This is a Philosophy assignment on Critical Response.It has to be double space and must be 600-900 words. (preference is between 700 to 850 words) and it is due on Wednesday, May 20My assignment has to be on ONE of the following topics:
Theistic Responses, Reflections on God’s Importanceor
Confucianism and Community.I would like us to work on one of these 2 topics using APA style (
Reflections on God’s Importance byNozickor
Confucianism and Community by Rosemont)
Please see attached instructions for the assignment as well as notes on each topic and the sample solution (critical response) provided by the teacher (with notes) for a better understanding and as a guide.
Thanks,
PHIL 2000OLA: Critical Response Instructions Dr. K. Laderoute 4 May 2020 Length: 600-900 words of body text (approximately 2-3 double-spaced pages. The word count excludes your name, the assignment title, your bibliography or equivalent, and citations) There is a 5% penalty for not double-spacing a response. There is a 5% penalty for every 50 words (or part thereof) a response’s body text is over or under the specified word limit. Each critical response is worth 20% of your final grade. You may complete all four critical responses with the best two counting towards your final grade. Instructions: Critical responses are reasoned engagements with our course material. Each response should isolate some aspect of the course material in a given unit, briefly explain that material (with proper citations), take a clear position on that material (i.e. state a thesis), and provide good reasons in favour of that position. Your target audience for these responses is a rational undergraduate student, unfamiliar with our course material, and who has no particular bias on the subject matter. There are two main types of argument that you may provide in your critical responses: evaluations and comparisons. Each critical response must focus on producing one of these types of arguments. The final essay will require you to produce both kinds of argument, so producing at least one critical response for each kind of argument is advisable. Here are some further details on each kind of argument: Evaluative: In an evaluative argument, you are assessing the merit or demerit of some particular claim or set of claims made by an author. The thesis in such an argument states the conclusion of your evaluation. The details contained in the response elaborate and clarify your position and provide clear reasons in support of your view. Your position may be positive or negative, i.e. you may argue that something in the course material is a good view, or you may argue that it is a bad view. In either case, your aim is not to simply repeat the reasons originally given for the view. Instead, your aim is to provide your own reasons in favour of your position (even though your position will concern someone else’s position and their reasons for holding it). Comparative: In a comparative argument, you are assessing the ways in which two (or more) thinkers’ views are similar or different. This kind of argument is essentially a kind of interpretation. The thesis of a comparative argument states your conclusion about how the views of two (or more) authors are similar and/or different from each other. The details contained in your response elaborate and clarify your thesis, provide clear reasons in support of your view, and make good use of textual evidence. Part of the task of these responses is to identify and explain the material you wish to engage with and to develop your own position on the matter at hand. The responses are not designed to be comprehensive, i.e. do not try to discuss everything in a particular thinker’s work, or in a particular unit. Each response is due at 11:59pm MT via Turnitin.com on the relevant date indicated below. Here is the due date schedule and the content each response may engage with (CR = “critical response”): CR1: Theistic Responses, Reflections on God’s Importance, Due May 21 or Confucianism and Community CR2: The Afterlife or Death and Immortality Due May 28 CR3: The Scientific Worldview or Buddhism and Pessimism Due June 4 CR4: Responses to Pessimism and Theism or Absurdity Due June 11 Get a Turnitin digital receipt when you submit your assignment. Without this receipt, I cannot assist you with any technical problems you may encounter. If you have any worries about your assignment submitting properly to Turnitin, email me a copy of your assignment (in .pdf or .docx formats) as soon as you submit it to Turnitin. Some points to keep in mind: • Be sure to provide citations for any claim that goes beyond common knowledge. • When making claims about our course material, cite the original texts whenever possible. • You may use Chicago, MLA, or APA citation styles. Pick one style and use it consistently and correctly in each response. • Provide page numbers whenever possible in your citations, even if you are using APA format. • Only cite the lecture or lecture slides if it adds content not originally included in the original text(s). • If you use somebody else’s exact words, make sure you give proper credit via the use of quotation marks. • Excessively close paraphrasing can count as plagiarism, so be careful! • If you are ever uncertain about what you should do to avoid plagiarism, ask questions. Our library website contains resources to help you with citations. Visit this link to find those resources: https://library.ulethbridge.ca/cite?hs=a • Keep your language formal and professional. • Assume your reader is intelligent and unbiased, but does not have the specialized knowledge you have (both about our course material and anything else that goes beyond common knowledge). https://library.ulethbridge.ca/cite?hs=a • Make your arguments as clear as possible. Clearly indicate any assumptions your arguments make, and do not include any hidden or unstated premises except what would be obvious to (almost) any intelligent reader with common knowledge. Critical Responses Rubric Responses will be graded according to the qualitative rubric below. Note: This rubric is meant to help illustrate the quality of individual components of your written work. The final grade is ultimately holistic; while the quality of the components helps inform the final grade, there is no direct mathematical relationship between the final grade and the component evaluation. Component 1 – Lacking 2 – Fair 3 – Good 4 – Excellent Writing Includes: spelling, grammar, use of punctuation Sentences require serious attention. Frequent confusion or poor word choice. Frequent errors in spelling, grammar, and use of punctuation. Sentences are adequately constructed, but may suffer from confusion or poor word choice. Errors in spelling, grammar, and use of punctuation. May contain sentence fragments. Sentences are generally well constructed. Largely free from errors in grammar, spelling, and use of punctuation. Sentences are well constructed, making effective use of word choice and punctuation. Almost completely free from errors in grammar, spelling, and use of punctuation. Structure Includes: the structure of the response and the organization of information Sentences often fail to connect with other sentences. Paragraphs generally do not group similar ideas together, or connect to each other in a clear manner. The connection between sentences is sometimes unclear. Paragraphs sometimes fail to group similar ideas together and/or clearly connect to one another. Sentences generally connect to each other. Paragraphs serve to group ideas together in a reasonable manner and generally connect with each other. Sentences connect in a fluid manner. Paragraphs exhibit logical structuring of ideas within themselves, and connect to each other intelligently. Thesis (the response’s central point) The response lacks a discernable thesis or the thesis is not worth stating and defending. The response contains a discernable thesis, generally supported by the content of the response. The thesis may not be clear at the start of the assignment, or it may not be clearly worth stating and defending. A generally clear thesis that is worth stating and defending is present at the outset and supported by the content of the response. The thesis may not clearly anticipate the reasons provided in favour of it. A clear, carefully worded thesis is present at the outset and kept in focus throughout the response. The thesis is worth stating and defending, and it clearly anticipates the reasons provided. Quality of the critical engagement The response fails to clearly support its thesis with reasons, or the reasons offered are too controversial to be convincing to an unbiased reader. The response supports its thesis with some reasons. The response is lacking in some area, such as the clarity or the sufficiency of the reasons given in favour of the thesis. The response supports its thesis with good reasoning. The reasons presented would benefit from some additional elaboration or clarification. The response supports its thesis with excellent reasoning. Explanation of the course material The explanation of the course material is insufficient for the target audience. Extraneous material may distract from what is important. Some area of the explanation is lacking. Some relevant material was missed or mis- represented. Extraneous material may distract from what is important. Relevant material is explained in a generally accurate manner. May contain unnecessary information or minor errors. Relevant material is accurately and aptly explained, without including extraneous material. Citations and