The paper (8-12 pages long) is due Wed., June 8, 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--I'm not sure exactly when.)
As was the case with the first paper: 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 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.
In general you should try to discuss two or three different authors, including at least one from the later part of this course (post-Kant)--but there could be exceptions to that for a really good idea; if you're not sure, check with me. Some of the topics also suggest the use of other sources; in general you are welcome to bring in such other sources (especially things you read in previous quarters) if you think they're relevant. If you do so, however, please make sure it's still clear that the paper was written for this course.
As usual, the intent of the paper is to discuss the views or attitudes of the authors and/or their characters, rather than your own opinions on the topic. Don't forget that the author of a work of fiction doesn't necessarily agree with the views expressed by all or any of its characters. Also, don't forget that some characters are dishonest or confused or hypocritical (they may not accurately report--even to themselves--either what has happened, or what they desire or intend, or what they think or feel); also, remember that some may change their views as time goes on. (These remarks mostly apply to Gene Wolfe, but Nietzsche, in Beyond Good and Evil, also has some fictional characters. And there are the movies.)
Recall as usual that a good comparison paper requires that there be interest in the comparison. That is: it should not just be two (or more) papers stuck together, one about one author and one about the other. Rather, it should show something interesting and unexpected about the relationship between the two (or more) authors discussed. For example, it might uncover unexpected similarities (and explain the differences that make those similarities difficult to recognize), or pinpoint the exact point at which two authors fundamentally disagree.
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.