

What Each Grade Represents:

THE GRADE OF F:
Here are typical characteristics of the work of a student who receives an F.
A close examination reveals:
The student does not understand the basic nature of philosophical reasoning and argumentative writing, and in any case does not display the philosophical reasoning and argumentative writing skills and abilities which are at the heart of this course. The work at the end of the course is vague, imprecise, and unreasoned as it was in the beginning. There is little evidence that the student is genuinely engaged in the task of taking charge of his or her thinking. Many assignments appear to have been done pro forma, the student simply going through the motions without really putting any significant effort into thinking his or her way through them. Consequently, the student is not analyzing issues clearly, not formulating information clearly, not accurately distinguishing the relevant from the irrelevant, not identifying key questionable assumptions, not clarifying key concepts, not identifying relevant competing points of view, not reasoning carefully from clearly stated premises, or tracing implications and consequences. The student's work does not display discernible reasoning, problem solving, and argumentative writing skills.

THE GRADE OF D:
D level work shows only a minimal level of understanding of what philosophical reasoning and argumentative writing is, along with the development of some, but very little, philosophical reasoning and argumentative writing skills or abilities. D work at the end of the course, on the whole, shows only occasional philosophical reasoning skills, but frequent uncritical thinking. Most assignments are poorly done. There is little evidence that the student is reasoning through the assignment. Often the student seems to be merely going through the motions of the assignment, carrying out the form without getting into the spirit of it. D work rarely shows any effort to take charge of ideas, assumptions, inferences, and intellectual processes. In general, D level thinking lacks discipline and clarity. In D level work, the student rarely analyzes issues clearly and precisely, almost never formulates information clearly, rarely distinguishes the relevant from the irrelevant, rarely recognizes key questionable assumptions, almost never clarifies key concepts effectively, frequently fails to use language in keeping with educated usage, only rarely identifies relevant competing points of view, and almost never reasons carefully from clearly stated premises, or recognizes important implications and consequences. D level work does not show good reasoning and problem solving skills and frequently displays poor reasoning, problem solving, and argumentative writing skills.

THE GRADE OF C:
C level work illustrates some but inconsistent achievement in grasping what philosophical reasoning and argumentative writing is, along with the development of modest critical thinking and argumentative writing skills or abilities. C level work at the end of the course, it is true, shows some emerging philosophical reasoning and argumentative writing skills, but also pronounced weaknesses as well. Though some assignments are reasonably well done, others are poorly done; or at best are mediocre. There are more than occasional lapses in reasoning. Though philosophy terms and distinctions are sometimes used effectively, sometimes they are used quite ineffectively. Only on occasion does C level work display a mind taking charge of its own ideas, assumptions, inferences, and intellectual processes. Only occasionally does C level work display intellectual discipline and clarity. The C level student only occasionally analyzes issues clearly and precisely, formulates information clearly, distinguishes the relevant from the irrelevant, recognizes key questionable assumptions, clarifies key concepts effectively, uses language in keeping with educated usage, identifies relevant competing points of view, and reasons carefully from clearly stated premises, or recognizes important implications and consequences. Sometimes the C level student seems to be simply going through the motions of the assignment, carrying out the form without getting into the spirit of it. On the whole, C level work shows only modest and inconsistent reasoning, problem solving, and argumentative writing skills, and sometimes displays weak reasoning, problem solving, and argumentative writing skills.

THE GRADE OF B:
B-level work represents demonstrable achievement in grasping what philosophy and argumentative writing is, along with the clear demonstration of a range of specific philosophical reasoning and argumentative writing skills or abilities. B level work at the end of the course is, on the whole, clear, precise, and well-reasoned, though with occasional lapses into weak reasoning. On the whole, philosophy terms and distinctions are used effectively. The work demonstrates a mind beginning to take charge of its own ideas, assumptions, inferences, and intellectual processes. The student often analyzes issues clearly and precisely, often formulates information clearly, usually distinguishes the relevant from the irrelevant, often recognizes key questionable assumptions, usually clarifies key concepts effectively, typically uses language in keeping with educated usage, frequently identifies relevant competing points of view, and shows a general tendency to reason carefully from clearly stated premises, as well as noticeable sensitivity to important implications and consequences. B level work displays good reasoning, problem solving and argumentative writing skills.

THE GRADE OF A:
A level work demonstrates real achievement in grasping what philosophical reasoning and argumentative writing is, along with the clear development of a range of specific philosophical reasoning and argumentative writing skills or abilities. The work at the end of the course is, on the whole, clear, precise, and well-reasoned, though with occasional lapses into weak reasoning. In A-level work, philosophy terms and distinctions are used effectively. The work demonstrates a mind beginning to take charge of its own ideas, assumptions, inferences, and intellectual processes. The A-level student often analyzes issues clearly and precisely, often formulates information clearly, usually distinguishes the relevant from the irrelevant, often recognizes key questionable assumptions, usually clarifies key concepts effectively, typically uses language in keeping with educated usage, frequently identifies relevant competing points of view, and shows a general tendency to reason carefully from clearly stated premises, as well as noticeable sensitivity to important implications and consequences. A-level work displays excellent reasoning, problem - solving, and argumentative writing skills. The A student's work is consistently at a high level of excellence.