Choose one of the following arguments:

A. Bertrand Russell's argument against the view that philosophy is nothing "better than innocent but useless trifling, hair-splitting distinctions, and controversies on matters concerning which knowledge is impossible." (quote from IP3 26a)

B. Richard Rorty's article in "Dismantling Truth" that "we should content ourselves with the ... 'weaker' conception of rationality and avoid the ... 'stronger' conception." (quote from IP3 147b)

C. Thomas Aquinas's fourth argument for the existence of God (IP3 157b)

D. William James' argument in "The Will to Believe" that "our passional nature ... lawfully may ... decide an option between propositions whenever it is a genuine option that cannot by its nature be decided on intellectual grounds ..." (See IP3 242b)

E. Immanuel Kant's argument in favor of the death penalty in "The Right to Punish" (See IP3 445ff)

Phase 1 (See due dates.)

1. Passage: First quote the portions of the passage which contain the relevant claims (e.g., premises, conclusion, reasoning) for the argument.
2. Conclusion: State clearly the conclusion of the argument. (If the conclusion is not among the quotations in part 1, be sure it indicate where you find it.)
3. Clarification of Terms: Define and clarify words and terms that will be used in the argument. This does not mean running to a dictionary. The definitions of important terms should arise from their meaning in the passage. This is also the place to indicate important distinctions that are made, or should be made, by the author for clear understanding of the argument.
4. Explication of the Argument: Explain the argument clearly. (This will be the longest section of the paper. You will want to do a better job than the author.) This will probably involve:
• Stating clearly each premise of the argument. Where the premises are explicit, quotation of the words of the author (perhaps in parenthesis, perhaps in a footnote) and a specific page reference should be included).
• Making clear the layers of argument, showing the overall structure of the argument. (See "Identifying and Formulating Arguments.")
• Identifying the forms of arguments made.

1. Passage
2. Conclusion
3. Clarification of Terms
4. Explication of the Argument

Rewrite and develop the paper you have written by

• taking into account the suggestions for improvement made by the grader on phase 1,
• further clarifying of terms
• improving the clarification and explication of the argument,
• adding two new sections of the paper:

  5.

  Critique: Offer critique of the argument. As you develop each point of critique, be sure to indicate the nature of the critique (e.g. if you are calling into a question the truth of a premise of the argument, be sure to point of what the premise is and why you think it is or may be false; if you are calling into question the validity of the argument, attempt to make plain the form of the argument and explain why you think the form is not a valid form).

  6.

  Defense of Author: Exploration of possible replies that the author could reasonably make to your criticism.

This paper should be submitted electronically to rlee@uark.edu. The paper should be submitted as a "rich text format" (.rtf) file. (You'll probably have to use a "save as" command to get your document into this form.) Submissions after the due date risk incursion of a penalty for lateness.

Please put your name on your paper. Be sure also to indicate (by letter) at the top of the first page which of the topics you are writing on.