Washington
and Lee University, Fall 2001
Philosophy
395: Advanced Seminar
TTh, HI hours (Newcomb 28A)
Ben
Eggleston—EgglestonB@wlu.edu
office
hours: M&F, 2–4, and T&Th, 9–11 (Newcomb 25)
If you remember paper assignment no. 2, you will not
be surprised by this one. Your assignment is to focus on one of Unger’s claims
in Living High and Letting Die: Our Illusion of Innocence and to develop
the most effective objection to it that you can. Your paper should be not more
than eight pages long, double-spaced, and will be due at 5 p.m. on Wednesday,
December 12. Please note that papers not turned in by Friday at 5 p.m.
may not—indeed, probably will not—be counted in your overall course grade until
January.
Following
is a detailed account of the criteria according to which you will be graded.
Note that you will be graded not only on the effectiveness of your objection,
but also on the significance of the claim to which you offer your objection. In
choosing a topic, then, you must strike a balance between (1) choosing a claim
that is easy to refute, but that is also quite trivial, and (2) choosing
a claim that is undeniably significant, but that is also very hard to
refute.
|
requirements: |
points possible: |
points earned: |
|
1.
Your paper accurately explains some claim that
Unger makes: |
10 |
|
|
2.
That claim is significant, either because of its
importance to Unger’s theory or because of its intrinsic philosophical
interest: |
20 |
|
|
3.
Your paper offers an effective objection to that
claim: |
45 |
|
|
4.
Your paper is well organized and clearly written,
with good spelling and grammar: |
20 |
|
|
5.
Your paper is not more than eight pages in length
and is double-spaced, and this sheet (with this side up) is stapled or
paper-clipped to the front of your paper: |
5 |
|
|
6.
lateness penalty (if applicable): (3
points off per unexcused day late, excluding weekends) |
|
|
|
total score |
100 |
|
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 the Rawls text itself,
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.