Too Tired? Too Anxious? Need More Time? We’ve got your back.
Breaking down the prompt even further, the essay consists of five subtasks:
1. Identifying and clearly describing the central tenets of three different accounts of personhood
a. Clearly indicating what about these views is (in)correct, incomplete, misguided, etc. Make sure to offer an explanation as to why it is (in)correct, incomplete, misguided, etc.
2. Clearly defining your new or modified view of personhood (I.e., to be a person is to have X, be Y, etc.); if applicable, clearly differentiate between self/person.
a. Be explicit about who/what counts as a person under this definition
3. Explaining why this definition of personhood is the best definition for achieving some morally-desirable end (e.g., justice, the end of unnecessary suffering, the attainment of a utopian world order, etc.)
4. Raising at least three reasonable (and challenging) objections against your newly defended view.
5. Adequately responding to (and, hopefully, diffuse
ing) the above objections.
Your task in this final reflection essay is to adequately address each of these subtasks in a clear, consistent, and persuasive way (see the rubric for more information).
You must cite at least ten distinct in-class sources and three outside scholarly sources. For our purposes, scholarly sources are peer-reviewed academic articles and books. No religious texts, blogs, or popular media will count as a scholarly source. Name-dropping scholars without thoroughly engaging with the relevant ideas we explored will not be accepted. To receive full credit for your citations, make substantive use of your scholarly sources. In other words, you must use these sources in such a way that it is clear to me that you understand the author’s main ideas and understand how those ideas fit into your larger philosophical project. Quoting, by itself, is not a substantive use of your source.
Too Tired? Too Anxious? Need More Time? We’ve got your back.