summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffhomepage
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorSean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name>2020-11-12 17:14:13 -0700
committerSean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name>2020-11-12 17:17:06 -0700
commit548f6b40399b25fd50441cb221ec4009888e0e6d (patch)
treedf33423b7737ee3cb77a20451554b51bb9da8e4b
parent4794676a454e7f1493d6afd8f467ff769c9aa8ea (diff)
downloadwiki-548f6b40399b25fd50441cb221ec4009888e0e6d.tar.gz
set second paper
-rw-r--r--philos/teaching/PHIL_150A1/second_paper.mdwn117
1 files changed, 116 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/philos/teaching/PHIL_150A1/second_paper.mdwn b/philos/teaching/PHIL_150A1/second_paper.mdwn
index a667c33..77e0886 100644
--- a/philos/teaching/PHIL_150A1/second_paper.mdwn
+++ b/philos/teaching/PHIL_150A1/second_paper.mdwn
@@ -1,5 +1,120 @@
+[[!meta title="Second paper assignment"]]
+
+# PHIL 150A1 Fall 2020 second paper assignment
+
+## Guide
+
+In this writing assignment, you are to address the following prompt:
+
+Callicles defends a distinction between conventional and natural justice.
+Explain his position and his reasons for holding it. Explain one of Socrates'
+arguments against Callicles. Briefly assess whether this response succeeds --
+who wins this part of the debate, and why do you think so? Be sure to include:
+
+- the general distinction between convention and nature and how this applies
+ to justice;
+
+- why there exists such a thing as conventional justice;
+
+- why those who are naturally superior *ought* to live in accordance with
+ natural justice, and what that would amount to;
+
+- what Callicles' conception of happiness is, and exactly how this underlies
+ and supports his other views;
+
+- precisely how Socrates' argument is intended to undermine what Callicles has
+ put forward.
+
+- precisely *how* Socrates' response does or does not succeed, and why you
+ think so.
+
+*This assignment is adapted from one originally set by Prof. Houston Smit,
+University of Arizona, for PHIL 160D1.*
+
+Do:
+
+1. Explain *arguments* step-by-step.
+2. Use simple language.
+3. Ask yourself "why?" for every sentence you write, and make sure the
+ reason is clear to your reader.
+
+Don't:
+
+1. State different reasons without explaining them.
+2. Use fancy language.
+
+Remember that your task is to explain things in your own words. You
+may use quotations, but you must explain what they say too. Most of
+the paper should be your own writing, not long blocks of quoted text.
+
+## Rules, formatting etc.
+
+1. Late work will not be accepted, except where mandated by university policy,
+ or where we have agreed, several days in advance, to extend your deadline.
+
+ It is your responsibility to contact me early enough, not my responsibility
+ to arrange an extension at the last minute.
+
+2. The paper must be submitted in PDF format, on D2L. No Word documents, no
+ Pages documents. **If you submit in the wrong format, you will lose 10%,
+ i.e., one letter grade.** If you have any doubt about your ability to
+ convert to PDF, talk to me well in advance.
+
+ If you have D2L issues close to a deadline you may e-mail me the PDF
+ as proof you did it in time, but it cannot be graded until it has been
+ uploaded to D2L.
+
+3. You may go 10% above or below 2000 words. Beyond that, you will get a
+ zero.
+
+4. Please double-space, use one inch margins, and a size 12 font. Other than
+ that I do not care about your formatting choices, so long as you satisfy
+ the requirements of academic integrity.
+
## Grading
I will enter into D2L a breakdown of your score for this paper corresponding
-to the preceding breakdown. For more detailed feedback than this, you will
+to the proceeding breakdown. For more detailed feedback than this, you will
need to make an office hours appointment.
+
+You are welcome -- and encouraged -- to bring a draft of your paper to office
+hours *before* the deadline, and I can provide you with some suggestions for
+improvement.
+
+The primary purpose of this assignment is for you to focus on carefully
+explaining Plato's ideas within a limited word count. Secondarily -- one
+tenth of your score -- you are being asked for your own assessment of
+Socrates' response to Callicles. **You are not being asked which of Callicles
+or Socrates you think is correct, but which of them provides the more
+successful arguments.**
+
+Your paper will be graded out of 20 points, broken down as follows:
+
+* 3 points for grammar, spelling and punctuation. Proofread your
+ paper carefully!
+* 3 points for sentence, paragraph and overall essay structure.
+ Carefully plan your essay before you write it.
+* 4 points for your explanation of Callicles' view about natural and conventional justice
+* 3 points for your explanation of Calliclean hedonism
+* 5 points for your explanation of one of Socrates' responses to Callicles
+* 2 points for the plausibility of your concluding assessment about whose
+ argument is more successful.
+
+## Suggested structure
+
+Structure your essay in accordance with the grade breakdown -- spend more
+words on the parts to which more points are assigned. Here is a more specific
+skeleton which may help you:
+
+1. First paragraph -- briefly introduce the dramatic context in which
+ Callicles and Socrates clash. Why does Callicles enter the conversation?
+
+2. Second and third paragraphs -- explain Callicles' political ideas.
+
+3. Fourth paragraph -- explain Calliclean hedonism and how it underlies
+ Callicles' political ideas.
+
+4. Fifth and sixth paragraphs -- explain one of Socrates' responses to Callicles.
+
+5. Seventh and possibly eighth paragraph -- give your view as to whether
+ Socrates response succeeds or not.