PHIL 13195 Second Paper Topics and Instructions - Prof. Jeffrey Speaks, Papers of Introduction to Philosophy

Download PHIL 13195 Second Paper Topics and Instructions - Prof. Jeffrey Speaks and more Papers Introduction to Philosophy in PDF only on Docsity! Second 5-7 page paper PHIL 13195 Due: in class, Thursday, November 19 (the Thursday before Thanksgiving) __________________________________________________________________________________ Below are some topics for your second paper. You are welcome to come up with your own topic, though you must get my approval by email first. If you do this, the question that your I approve should be on the first page of your essay. The papers should be at most 5-7 pages in length, double-spaced and with reasonable margins and font. You should email the paper to me. A late penalty of 3 points per day, including weekends, will be assessed for any papers which are handed in late. Plagiarism is a serious and growing problem at Notre Dame and other universities. It is your responsibility to acquaint yourselves with the Universityʼs honor code, as well as with the philosophy departmentʼs guidelines regarding plagiarism. Both are linked from the course web page. __________________________________________________________________________________ 1. Explain the view of personal identity which you believe to be true, and say why you believe it to be true. Consider what you take to be the two or three most difficult challenges to your view, and explain how you would respond to those challenges. 2. Explain the “split-brain” cases described by Parfit. Do these cases provide a good argument against any theories of personal identity? Do they support the view Parfit describes as the “bundle theory”? 3. Explain McTaggartʼs argument for the unreality of time, and van Inwagenʼs reply to that argument. How should a proponent of McTaggartʼs argument reply to van Inwagen? Does McTaggartʼs argument show that the “A-theory” of time is mistaken? 4. Explain Descartesʼ argument for dualism, and van Inwagenʼs objection to that argument. Can the argument be reformulated to avoid van Inwagenʼs objection? Is Descartesʼ argument, in the end, convincing? 5. Defend psychological egoism - the view that all human intentional actions are self-interested - against Feinbergʼs objections. 6. Sider describes two views of time: the space-time theory, and the theory that time flows. Which do you think is correct, and why? Be sure to consider objections to the view you defend from Sider as well as the other authors weʼve discussed in the course.