I need a 1200 – 1500 word MLA Format Paper on Clarke’s Cosmological Argument for God’s existence. I have to discuss and analyze Clarke’s argument in the paper.
The paper must include:
–
Defend a thesis and should proceed according to the
following format: Thesis, Argument, Objection(s), Response(s), Conclusion
– Sources must be properly cited using MLA
format.
–
Use a standard 10-12 pt. font and be double spaced.
-Introductory paragraph: overview of what you are going to do in your paper. Must include thesis for the paper. Your thesis is going to be whether you agree
or disagree with the argument you look at.
For instance, if you are going to talk about Anselm’s argument and agree
with it, you might say, “My thesis will be that Anselm’s argument is a good
one.” Also, it’s OK in philosophy if you
actually tell your reader straight out “My thesis in this paper will be. . .
.” In philosophy, you always want to as
direct and clear as possible.
-next you might
want to write one or two paragraphs with a little biographical information on
your philosopher. For instance, if you
are writing on Anselm, write one or two paragraphs telling your reader about
who Anselm was as a person and what he did with his life. To do this, you will have to do some research
on the Internet from a reliable source. Some
good sites are these:
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato.stanford.edu/
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://www.iep.utm.edu/
Note that you don’t want to do too much of this biographical
information in your paper. One or two
paragraphs is enough. More than that
would be too much.
After this, then you will want to spend some time explaining
to your reader the argument you will be analyzing in your paper. For instance, if you are going to be
analyzing Anselm’s Ontological Argument in your paper, then explain Anselm’s
argument to your reader. Here you want
to explain the argument you are analyzing as clearly as you can. Also, you want to explain the line of
reasoning as clearly as you can in your
own words. Don’t just give your
reader a long list of quotes. That
doesn’t show you really understand the argument for yourself. It’s OK to use some quotes in your
explanation of the argument, but, again, just do not do too much of this. Overall, your goal is to explain the line of
reasoning as clearly as you can in your
own words. Here you can use the
readings for the course, including the reviews that I send out each week, to
help you (obviously, though, you cannot just copy any explanations in these
materials; again, your goal is to explain things in your own words).
Explaining the argument you are analyzing to your reader thoroughly and
clearly and carefully and in your own words will take a few paragraphs.
After you explain the argument you are analyzing to your
reader, restate the thesis of your essay.
For instance, if you are looking at Anselm’s essay, you might say, “Now
that I have explained Anselm’s argument, now I will defend the thesis that it
is a good one.”
Then, after you restate your thesis, go on to explain to your reader your reasons for adopting that thesis. Here you are explaining why you accept the thesis you have stated. This is important, and it will require you to
think. You don’t want to simply say “I
agree with Anselm’s argument” or “I disagree with Anselm’s argument” and just
leave it at that. You want to go on to explain
why you think that this argument you
are analyzing is good or bad. To do
that, really think about the assumptions and premises that undergird the
argument you are looking at. If you
think the argument is bad because a certain assumption or premise that
undergirds that argument is bad, then explain which assumption or premise you
think is bad and why you think that assumption or premise is bad. If you think the argument is good because the
assumptions and premises that undergird the argument are good, then explain why
you find the individual assumptions and premises that undergird the argument
persuasive. Again, you don’t want to
simply say “I agree with Anselm’s argument” or “I disagree with Anselm’s
argument.” You want to explain why you think that this argument you are
analyzing is good or bad.
After this, you want to think of some objections to your thesis and write them out and explain why
someone might have these objections. The objections you explain here will depend
on your thesis. If you are defending
the argument you are considering, then think of two or three possible
objections someone might have to the argument you are defending. For instance, if you are defending Anselm’s
argument, then think of two or three possible objections that someone might
have to it. By contrast, if you are
attacking the argument you are considering, then think of two or three possible
objections that someone might have regarding why the argument at hand is a good
one. Doing this will require you to
think hard, and it will require you to consider alternative points of view to
the thesis you are considering.
Next you want to think of responses to the very objections that you just raised and then
write them out and explain them. The responses you explain here will depend
again on your thesis and the point of view you are taking. If you are defending the argument you are
considering, and then just raised two or three possible objections to it, then
go on and answer each of those two or three objections. By contrast, if you are attacking the
argument you are considering, and then just considered two or three objections
regarding why someone might think that the argument at hand is a good one, then
go on to answer those two or three objections and explain why you think they
don’t show the argument at hand is good.
After this, wrap up your paper with a concluding paragraph
providing an overview of what you argued in your essay.
0 comments