17th and 18th Century Philosophy (PHIL 318)
Writing
With all your writing assignments, please make free use of the resources available to you at the Manchester University Writing Center.
Short Essays [rubric]
About once every two weeks a one to two page essay on the day’s reading will be due (and it is due BEFORE THE CLASS PERIOD for which it is assigned). An essay topic is provided for nearly every day (see the Schedule page, but you need to complete only NINE of these for full credit, with the following distribution, writing on three before each of the three exams (one each on Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, and three on Kant).
Because of your ability to choose which essays to write, I will not accept any late essays.
Each essay should be a succinct and beautifully written response to the given prompts, which are found on the Reading Schedule. Please turn in these essays through Canvas, in the appropriate drop-box (your first essay goes into box E-1, your second into E-2, and so on). These will be graded on length, content, and basic mechanics (see the rubric). Please type these up in a word processor, and give them a good proof-reading before uploading into the appropriate essay-number in Canvas.
Length: 400-500 words (this is not much, so you need to be succinct).
Daily Paragraphs [rubric]
A one-paragraph reflection on some passage in the reading will be due at 9:00 a.m. before each class session. This passage is of your own choosing, so long as it doesn’t overlap with the topic of the short essay for that day. This passage could be a single sentence that puzzles you or that you find interesting. These daily paragraphs are due by 9:00 AM (type these up as a Word document, then upload the file into Canvas). Each paragraph will be graded following a 5 pt. rubric.
Format: If the passage is short, type it out; otherwise, indicate its location. Follow this with your one-paragraph reflection. Use this sample submission as a guide:
|
Heraclitus, Fr. 118: “A dry soul is wisest and best.” Heraclitus mentions the four standard kinds of stuffs (fire, air, water, earth), and he seems to associate the soul with fire, which is also associated with logos, which makes sense. The soul (or mind) would be analogous to fire (or perhaps he intended it to be literally a kind of fire), always changing, but also retaining a kind of unity (namely, the continuity of the flame). Would Heraclitus have thought that each of our minds was part of the basic cosmic fire that ordered (or was the order of) the universe? |
Discussion Forums [top]
Full credit in the course will require writing four posts and commenting on eight posts written by others (so, for each forum, you will write one post and comment on two posts by other students).
The topics and due dates (for the posts and comments) are listed below, and on Canvas (under the "Communications" tab: select "Discussions"), where the writing will be submitted; reminders are also listed in green on the reading and assignment Schedule. NB: You are encouraged to make these posts as early as you can. Feel free to comment on posts as soon as they are available.
Each post should be at least 500 words and is worth up to 6 points; the comments should be at least 100 words each, and each is worth up to 2 points (see the rubric).
A good post will show evidence of having worked through the relevant readings, perhaps also responding to class discussion, and is written free of grammatical errors and typos.
About the comments:
(1) If a post already has two comments, then choose another post on which to comment.
(2) These comments should be more than simply praise or a note of agreement. You should interact with the claims made in the post, or with the argumentation: Do you agree or disagree, and why? Is the author overlooking something? You might offer further evidence for the author’s views, or else counter-evidence. Try to raise at least one useful question for furthering the discussion.
(3) Feel welcome to comment as often as you wish on the posts; for any given forum, I’ll grade your two most substantial comments (that appear to be 100 words or more), but shorter comments are also welcome, and can add immeasurably to the conversation.
Topics and Due Dates [top]
Forum #1: “Cogito ergo sum.” [rubric]
Do you agree with Descartes that one’s own existence is self-evident? Before answering this, first indicate as clearly as you can what you mean by this thing that you are certain exists, when you are certain of your existence. [Writing this in two paragraphs would be a good practice.]
Before you write the post and comments, be sure to check out the grading rubric. [rubric] Your writing will be graded on how well it measures up to this.
Due dates
... for the original post: Wednesday, Feb 7 (midnight)
... for the two comments: Friday, Feb 9 (midnight)
Forum #2: “Principle of Sufficient Reason.” [rubric]
Leibniz (and a great many other philosophers) have claimed that nothing happens without a reason or cause — that is, everything that exists has a “sufficient reason” that causes it to exist, and everything that is true has a “sufficient reason” for its truth. Do you agree with this “principle of sufficient reason”? Explain why you accept or reject this principle.
Due dates
... for the original post: Friday, Feb 23 (midnight)
... for the two comments: Monday, Feb 26 (midnight)
Forum #3: “Material World.” [rubric]
Berkeley claims that the material world does not exist; on the face of it, this sounds absurd. Samuel Johnson, a contemporary of Berkeley’s, kicked a large stone upon hearing of immaterialism, saying “I refute it thus.” Does kicking a large stone (or, for that matter, a large philosopher) refute immaterialism? Are Berkeley’s arguments against matter compelling?
Before you write the post and comments, be sure to read through the grading rubric. Your writing will be graded on how well it measures up to this. Among other things, your post should make use of appropriate class readings and discussions.
Due dates
... for the original post: Friday, Apr 6 (midnight)
... for the two comments: Monday, Apr 9 (midnight)
Forum #4: “Phenomena and Noumena.” [rubric]
One of the oldest and most fundamental distinctions in philosophy — if there is such a distinction — is between appearances (phenomena) and reality (noumena), the way things appear and the way things are. This is a central feature of Kant’s transcendental idealism which, among other things, claims that the extent of our knowledge is limited to phenomena; we can think of the noumenal, but we can never know it. What do you think?
Before you write the post and comments, be sure to read through the grading rubric. Your writing will be graded on how well it measures up to this. Among other things, your post should make use of appropriate class readings and discussions.
Due dates
... for the original post: Friday, May 4 (midnight)
... for the two comments: Monday, May 7 (midnight)
WRITING TIPS
Please carefully proofread your essays. You need to use complete sentences, proper punctuation, and correct spelling. Both in college and after you graduate you will be judged, in part, by how well you write. Typos, misspellings, poor grammar — in short, sloppy writing — is like so much stink coming from the bottom of your shoes. It won’t matter how nicely your hair is combed or your shirt is pressed if you can’t write a decent paragraph.
I hope it never comes to this, but my comments on your writing might make use of some of the following abbreviations:
awk: awkward. This is a sentence problem; the sentence should be re-written for greater clarity.
frag: sentence fragment. Another sentence problem; your sentence is lacking something vital. Like a subject. Or a verb. Don’t fall into the trap of writting essays that sound like advertising copy. We all can do better than that!
wc: word choice. You might find a better word to suit your sentence. Consult your dictionary for the exact meaning.
sp: spelling. Consult your dictionary!
?: Huh? You’ve lost your reader.
TS?: Topic sentence? This is a paragraph problem. There needs to be a topic sentence (normally, the lead sentence of the paragraph) that indicates what the paragraph is all about (what you are hoping to do in the paragaph; or it’s the claim for which the paragraph will now offer support, or an observation for which the paragraph will now offer some elaboration, etc.).
CO?: Cohere? Another paragraph problem; the sentences in this paragraph don’t fit together very well. Try re-arranging the,. Ask yourself: (a) What goal am I trying to acheive with this paragraph? and (b) Is each sentence working towards this goal?
Q?: Quotation? Quotations should be used only when a paraphrase will not do the job as effectively. Common problems include failing to properly introduce a quotation, failing to properly cite a quotation, quoting more than is helpful, and using a quotation when a paraphrase would be better.
Academic Dishonesty [top]
Feel free to stop by my office with any questions you might have about what might constitute plagiariasm, but see also this useful resource found on the library website.
[The following text is copied from the university Catalog]
Membership in the Manchester University community requires a devotion to the highest principles of academic and personal integrity, a commitment to maintain honor, and a continuous regard for the rights of others. There can be no rights without individual responsibility.
Manchester University faculty are committed to teaching and learning as a career and a profession. Each instructor is presumed to develop and use methods and techniques which enhance learning and which best fit his or her personality and subject matter area. At the same time, the instructor is expected to abide by the general principles of responsible teaching which are commonly accepted by the academic profession. These principles suggest that faculty keep complete records of student performance and that they develop and apply express, uniform criteria for evaluating student performance.
Students are free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study. While they may reserve judgment about matters of opinion, they are responsible for learning the content of any course in which they are enrolled. At the same time, students are expected to abide by the general principles of academic honesty which are commonly accepted in educational settings.
When a student chooses not to follow the general principles of academic honesty, the following policies and procedures bear their sad fruit.
Plagiarism
Plagiarism is the presentation of information (either written or oral) as one’s own when some or all of the information was derived from some other source.
Specific types of plagiarism encountered in written and oral assignments include the following:
● Sources have been properly identified, but excerpts have been quoted without proper use of quotation marks; or the material has been slightly modified or rephrased rather than restated in the student’s own words.
● Key ideas or items of information derived from specific sources that present material that is not common knowledge have been presented without proper identification of the source or sources.
● Unidentified excerpts from other sources have been woven into the student’s own presentation.
● A paper or speech may be a mosaic of excerpts from several sources and presented as the student’s own.
● An entire paper or speech has been obtained from some other source and presented as the student’s own.
● Texts in another language are translated into English and presented as the student’s own.
Cheating
Cheating consists of any unpermitted use of notes, texts or other sources so as to give an unfair advantage to a student in completing a class assignment or an examination. Intentionally aiding another student engaged in academic dishonesty is also considered cheating.
Submission of the same work (essay, speech, art piece, etc.) to fulfill assignments in separate classes requires the permission of both faculty members (if both courses are being taken in the same semester), or the permission of the second faculty member (if they are taken during different semesters).
Penalties
• Unintentional Plagiarism. In cases of plagiarism in which no deception is intended (such as ignorance of proper citation of sources), the student should expect a reduction in the paper’s grade; in some cases, the student may be given an option to rewrite the paper. No disciplinary letter will be filed.
• Deliberate Plagiarism and Cheating. In cases of deliberate plagiarism, and in all cases of cheating and attempted cheating, the work assigned will be failed. At the instructor’s discretion, the student may also fail the course (regardless of the grade-weight of the work assigned).
In either a case of deliberate plagiarism or cheating, a disciplinary letter recording the deception will be sent to the student, with copies sent to the associate dean of academic resources and the student’s academic advisor. For more information, as well as for information regarding your rights of appeal, see the MU Source.
Manchester College // Registrar // Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies // Last updated: 17 Dec 2017