Short Writing Assignment #3 for PHIL 103 (Spring 2011)
Instructor: Dr. Jan Garrett
Most recent alteration: April 15, 2011 The third short paper is due Wednesday, April 27, for those writing on either of the Marx topics (1 and 2); Friday, April 29 (next session), for those writing on topic 3; Monday, May 2 for those writing on any other topics.
Because I want to encourage a reasonable distribution of topics, no more than eight (8) persons may write on any single topic. Please check with me when you have decided on your preference. I'll let you know whether the topic is oversubscribed.
If you do not write the third SWA on topic 1, 2, or 3, you will be expected to write an essay on Marx on the Final exam.
The best way to begin preparing for these papers is to read the appropriate textual material well in advance and work through the corresponding Study Questions that have been provided on the course website. Be engaged in the classroom discussion of these texts in the weeks before the SWA is due, if they are discussed in class.
Start work on these papers several days before they are due, so you can revise your original drafts while consciously paying attention to the virtues of good papers, also known as Intellectual Standards, and trying to ensure that you have followed the requirements stated below.
Incidentally, such intellectual standards are normally used by teachers in evaluating written work in subjects like ours. You might as well be aware of what they are.
The papers should be in essay style, broken into paragraphs of no more than ten lines each. Papers may be from 600 to 1000 words in length. They should be double-spaced and employ complete sentences, most of them declarative sentences. How the sentences are related to one another should be clear.
On the first page of the paper, put your name, email address, assignment indicator (SWA 3), class and section (e.g., 103-004), the date the assignment is being turned in, and the word count. Please do not forget the word count.
Quantity
If you have not written 600 words of original composition, you have probably not done enough.
When figuring the word count, do not include any quoted material in your word count.
Documentation
Do not fail to properly quote material taken directly from the textbook. Document your direct quotations using embedded page numbers, for instance (11) for page 11 of the textbook. Plagiarism is an academic offense. Please read and be sure to understand this FAQ page on plagiarism.
If you use any outside sources, please minimize borrowing passages from these for purposes of writing the paper. If you do directly cite an outside source, be sure to cite accurately and provide an accurate bibliographic reference to your source. Plagiarism is an academic offense.
I reserve the right to require that you supply me with a copy of your outside source, so that I can check your use of sources.
Options for Discussion in this SWA (SWA 3):
1. Marx, chapter 8, in Ten Theories. See the study questions on this chapter.2. Marx, The Communist Manifesto, chapter 1. See the study questions on this text.
There are a number of common weak arguments against Marx and Marxism. Sometimes even relatively careful academic authors like Stevenson adopt a few of them. Students doing short essays should on Marx should be aware of those weak arguments and the counter-arguments to them. I have prepared a partial list on this relatively short web page. See Challenges to Marx and Marxian Socialism. Marx and Engels include a discussion of some early counter-arguments in chapter 2 of the Communist Manifesto.
3. Foster and Magdoff, What Every Environmentalist Needs to Know about Capitalism, Monthly Review vol. 61, no. 10, especially sections III and IV. There are no study questions as of yet for this article.
4. Sartre, chapter 9, up to p. 197, in Ten Theories. See the study questions on this chapter.
5. One of the sections of chapter 10 (stages I, II, and III). See also what Stevenson says about evolutionary theory in his Conclusion. See the study questions on this chapter.
6. The Conclusion chapter by Stevenson. This is a reflection on the whole book by the primary author, but especially chapter 10. That chapter, which is about natural scientific and non-Marxist social scientific theories about human nature since 1859, contains no "Diagnosis" or "Prescription" section, but the conclusion does. If you write on this, be prepared to read or reread sections from earlier chapters when necessary to understand Stevenson's references to them. (Note: We may not have time to discuss Stevenson's conclusion in a systematic way, but if you'd like me to discuss something he says there, just ask.)
General Instructions For topic 1, focus on pp. 167-180; what problem or problems of humanity does Marx diagnose, according to Stevenson, and what "prescription" does he offer. Provide insights based on parts of the chapter other than "diagnosis" and "prescription" as needed to make sense of those issues.
For topic 2, focus on chapter 1 of the Manifesto. Basing your essay on (paraphrases of) Marx's and Engels' own words (as of 1848), what problems of modern society/the working class do they diagnose and what solution are they trying to help along? Incorporate insights from Stevenson's Marx chapter or lectures as needed.
For topic 3, focus on sections III and IV of the Monthly Review article by Foster and Magdoff. Restate the authors' argument about capitalism and the environment as clearly as you can.
For topic 4, focus on pp. 185-197. What diagnosis of the human condition does the younger Sartre present and what kind of prescription does he give in response? Provide insights based on other parts of the chapter than diagnosis and prescription as needed to make sense of those issues.
Space permitting, present a reasoned criticism of the primary view under discussion. Obviously, there is no sense in presenting a criticism of a theory criticized by Stevenson if you haven't first fairly summarized the particular theory being criticized.
For topic 5, summarize the discoveries or scientific claims presented in the section you chose. Can we draw any moral conclusions from these scientific or social scientific theories, or must we get our ethical guidelines from some other source? If we can draw moral conclusions from them, what are those conclusions?
Part of your task is to show you've understood the essentials of your chosen topic and could explain them to somebody else.
If you choose topic 6, summarize and reflect on (some of) the comments and challenges by Stevenson in the Conclusion. The Conclusion is a reflection on the entire book, but especially chapter 10.