PHIL 467 New York University Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding Paper all the instruction are attached, please take a look and work hard. The first att

PHIL 467 New York University Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding Paper all the instruction are attached, please take a look and work hard. The first attatchment is the instruction, the second one is the topic, the third one is the resources. 10:40
Back LPHIL 467 Enlightenment sy…
☺
MW 4:10 – 5:00 or by appointment
Lectures:
11:30 AM – 12:50 PM MW
2271 Angell Hall
Important Dates
Mon. Jan. 20 (Martin Luther King Day) No Class.
Saturday Feb 29: Winter Break Begins
Monday March 9: Classes Resume
Tuesday April 21: Last Day of Classes
Friday April 24: Final Paper Due
Writing Assignments: There will be 2 short writing assignments of
2 pages each. The two page limit (double spaced, Times New
Roman font, 12 point type) is an absolute maximum. Part of the
point of the short papers is to get you to write efficiently and
concisely! So the paper must be less than two pages. (If you include
a bibliography, that can be on a third page.) You will need to submit
a draft first, and then submit a revised final version after you’ve read
my comments. A 6 – 8 page paper is expected at the end of term.
The longer paper may include material from one or both of the
shorter assignments. It is not required that you submit a draft for the
longer paper, but you may do so if you wish, and I will give
comments. Details of the mechanics of writing will be more central
than in typical philosophy courses, and some of my comments will
address issues of style, grammar and vocabulary, etc.
One of the short assignments will be the basis of a 15 minute class
presentation and discussion. Within the next couple of weeks you
should have picked a topic and we can find a day for the
presentation. If you aren’t sure, come to my office and chat – we can
figure out something that will fit your interests. Don’t feel locked in
by the assigned readings in choosing your presentation: if you have a
particular interest, we can accommodate it. (Say to pick just two
example for illustration you are interested in the details of Newton’s
Debate with Leibniz over the extent to which the universe requires
regular divine intervention, or the debate between Voltaire and Mme.
Du Châtelet over the foundations of the new physics. I can add extra
readings to support a presentation on the topic.)
74
7.
4
=
Dashboard
Calendar
To Do
Notifications
Inbox
10:53
Back Short paper 2 suggestions.d…
State and critically examine Newton’s argument(s) for the existence
of “a Divinity” as laid out in the selection p. 96 – 100 in Kramnick.
The critical examination could consider not just whether the
argument(s) is (are) or is (are) not valid, but also what the argument
would require us to believe about God if it were correct, and what
wouldn’t it require.
Outline and critically discuss Hume’s argument in his essay “Of
Miracles” in the Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding. The
selection on p. 109 – 113 of Kramnick is compressed significantly,
so you should also draw from the essay on Miracles that is Section X
in Hume’s Inquiry posted on Canvas.
Critically describe the philosophical method that Voltaire draws
from Newton’s physics and methodology in the Principia. You need
not use more of Newton than what is excerpted in Kramnick as a
reference on Newton, but for Voltaire you should consider not just
the “Bacon and Newton” selection in Kramnick but also the essay
“Systems of Attraction” in Philosophical Letters (aka Letters
Concerning the English Nation) on Canvas. (Among the questions
you might want to ask in the critical examination are: Are there any
features of Voltaire’s picture that don’t appear in Newton?)
Describe Catharine Macauley’s reply, in “Education of Women”
(Kramnick – from her Letters on Education), to Rousseau’s selection
“Duties of Women” (in Kramnick – from Rousseau’s Emile). You
many want to compare Rousseau’s picture of education for women
with the account of education excerpted in “Children and Civic
Education” (Kramnick – also from Emile).
Critically compare the foundations of morality described in either
Hutcheson: “Concerning the Moral Sense” [Kramnik -from System
of Moral Philosophy] or Bentham: “Principle of Utility” [Kramnik –
from An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation]
with that in Kant’s: Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of
Morals [Kramnik sourcebook]. (You can discuss both Bentham and
Hutcheson if you want, but you can get a good contrast with Kant
from either.) Explain in particular why Kant emphasizes the
principle of duty, and how that sets his account off from
Bentham/Hutcheson.
Critically discuss the account of the origin of inequality and the
principles of the design of an optimal society that Rousseau puts
forward in the two selections in Kramnick from Discourse on the
Origin of Inequality and The Social Contract. You can (though you
don’t need to) contrast some of the details of this account with the
selection from Montesquieu’s The Spirit of the Laws, especially on
the topics of the purpose of a structured society with a system of
laws.
74
7
4
=
Dashboard
Calendar
To Do
Notifications
Inbox

Purchase answer to see full
attachment