Back to Class Page

 

Dowling College  Dr Christian Perring

 

PHL 003A Introduction to Philosophy Spring 2003

 

Paper III.

 

4 pages/~1200 words.  Due by midnight on Monday April 28. Even if you have not completed your paper by class, do NOT miss class.  If you find you are having difficulties writing your paper, contact me to let me know and I will help you.  If you paper is late without excuse, you will lose 1% per day on your paper grade. 

 

Papers must be submitted in an electronic form.  I prefer you to do so using Turnitin.com (the class ID is 59882, and the password is "philosophy"), but you can instead email me a copy of your paper in Word or RTF as an attachment, or give me a copy of your paper on disk.  You can if you want also give me a hard copy. 

 

Any form of plagiarism or academic dishonesty is unacceptable and may result in you failing the course and being reported to the Dean of Students.  Plagiarism is using sources in the writing of your paper without acknowledging your sources.  It is often a good idea to use other sources, but if you do so, you must say where you found information, either in parentheses or in a footnote.  If you quote directly or copy text from another source, you must put the quotation in quotation marks and say exactly where it comes from, giving page numbers or the exact URL.  I don’t require any particular reference format, but APA format is a good one to use.  (For more information on reference formats, the Dowling College Library website has a page on the Citation and Evaluation of Sources.)

 

For this paper, I recommend that you write an introductory paragraph setting out what you intend to argue.  You do not need to write a concluding paragraph, although a concluding sentence would be appropriate.

 

Answer ONE of the following questions.

 

  1. Compare the arguments of William Lycan and John Searle concerning the possibility that computers might in the future be capable of conscious understanding of English.  Discuss whether Lycan or Searle provides the better arguments, or whether the debate ends in stalemate.
  2. Explain Aristotle's account of when action is voluntary and when it is involuntary, making sure to show his argument for his views.  Then consider whether his account would imply that the drinking of an alcoholic is voluntary or involuntary.  Finally, discuss whether an Aristotelian approach to understanding the voluntariness of alcoholism is plausible. 
  3. Explain Karl Popper's argument for the claim that it is impossible to prove a scientific theory true.  Compare this with Thomas Kuhn's view about the progress of science, and discuss whether the theories of Popper and Kuhn are compatible with each other.