Paper Assignment

INSTRUCTIONS

1. Pick a topic below.  Structure the paper as specified below the topic.Give equal space to each bullet.  If there are three bullets, then one page per bullet. Jump right in--no need for intro or concluding paragraphs.
2. Length: 3 pages (900 words--put word count on last page).  Use Times 12 or a similar font and normal margins.  No penalty for longer papers.
3. Write for an uninformed reader--someone who doesn't know anything about the material you're discussing.  You must explain everything clearly.
4. Unless you get prior approval, no other sources should be used besides readings in the textbook, movies, and class materials (lecture notes, blog posts, powerpoints, etc.)  Do no simply copy class materials.
5. Don't quote excessively.  The paper should have no more than one quoted sentence per page. When you do use an author's words, phrases, or sentences, you must use quotation marks.  If you don't, you open yourself to being charged with plagiarism*.  See more important instructions about quotation here.  
6. Carefully proof and edit. Use spell check and grammar check.
7. Due 11/11 (by midnight).  Papers have to be submitted at Canvas.  Three point penalty for every day late.

TOPICS

(1) Imagine Truman Burbank comes upon Vogel's argument about skepticism and applies Vogel's solution to his own situation.  Are Vogel's ideas going to help him discover the truth or are they going to make him live forever in a reality TV show?

• Explain Truman's problem, presenting relevant movie scenes.
• Explain Vogel's solution.
• Discuss your view on the question.  Defend your view.

(2)  In Ex Machina, Ava worries that Nathan is going to switch her off.  Is it morally problematic to turn off an AI?  Your discussion should involve explaining and responding to two relevant and contrasting philosophies of mind.

• Explain the issue about Ava, presenting relevant movie scenes.
• Explain and demonstrate the relevance of two philosophies of mind.
• Answer the question in light of what you said about the two philosophies of mind. Defend your view.

(3) Does The Knowledge Argument (Jackson) successfully show that physicalism is false?  Your discussion should involve explaining and responding to two objections philosophers have made against that argument.

• State The Knowledge Argument.
• State the two objections.
• Respond to the objections.  Defend your view.

(3) In the movie Alice, Alice1 plans the drug overdose of Alice2. Take a position on whether Alice1 is trying to kill her older self or trying to kill someone else.  Your discussion should involve explaining and responding to two relevant and contrasting accounts of personal identity.

• Explain the issue about Alice, presenting relevant movie scenes.
• Explain and demonstrate the relevance of two accounts of personal identity.
• Answer the question in light of what you said about the two accounts of personal identity.  Defend your view.

(4) Watch the movie Moon (2009).  Discuss whether Sam Bell (the person we meet at the beginning) survives at the end of the movie.  Your discussion should involve explaining and responding to two accounts of person identity. Pick accounts that give contrasting answers to the question.

• Explain the issue about Sam Bell, presenting relevant movie scenes.
• Explain and demonstrate the relevance of two accounts of personal identity.
• Answer the question in light of what you said about the two accounts of personal identity.  Defend your view.

(5)  Hard Determinists would say none of the actions in The Manchurian Candidate are free.  How would Libertarians explain why some of the actions are free?  Do they have a plausible explanation?

• Explain the issue about which actions are free, presenting relevant movie scenes.
• Explain and demonstrate the relevance of Libertarianism.
• Assess what the Libertarian would say. Make objections.  Perhaps defend Libertarians from objections.  Defend your view.

(6)  Hard Determinists would say none of the actions in The Manchurian Candidate are free.  How would Soft Determinists explain why some of the actions are free (discuss Wolf, Frankfurt, or both)?  Do they have a plausible explanation?

• Explain the issue about which actions are free, presenting relevant movie scenes.
• Explain and demonstrate the relevance of Soft Determinism.
• Assess what the Soft Determinist would say. Make objections.  Perhaps defend Soft Determinists from objections.  Defend your view.

(7)  Explain Galen Strawson's argument that there's no free will and people are never responsible for their actions (the video at the blog will help you understand his article). Make the best counterargument you can.

• Explain Strawson's argument.
• Make a counterargument.

(8)  Why does Plantinga think it's legitimate to believe in God without proof? Either argue against his position or consider an objection to Plantinga and refute it.

• Explain Plantinga's argument.
• Make a counterargument, if you have one.
• Otherwise, consider an objection and refute it.

(9)  Watch the movie A Serious Man (2009).  Considering all the awful things that happen to the devout main character, should he conclude that God does not exist--as the argument from evil holds?  Discuss in light of Rowe's article.

• Provide a quick synopsis of the awful things that happen to the main character.
• Explain how the argument from evil uses those sorts of things to show that God does not exist.  Discuss possible responses.
• Answer the question in light of the ideas in Rowe. Defend your view.

(10)  Explain the debate about the fine tuning argument and take a position for or against it.

• Explain the fine tuning argument and explain some of the main points White makes in defense of it.
• Explain some objections to the fine tuning argument.
• Take a stand on whether the fine tuning argument is weak or strong. You should respond to some of the key points on each side and defend your position.

GRADING

1.  50 points--Paper is on one of the topics and has the right length. Paper is original--no plagiarism*, no over-use of quotation, no copying from texts.
2. 15 points--Paper has the right structure.
3. 15 points--You present philosophical ideas accurately and clearly.  Movie details are presented accurately (when topic involves a movie).
4. 15 points--Your own views are well thought out and coherent.
5. 5 points--The paper is well proofed and edited. Quotation is punctuated and referenced properly.

*PLAGIARISM

Violation of SMU's honor code will not be tolerated. Every piece of work you turn in must be entirely your own. Writing a paper means both expressing your own thoughts, and expressing them in your own words. You may not copy passages from our texts, from any other texts, or from the internet, even if the passages are brief. Brief quotes, with proper attribution, are of course acceptable. No one else may write a paper for you, whether in whole or in part. The penalty for academic dishonesty will be a zero on the paper or exam in question and possibly also in the course. On top of this grade penalty, the case may be presented to the honor council, which may decide to take further disciplinary action, such as suspension or dismissal.