Next: About this document ...
Up: Phil. 11paper, Winter 12
Previous: Phil. 11paper, Winter 12
The paper (5-7 pages long) is due, as an attachment, via the
“Assignments” tool on ecommons,
by midnight Wed., Mar. 21.
There are two suggested topics, listed below, but if
you want to write on another topic relevant to the course, 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).
I don't expect or recommend that you use any sources
beyond the texts assigned for the course. If so you must of course
make it clear exactly what you are using and how (this applies even if
you don't quote verbatim). Also: whatever topic you choose, and
whatever outside material you may use, it should still be clear that
the paper was written for this course.1
The two suggested topics are as follows:
- Compare Socrates (meaning, primarily: Socrates as presented by Plato,
although you might find Aristophanes' portrayal relevant for some
purposes) with one of the following: Thales, Anaxagoras, Aristophanes,
Euthyphro, Gorgias (as teacher of Meno), Euthydemus/Dionysodorus,
Diogenes the Cynic. Specifically, you might want to look at a question
like this: if philosophy is defined by the type of wisdom that
Socrates has, or by the method (of teaching, and/or of seeking
knowledge, and/or of self-examination) that Socrates follows,
as opposed to the wisdom or method of the other figure, then:
what is philosophy (and/or: how can it be taught and learned)?
- Consider Aristotle's definition of moral virtue at Nicomachean
Ethics 2.6, 1107a
-b
, which I would translate as follows: “a
state having to do with choice: [a state which consists in] being in
the mean [relative] to us which is defined by a
reason/account/ratio [logos], and [in particular] by
that reason/account/ratio by which the prudent person would
define it.” (In the assigned Bartlett and Collins translation, which
among other things is based on a slightly different version of the
original text, reads “a characteristic marked by choice, residing in
the mean relative to us, a characteristic defined by reason and as the
prudent person would define it” [p. 35].) Explain why Aristotle
thinks that this definition, unlike, for example, those offered by
Meno, would hold up to Socrates' arguments. (In a short paper you
should probably not aim to do this completely, but rather should pick
a particular feature of Aristotle's definition and explain what
Socratic strategy it's designed to head off.
As a variant of this you could try doing the same thing with
Aristotle's description of the ruling art or science as “the
political art” in Nicomachean Ethics 1.1-4, or with his
discussions of wisdom in Nicomachean Ethics 6.7 and
Metaphysics 1.1-2 (though the latter will be difficult on the
new reading schedule).
Footnotes
- ... course.1
- If you have any
questions about policies on plagiarism, double submission (submission
of the same paper for two different courses -- not generally
allowed), or related issues, please see http://www.ucsc.edu/academics/academic_integrity/undergraduate_students/resources.html.
Next: About this document ...
Up: Phil. 11paper, Winter 12
Previous: Phil. 11paper, Winter 12
Abe Stone
2012-02-29