Washington and Lee University, Winter 2002

Philosophy 101: Problems of Philosophy

MWF, B hour (Newcomb 10B)

Ben Eggleston—http://home.wlu.edu/~EgglestonB

office hours: M&F, 2–4, and T&Th, 9–11 (Newcomb 25)

 

Paper Assignment no. 3

 

Your assignment is to write a paper, about five pages long (double-spaced), answering one of the following questions. (Pick just one—do not try to address more than one.) Your paper will be due in class on Monday, April 1. (No foolin’!)

  1. p. 158, no. 4
  2. p. 158, no. 5
  3. p. 159, no. 12
  4. p. 319, no. 6
  5. p. 319, no. 7
  6. Every primate is a member of some species or other, and the boundaries among the species are pretty sharp—members of the species homo sapiens don’t often get mistaken for members of other species. But suppose that genetics worked differently, and that as a result of millennia of inter-breeding, the boundaries among primate species were as blurred as are the boundaries among races of humans that have had substantial inter-mixing. That is, suppose that there were some individuals whom we regarded as humans, just as there are some individuals whom we regard as black; and some individuals whom we regarded as apes, just as there are some individuals whom we regard as white; and so on, for various primate species and various races; and—here’s the kicker—some individuals whom we regarded as part human and part ape, just as there are some individuals whom we regard as partly black and partly white. Supposing all this—supposing that is, that the primate species were only as distinguishable from one another as the human races are distinguishable from one another—answer the following two questions. First, would humans have different beliefs about animal rights from those that they now have? Second, should humans have different beliefs about animal rights from those that they now have?

As with your first two papers, think carefully about your use of space. Don’t spend too much space explaining whatever you may need to explain, or else you won’t have enough space in which to develop the argumentative part of your paper sufficiently. To avoid spending too much space on the explanatory part of your paper, you might want to write that extremely briefly at first, then write the argumentative part of your paper, and then go back and fill in some of the earlier part. Of course, how much space is sufficient for developing the argumentative part of your paper will depend on your own ideas and writing style, but a fairly safe rule of thumb to follow would be to spend no more than two pages on the explanatory part of your paper, and at least three pages on the argumentative part of your paper. You may spend even less space explaining, and more space arguing, if you are so inclined. Here, explanation is just a tool for argumentation.

To be more precise about what I’ve said so far, following is a detailed account of the criteria according to which I will grade.

 

requirements:

points possible:

points earned:

1.      Your paper accurately explains the issue(s) relevant to the question you choose to answer:

20

 

2.      Your paper provides reasons for the view you defend (your paper develops a solid argument for some position):

55

 

3.      Your paper is well organized and clearly written, with good spelling and grammar:

20

 

4.      Your paper is not longer than approximately five pages and is double-spaced, this sheet (with this side up) is stapled or paper-clipped to the front of your paper, and your name and the question you are answering are provided below:

5

 

5.      Lateness penalty (if applicable):

(3 points off per unexcused day late, excluding weekends)

 

 

total score

100

 

 

Your name: ______________________________  The question you’re answering: 1  2  3  4  5  6

 

Finally, a word about the honor system. As you know, all work turned in for credit at Washington and Lee is presumed to have been done without the giving or receiving of unacknowledged aid. This paper shall be no exception. But this does not mean that you cannot get help on this paper; on the contrary, you can get all sorts of help, but you must acknowledge it. That is, you must indicate—with footnotes, ideally—all of the ways in which you have gotten help, whether from other people (such as the staff of the Writing Center, which you are encouraged to take advantage of), or from books other than our textbook, or Web sites, and so on. Where possible, help that you have received should be noted in connection with the part of your paper to which it pertains. (For example, if someone helps you find a more persuasive way of expressing some thought of yours, then that should be noted with a footnote in that part of your paper.) But help whose effects extend throughout the paper (such as when someone reads your whole paper and gives you comments on many parts of it) can be noted as such in a single footnote at the beginning or end. In acknowledging aid, there is a balance to be struck between thoroughness and manageability; the key is to be as thorough as you need to be in order for the reader not to mistakenly attribute to you anything that you owe to someone or something else. So when in doubt, err on the side of thoroughness in acknowledging aid.