Use this prompt to write a 10-12 page, typed,
double-spaced essay in 11 or 12 point font, and submit it as a .pdf (.hwp files are not acceptable).
Please note that I will not accept late papers, or papers submitted in any other way than through
being uploaded on LearnUs, so please make sure to complete your paper in time to submit it
properly. Part of the point is to help you work on the completeness, clarity and concision of your
writing, and so you’re likely to be penalized for going substantially under or over the length
limits. Do not simply copy and paste things from the class notes: this will be considered
plagiarism.
Your task in this paper is to explain Taylor’s picture of what it is to be a person, building on the
picture he presented in “Self-interpreting animals” by focusing on the arguments of Part I of
Sources of the Self.
First, briefly summarize Taylor’s argument that we are self-interpreting animals as he presents it
in the essay of that title. Make sure to emphasize those aspects of his picture there that you will
develop further in the remainder of your paper, so you can lay the groundwork for your
discussion of Sources of the Self. In other words, this introductory section of the essay should
flow naturally into your discussion of that book.
As you discuss Sources of the Self, you should make sure to explain: (a) what a moral framework
is; (b) the three axes of evaluation, and Taylor’s metaphor of moral space; (c) Taylor’s arguments
that our relation to the moral space we inhabit is crucial for our understanding of our own
identities (i.e., the importance of having an orientation in moral space through an understanding
of the good, of having a sense of one’s location in moral space), and why Taylor thinks such self-
understanding is essentially narrative; (d) what hypergoods are, and how they’re different from
other goods; and (e) what moral sources (a.k.a. constitutive goods) are, how they are different
from other goods, and how they are important for us; as well as (f) why Taylor thinks articulating
our understanding of the good is important for our moral lives. As you tackle (a)-(f), it would be
helpful to make liberal use of concrete examples. You may use some of Taylor’s examples, but I
encourage you to formulate your own and/or elaborate on some of Taylor’s examples in ways that
will aid in the clarity of your explanations.
Lastly, as in the midterm paper, critically evaluate Taylor’s views. Since there are many moving
parts to his arguments, for this portion of your paper to be effective, you should consider a
discrete claim or argument Taylor makes, consider possible objections to it, and possible
responses to those objections, attempting to be as careful and precise as you can.
Previous comments that needs to be avoided at all cost:
-fair exposition: made no major mistakes, shows a
grasp of the argument, but doesn’t convey it to
the reader
poor exposition: made major mistakes and/or
doesn’t show a grasp of the main line of argument
misfire: off target
-somewhat effective critique: lacks development
and/or makes minor argumentative errors
and/or does not understand what’s been
accomplished
I appreciate your efforts to create a context for the
discussion of your essay, but I think you should consider
jumping right into the material by giving a briefer
summary of what you will talk about in the rest of the
essay. Plus, it would have been helpful to explicitly and
concisely define the notion of moral responsibility.
(3) As in your introduction, you’re talking about a lot of
things that aren’t directly relevant to the specific themes
we discussed in class, and failing to address the issues
that are: rational determinism, and radical choice. You
mention radical freedom, but you fail to characterize what
is ’radical’ about it.
(4) This is all correct, but you need to say something more
specific. What is Frankfurt’s view of freedom of the will,
and why precisely does he think it’s not necessary for
responsibility? I think this would be clearer if you used
some concrete example to illustrate.
(5) You need to explain Taylor’s criticisms of Frankfurt.
(6) The observations about the importance of cultural context
are external to the particular texts we discussed.
Overall: This essay reads more like a book report than an
argumentative essay. You need to focus more on the texts we
discussed in class and the terms in which we discussed them. By
relying on external resources, you’ve ended up bringing in a lot of
issues that come from work external to the texts we read, and
bringing in this external material resulted in overly brief and often
vague considerations of the material that we did discuss. The
impulse to consult secondary resources is a sign of lack of
confidence in one’s own ability to read and reflect on a text on its
own terms. Focus more on defining terms, laying out steps in
reasoning, and illustrating ideas using concrete examples. Make
sure to read the prompt carefully and study the specific material
that was discussed in lecture. It’s clear to me that you’re capable
of doing this, given the quality of the writing. If you shift your
emphasis, you could no doubt do a lot better. In your critique, as I
suggested pick a discrete claim or argument, making sure to
identify it clearly and precisely, and think about it on your own
rather than citing critical reflections from others in a somewhat
vague and summary fashion.
I tried by best and still got B- 🙁
This time I need help.
