The paper (6-10 pages long) is due Thurs., Mar. 23 in my office (Cowell Annex A-106) by 5:00pm. Please note that, as announced, there is an alternate assignment (which is more like a take-home final). The following instructions are for the original final paper assignment.
You should use some material from the second part of the course--i.e., Popper and/or Kuhn, and possibly also one or more of Popper's critics (Neurath, Putnam, Lakatos). Most if not all of the topics will also allow you to bring in material from the first part (e.g. you could write on Carnap vs. Popper, or Quine vs. Popper).
The first three suggested topics below are new; the others are modified versions of topics from the first paper. (The rest of these instructions are identical to the instructions for 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 first.
The main focus of the paper should be, one way or another, on texts we've read for this class, though you're welcome to use other material also if it seems useful/relevant. If you do use outside sources, it should go without saying that you must cite them, and provide enough bibliographical information that I can figure out what they are. (For sources from the recommended or required reading, title and page number should be sufficient.)
I recommend an attempt to interpret (understand/explain/make sense of) the views of the authors we've read, rather than, say, an attempt to make an argument of your own against them. (I recommend this particularly if one or more of these authors rubs you the wrong way or seems obviously wrong or uninteresting.) All of the suggested topics below are along those lines. This is only a recommendation, however: I suspect that an effort in this direction is most likely to produce a good paper, but if you think you have a good idea along other lines, go ahead and try it.