Write a short, philosophical paper that has as its thesis (((one))) of the following:
1. The argument based on Pascal’s wager succeeds/fails in establishing the existence of God.
2. The teleological argument succeeds/fails in establishing the existence of God.
3. The argument based on the backward problem succeeds/fails in the establishing the truth of Determinism.
4. Frankfurt’s Jones-Black case succeeds/fails in establishing the plausibility of compatibilism.
5. Hobbes’ (paired with the Prisoner’s Dilemma) succeeds/fails in establishing the necessity of a government.
Of course, the main goal of the paper is to display your new found skills as a philosophical ninja. As a result, you should write in your best possible “voice” and be as clear about the concepts and arguments as you can. You may use “I” (first person singular) in the paper; after all, it is a paper about your take on the arguments, and in some cases your arguments. It is a long held belief that writing is crucial to good understanding; so if you feel that you are missing a piece of the puzzle, you might be. Try and work through the problem the best you can. Also, if you feel that you may not be as clear as you like, try using an example, or putting it another way. Finally, while this paper is short, I would strongly prefer a polished draft; that is, you should (at least) re-read the paper (some time after you’ve completed it – a few hours later is usually good) and clean it up in line with your fresh look at it.
structure of the paper:
Introduction
Start with the thesis statement you select above. (Do not start with “Since the beginning of time” or some other framing sentence; these are almost always false and take up valuable space.) After that, you should proceed to mention the arguments you will talk about in the three main sections. (Normally, philosophical papers can have many sections, but since this is a short paper you will have only three.) Also, be as clear as you can about what your position will be in each section. Since there will be no conclusion for your paper, the entire map of your paper should appear here.
Section 1 (The Set Up)
A. Outline the argument you will be focusing on in for the rest of the paper. For example, if you selected Thesis 2, you should state clearly whether you will argue that it succeeds or fails and then you should provide the argument as clearly as possible.
B. Be sure to clear up any simple problems that would make someone reject the argument and clear up any difficulties with the key concepts. For example, if you selected Thesis 1, it might be helpful to say what kind of God you will be talking about and why.
Section 2 (Critical Evaluation, take 1)
A. Raise one serious (the most serious if possible) objection to the argument you detailed in Section 1. Be sure to be clear on whether the objection is to the premises or to the support relation of the argument. By the time you are done with Section 2 A, it should be obvious to your reader what the objection is and how bad it might be for the argument presented in Section 1.
B. Offer a defense on behalf of the argument in Section 1A to the objection you raised in Section 2 A. Be clear how this defense is supposed to work and the concepts required for the defense.
C. Discuss whether or not you think the defense succeeds or fails. That is, does the reply/defense succeed in saving the argument, or does your objection (in 2A) destroy the argument? A good discussion may contain additional arguments, but it always contains good reasons for agreeing or disagreeing with the position you take.
D. Your discussion may introduce new ideas that require critical evaluation themselves. If they do, continue with a discussion of this sort in a new paragraph. In a longer philosophical paper, you may have many paragraphs of this sort before you turn to the next section. For most papers of this length, it is unlikely you will have more than one of these paragraphs.
Section 3 (Critical Evaluation, take 2)
A. Raise the next most serious objection to the argument in 1A. Proceed as you did in 2A.
B. Provide a defense for the argument in 1A to this new objection. Proceed as you did in 2B.
C. Discuss the objection and defense, as you did in 2C.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]