The paper (68 pages long) is due, as an attachment, via the Assignments tool on ecommons, by midnight Tues., Jun. 10. However, an introductory paragraph and brief outline (approximately one sentence per paragraph of the proposed complete paper) is due (via the same tool on ecommons) at some time on or before Tues., Jun. 3. Your TA will send this back to you as soon as possible with suggested changes, which you should take into account. This preliminary assignment will not be separately graded, but if you do not hand it in at all or if it is wholly unsatisfactory, your grade on the final paper will be reduced by one half step (e.g. A to A-).
The below topics are suggestions. If you want to
write on another topic, feel free to do so. It might be a good idea,
however, in that case, to check with me and/or your TA first (i.e.,
even before writing your introductory paragraph and outline).
Note that the topics tend to have many
sub-questions. You need not (and probably should not) try to answer
all of them. (You certainly should not just answer them one
after another in order that would make a bad paper.) I put them
there to suggest various directions for thinking about the topic, and
in particular to head off superficial or excessively simple ways of
thinking about it.
All of the topics below require you to make
substantial use of material from at least two of our main authors
(Locke, Berkeley, and Hume). You can also write about all three
if you feel it improves your paper (but you will not get extra credit
just for including a third author). If you want to write about a
topic which involves only one of the three, you should check with me
or with your TA about it.
You can also use other outside material if you think
it helps your paper (though, again, I dont necessarily recommend
that). If so you must of course make it clear exactly what you are
using and how. Also, it should still be clear that the paper was
written for this course.1
The intent of the paper is to discuss the views or
attitudes manifested in the reading, rather than your own opinions on
the topic. That is: you should ideally come up with something
interesting and original to say (not mere summary), but it should
something interesting and original about what our authors
mean. (In particular: I dont expect or encourage you to reach a
judgment about whether what they say is correct or not.) If you are
upset by something one of our authors says, or find it ridiculous, you
should use that as an excuse to try and understand better why someone
would say such a thing. If you cant manage that, you should try to
write about a topic which doesnt touch on the problem area.
For a good comparison paper, remember that the comparison should be interesting. This means, for example, that the
paper should not read like two shorter papers (one on each author)
stuck together. Also it should say something non-obvious about their
similarities and differences. (It is always possible to make any two
positions sounds similar if one is vague enough. But that isnt
interesting.)
If youre using the editions I ordered, you can
refer to the readings just by giving the page number. If you use a
different edition and/or some other source, please give at least
enough bibliographical information that I and/or your TA can find it
if necessary. Theres no need for a separate bibliography or title
page.
You can find answers to some commonly asked questions about my assignments and grading at http://people.ucsc.edu/~abestone/courses/faq.htm.