SHORT PAPER #2
Assignment directions:
Carefully read Woozley’s criticisms of Aristole and Plato. He raises two ‘difficulties’ with Plato’s theory, and two ‘difficulties’ with Aristotle’s. Your paper should have two sections.
Section 1: Summary: In the first section, summarize one of the four difficulties he raises. You may pick either of the ones he raises against Plato, or either of the ones he raises against Aristotle. Simply pick one of Woozley’s objections and summarize it.
Section 2: Evaluation: First, you should provide a defense on behalf of Aristotle or Plato against the objection you summarized in section #1 . In other words, if you picked one of Woozley’s attacks on Plato, you should defend Plato against that attack (the same would go for Aristotle). Second, tell us whose view of universals you think is best — Aristotle, Plato, or Woozley?
DO NOT FORGET: ONCE YOU SUBMIT YOUR ESSAY, YOU NEED TO COMMENT ON ONE OTHER STUDENT’S ESSAY.
Formatting, length, style, and other guidelines:
Your reply to a classmate is worth 5 of the 20 points. Make sure your reply is substantive and critical (provides an objection to their evaluation). This means that you need to say more than “good job, but I disagree”. If you find yourself making a comment that could easily be copy/pasted into every reply of the semester (because it is not specific), then you need to know that comment will not receive any points. Furthermore, make sure you are objecting to the view that your classmate expresses in his/her evaluation section, and make sure it is someone with whom you disagree. So if, in the evaluation section, your classmate says: “X is the case”, your reply should be “X is not the case, and here’s a reason why…”
Your paper should be 300-600 words (about 1-2 pages), 12 pt font.
Your paper should have two sections. Label them Section 1: Summary and Section 2: Evaluation.
The title of your paper should be Short Paper 2: Universals & Nominalism.
Think through this on your own. Dont use outside sources.
As for the level of discussion: a good rule of thumb is to imagine that you are explaining this argument to a smart peer in the class who is otherwise up-to-date on the course readings, but has not read the chapter.
Clarity: Use simple, direct language; avoid complicated, elaborate prose. Explain key concepts. Use examples where appropriate. Avoid metaphor and figurative language. Dont use rhetorical questions; instead, state and defend your claims.
Concision: Dont use many words where fewer will do, and avoid redundancy. Do NOT include an introduction, its a waste of space in an paper this short. Just immediately begin answering the assigned prompts. Likewise, there is no need for a conclusion that merely sums up your short paper.
Relevance: Stay focused, and avoid generalities. The point of this essay is for you to explain and evaluate a specific argument given by a philosopher. Stick to the point; avoid tangents; everything in your paper should be organized around the prompts.
Charity: Avoid distorted presentations of the arguments (or anyone elses). Give every argument you discuss the strongest, reasonable interpretation.
Deadline and how to submit:
Due Sunday by 11:59 pm. The paper can be written in a separate word processor, then copy/pasted into the ‘reply’ text box. Or, less ideally, you can type it directly into the text box. Do NOT submit files.
