Three interconnected parts/steps (think of the following as a rough outline):
(1) Introduce, briefly: philosophers, texts, and topic to be discussed, AND your thesis (i.e., your view of the good life in relation to Russell’s).
(2) Explain and analyze Bertrand Russell’s conception of the good life (though he calls it happiness) and connect his conception with two other philosophers we have read since the last paper, including either Simone de Beauvoir or Nell Noddings). Introduce the other philosophers to explain or critique Russell or, later, to begin to develop your thesis.
(3) Explain as your thesis–as stated at the start of your paper– whether you agree/disagree with Russell and why? You have a lot of leeway here to state, clarify, and give reasons for your own views on the good life, so far.
Remember to give reasons in your explanation and analysis. If you say you think/believe X, then continue: “I think X, because…” And when you give your reasons, then also imagine, as a way to develop your thinking through a dialog, how any of the other philosophers you are discussing might respond.
Papers must be submitted in Canvas. No email submissions accepted.
LENGTH: 3 pages (no more, no less). No late papers, unless you talk to me in advance with a documentable excuse.
Please do not visit or rely on any secondary source, in print or online, as this is not a research paper but a philosophical paper for you to develop your own ideas. Using outside sources is unacceptable
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.