The paper (4-6 pages long) is due Wed., Mar. 16, in my office, Gates-Blake 228, by 4:30pm. Gates-Blake is the building connected to Cobb. (The 4:30pm limit is mostly because Gates-Blake gets locked at some point in the evening.)
As usual: 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 the writing
intern first.
Note once again 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.
For all but one of the below topics, I expect you to
discuss in some detail (1) Cervantes and (2) at least one of Leibniz
and Descartes (focusing on the Meditations 2-4 and 6, though
you can use other things from him as well). To write a good paper you
will probably have to mention some other things we've read, at least
in passing. I don't recommend a paper only about one author, or which
doesn't use Cervantes, or which uses Cervantes and Locke and/or Hume,
but not Descartes and/or Leibniz. If you want to write about a topic
which doesn't fit these guidelines, you should definitely
check with me about it.
I don't expect any of these papers to use
the ancient and medieval material from the beginning of this
course. You're free to quote it if it seems useful, but I don't
necessarily recommend trying that. On the other hand, if you can use
traditional metaphysical terminology--and use it correctly--in your discussion of the early modern authors, that
might well be helpful. (But this doesn't mean: try to get in as much
Aristotelian terminology as you can for extra credit. It means: use it
if and when it enables you state your point more clearly or
concisely.)
As usual, 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 and/or their characters mean. (In particular: I don't expect
or encourage you to reach a judgment about whether what they say is
correct or not.)
If you're 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 can find it if
necessary. There's no need for a separate bibliography or title page.