Philosophy 25A Clarke FIRST PAPER Directions: Write a 3-page paper in response to the prompt below

Subject:PhilosophyPrice:16.86 Bought3

Share With

Philosophy 25A Clarke FIRST PAPER Directions: Write a 3-page paper in response to the prompt below. Your paper should be doublespaced. Use a standard font (e.g. Times New Roman), size 12, and standard margins. Make sure you write about the specific passage mentioned in the prompt. Make sure you answer each part of the prompt. Due date: Monday, September 27, at 5pm (PT) Submit your paper as a pdf or word file via bCourses > Assignments. Meno’s Definition of Virtue At Meno 77b, Meno offers the following two-part definition of virtue: ‘I say that virtue is (1) to desire beautiful things and (2) to have the power to acquire them.’ At Meno 77b–78b,1 Socrates gives an argument against the first part of Meno’s proposed definition. Explain how Socrates’ argument works. Is it a good argument? Explain your answer. Plagiarism notice: Anyone found plagiarizing or cheating in an assignment will automatically fail the course and be reported to the Center for Student Conduct. For further information on plagiarism and how to avoid it, see: http://sa.berkeley.edu/cite-responsibly. As a tool to promote academic integrity in this course, all written work submitted via bCourses will be checked for originality using Turnitin. Turnitin compares student work to a database of books, articles, websites, and other student papers. For more information about Turnitin at Berkeley, visit http://ets.berkeley.edu/academic-integrity. 1 This goes from the bottom of p.66 to the top of p.68 of Plato: Five Dialogues. Philosophy 25A Clarke Introduction to Plato’s Meno The first paper assignment focuses on a passage from Plato’s Meno (77b–78b, on pp.66–68 of Five Dialogues). In preparation I asked you to read Meno 70a–81a. The Meno is thematically linked to the Protagoras: both dialogues are concerned with the question: Is virtue [or: excellence] teachable? (Note: the same Greek word aret? can be translated both as ‘virtue’ and as ‘excellence’.) The Meno portrays a conversation between Socrates and Meno, a young aristocrat from Thessaly. (Later on, a third character will join them––Anytus, who would later be one of Socrates’ accusers.) The dialogue starts with Meno asking Socrates: Can you tell me, Socrates, can virtue be taught? Or is it not teachable but the result of practice, or is it neither of these, but men possess it by nature or in some other way? (70a) Socrates says that he doesn’t know the answer. (This shouldn’t be surprising, now that we’ve read the Apology.) Further, he says that the reason he doesn’t know the answer is that he doesn’t know what virtue is: If I do not know what something is, how could I know what qualities it possesses? (71b) In other words, if you don’t know what virtue is, how can you be in a position to know whether it is teachable or not? Socrates goes on to suggest that he has never met anyone who did know what virtue is––not even the great Gorgias! Meno, by contrast, thinks that the answer to this question (the ‘What is it?’ question) is easy. But it turns out to be much harder to answer than he realizes. Initially, Meno doesn’t really understand the question. (Compare Euthyphro, at the beginning of the Euthyphro.) He starts by listing different types of virtue (‘the virtue of a man is …, the virtue of a woman is …’). But Socrates corrects him. We are not looking for a list of different virtues. We are looking for the form of virtue, i.e. the thing that all the different instances of virtue have in common: all human beings are good in the same way, for they become good by acquiring the same qualities … Since then the virtue of all is the same, try to tell me … what that same thing is. (73c) Meno eventually catches on. And this is the proposal he offers: I say that virtue is (1) to desire beautiful things and (2) to have the power to acquire them. (77b) 1 Philosophy 25A Clarke The prompt asks you to explain and to evaluate Socrates’ argument against the first part of Meno’s definition (77a–78a). *An important note about the term ‘beautiful things’. The Greek word for ‘beautiful’ is ‘kalon’. This word does not refer exclusively to aesthetic beauty. It can also be translated as ‘fine’. 2 Philosophy 25A Clarke Writing a Philosophy Paper (for 25A) 1. Answer the question My most important piece of advice is: answer the specific question (or questions) you are asked. Answer every part of the question. Every sentence in your paper ought to be directly relevant to answering the questions in the prompt. 2. Locate the relevant section of the text This may seem obvious, but make sure you are writing about the right part of the text! Look carefully at the page references given in the prompt. 3. Understanding the two main tasks The prompt asks you (a) to explain and (b) to evaluate a philosophical argument. Let’s think about these two main tasks in turn. (a) Explain Your goal here is to explain how the argument in question is supposed to work. In other words: Give your own reconstruction of the argument. In other words: What’s the argument’s conclusion? What are its premises? Are there any implicit premises (i.e. premises that the author takes for granted without stating them explicitly)? Why are we supposed to accept the argument’s premises? (Sometimes an author will support one of the premises with a further sub-argument.) How do the premises support the conclusion? Some advice: • Make sure you don’t just paraphrase the text. Merely paraphrasing the text isn’t the same thing as explaining how an argument works. • You should support your explanation of the argument by citing the text, but avoid long quotes (they take up too much space). • Remember the principle of charity! Try to give the most charitable reconstruction of the argument that you can. Having a clear idea of how an argument works is an essential precondition of being able to assess the argument – that’s the second main task. (b) Evaluate The second task is evaluative. Is it a good argument, or not? Why do you think this? Give reasons backing up your assessment of the argument. It is crucially important that you explain and justify your assessment of the argument. Some advice: • Regardless of whether you end up agreeing or disagreeing with the argument, the procedure for evaluating the argument will be pretty much the same. Once you’ve explained how the argument works, you should think about where it might be challenged. (For example, have you identified a premise that seems particularly controversial?) Spell out the challenge for the argument. Then consider how this challenge might be answered. 1 Philosophy 25A Clarke • • The page limit is tight. It’s much better to explore a single objection in depth, rather than trying to reel off lots and lots of superficial criticisms. A good philosophy paper will often have a ‘dialectical’ structure. First you explain an argument, then you present an objection to that argument, then you consider how that objection might be answered (and so on). 4. Writing style The best philosophical writing is clear, simple, and straightforward. Use short sentences and plain prose. Avoid needlessly elaborate language. Don’t vary your terminology just for the sake of variation. If you use a technical term, explain what you mean by it. Avoid unexplained jargon. Avoid overstatements. Be careful and precise. Give examples to illustrate your points. Never just ‘gesture’ or ‘hint’ at things. Spell everything out as carefully and as explicitly as you possibly can. 5. ‘Signposting’ An excellent way to make your writing as clear as possible is to make use of ‘signposts’. For example: ‘In this paper I am going to explain and evaluate X’s argument for thesis Y. First I will explain how X’s argument works … I have now explained how X’s argument is meant to work. In the next section of my paper I will consider a possible objection to this argument… Now that I have explained the objection to X’s argument, I want to explain how X might reply to the objection…’. 6. Get into the habit of revising Once you’ve finished a draft of your paper, put it aside. Go back to it a day later, with fresh eyes. Be self-critical. Ask yourself: ‘Is everything I’ve written perfectly clear? Will it be perfectly clear to other people?’ If there is even a chance that something won’t be clear to your reader, rewrite the relevant parts of the paper and put it aside again. Repeat this process. (Consider asking a friend to read your paper and tell you if they find anything unclear: this can be very helpful.) Get into the habit of re-reading and revising your work. This is the only way of writing a good philosophy paper. (This means that you should plan ahead: don’t leave it to the last minute, or the last day, or the last three days…). 7. ‘Research’ Your ‘research’ for this paper should consist in carefully reading and thinking hard about the primary text. You should read the text several times over before you start writing. Keep checking the text as you write. For this class you don’t need to do any secondary reading in order to do well in the assignments; what’s important is that you do the primary readings very carefully. (Needless to say, if you do make use of secondary sources, you must cite them.) 8. Additional resources A more extensive guide to philosophical reading and writing, by Niko Kolodny, is available on bCourses. It’s highly recommended! You should also consider trying Prof. Kolodny’s sample paper exercise (also on the website). 2 Paper quality checklist Reconstruction of views - Have I reconstructed the views of those I’m discussing accurately? - Have I been careful not to attribute claims to them that they don’t actually make? Introduction and conclusion - Do I clearly state what I’m going to do (and will not do) in the paper at the start? - Have I set out my thesis clearly? Find the sentence(s) in which you set out your thesis. - Do I clearly state what I have done (and haven’t done) in the paper at the end? Clarity of writing - Does my writing style clearly communicate what I want it to? - Take out unnecessary synonyms and simplify your sentence structure. - Use your sentences to communicate something to a friend or a family member (not someone in the class) and ask them to tell you what they think they mean. Clarity of structure and thesis - Is the structure of my paper absolutely obvious? - Check that you’re signposting about what you’ll do in certain paragraphs. Is the function of each and every paragraph obvious to the reader? Originality - Do I go beyond what we did in class? - Make sure you’ve drawn new connections, made a new point or suggestion, used an original example, or offered a new criticism - Saying something very clearly in your own words can count as originality - Don’t take this as an invitation to be overly ambitious Focus - Do I stick to the point and follow my plan closely? - Do I avoid tangents and exclude undeveloped ideas from my paper? - Do a few things well, not more things poorly - If the prompt doesn’t ask for it, you probably shouldn’t try to do it in your paper Also check out Jim Pryor’s excellent guidelines at http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/guidelines/writing.html