First part of your paper: Understanding what the author is saying.
For the first part of the paper, I would like to see how well you understood the author’s main point and his argument. To help me with that, I would like for you to answer the questions below. The questions follow the order of the content presented by the author in the chapter. The questions are also intended to help you draw out the main point (s) and arguments. At this point, I’m not interested on what you think, or whether you agree or disagree. I want to see how well you understand what the author thinks. You will notice that along with the questions, I have included paragraph breaks, in other words, where I think you should start a new paragraph. These are only suggestions on how to divide your paper into separate paragraphs, so that you don’t submit a paper that is one very long paragraph. You can divide your paper differently, but keep in mind that regardless of how you divide your paper, you are required to answer every question below. When I read your papers, I will be looking for your answers to these questions. Chapter 2 is already divided into sections. My questions are basically following that order. Another suggestion is to divide your paper into the same sections as the chapter.
Second part of your paper: your own questions, comments, and thoughts
The second, smaller part of your paper will answer the questions for the second part of the paper explained below. In the second part of the paper, I do want to know what you think, whether you agree or disagree, i.e., your own thoughts and questions about the subject matter.
Format:
Please submit your paper only in Word or PDF, not any other format. Your paper should be approximately between 900 to 1100 words. I think that is a good number to aim at. There is a lot in this chapter, so I don’t think you should have trouble meeting the minimum side. You’ll probably have more trouble staying under the max. Use MLA.
There is no need to use outside resources since we are using just this one source, “The Way of Philosophy.” Please use quotation marks if you quote the author word for word. If you paraphrase, you still need to cite. Remember that plagiarism FAILS MY CLASS, NOT JUST THE ASSIGNMENT, with an automatic F. Make sure that your paper is intelligible, in other words, has good punctuation and grammar. I gave everyone feedback on their first Wonder paper regarding the issues with grammar and punctuation that were present on the Wonder paper. So, that should help you know what to avoid and look for in this second paper. Please visit the Center for Reading and Writing at LSC-North Harris if you need help with punctuation and grammar. If your paper is hard for me to read because of issues with grammar and punctuation, you will have to resubmit it with a 40-point deduction from your grade.
Questions for First Part of the paper:
(FIRST PARAGRAPH) It seems that the author’s goal in this chapter is to shed some light on truth, the nature itself of truth. The last section of the chapter is titled “What is truth?” Rather than starting the whole chapter with the question “what is truth?”, the author begins the chapter with a different question: “Can Science Know Everything there is to Know?” Why do you think the author does that? How does he answer the question “Can Science Know Everything there is to Know?”? (NEW PARAGRAPH) What is the name given to the belief that science knows everything there is to know? What else does this belief hold? How does the author show that this belief is false? (NEW PARAGRAPH) How does the section titled “The Evolution of Love” and the section titled “Thinking about the Brain” fit into the main point of the chapter? (NEW PARAGRAPH) What is relativism? What are some of the problems with this view? (NEW PARAGRAPH) In the section titled “Is truth relative?”, the author explains the method of philosophy, how it is that philosophy investigates things, how it is that philosophy has access to the truth of things. What is that method? (NEW PARAGRAPH) Lastly, before the author finally answers the question “what is truth?”, he points out a connection between truth and pain. What is that connection? Why? He also points out a connection between truth and freedom. What is the connection? Why? (NEW PARAGRAPH) So, finally, what is truth?
Questions for 2nd part of the paper:
Is there anything you found enlightening or at least thought-provoking? Something that got you wondering? Is there anything you disagree with? Why do you disagree? How do you think the author might answer to your disagreement? Are there any questions (or comments) you would ask (or make to) the author or Dr. Ramirez about anything talked about in this chapter? What do YOU think truth is? After reading this chapter, is there anything about your understanding of truth you would change, or correct? If so, what? If not, why not?
If you have any questions about this writing assignment, please reach out to me.
