Beginning Philosophy

Paper #1
Due Wednesday, March 3, 2010 in class.

Answer one of the following two assignments in a 5-to-7-page paper (double-spaced, 10 to 12-point font).

1. Meaning of Life Paper
Thomas Nagel argues that one who leads a "Sisyphisian" existence has no hope for meaning in life--and that, ultimately, we all lead Sisyphisian existences. Can someone who leads a Sisyphisian existence have a meaningful life? If not, how would that life have to be changed to allow for meaning? Three philosophers we have discussed in class have offered arguments about how we might have meaning in our lives.
  • Outline Nagel's argument for why our lives are ultimately meaningless.
  • Discuss in some detail the views of two of the following philosophers, including the strengths and weaknesses of each: Richard Taylor; Raymond Martin; Aristotle.
  • If you think either of the philosophers you are discussing has the right answer, what is the strongest objection that might be brought against his view, and how might he respond to it?
  • If you think neither of the philosophers you are discussing has the right answer, provide an argument for an answer of your own (this may be a modified version of one of the theories you discussed).

    • OR

    2. Ethics Paper
  • In some detail, outline and compare the central theories of utilitarianism and deontology (refer in your papers to the readings we have done for class). As a part of this outline, explain how the central views explain "easy" ethical problems like murder and helping others in need.
  • Second, select one of the following contemporary "hard" ethical problems and discuss in some depth the application of utilitarianism and deontology to the problem:

    • - When (if ever) should a mother be permitted to abort her unborn child? or
    - When (if ever) is capital punishment justified? or
    - When (if ever) should you be (morally) allowed to download music without the copyright owner's permission?

  • In your discussion, be sure to include:
    1. Which factors in the issue pertain (or might pertain) to each ethical theory, and which do not.
    2. Which of the views (if either) do you think is best, and why? If you have reason to think neither view works, provide an argument for an answer of your own.