Philosophy 1000 First Essay Topics.
Our first essay topics all deal with philosophy of religion; the readings in the book are a sufficient
basis for an essay, but you are all welcome to introduce other sources as well. Just be sure to cite clearly
anything that you quote or paraphrase from somewhere else. I’m not fussy about style, but one of the
clearest and easiest ways to do it is to make references in the text of your paper by putting the author’s last
name and the page in parentheses, and putting the details (author, editor (if any), title, city of publication,
publisher and date for books; author, journal title, volume, number, date for articles), listed alphabetically
by author’s last name, in a bibliography at the end of the paper. It is very important (this includes you, Mr.
Klein) that you clearly acknowledge anything you borrow from someone else’s work.
The assignment is to write a 4-page, double-spaced paper (in a 12-pitch font, with ¾” margins).
You shouldn’t write significantly more or less than this amount; quality is the aim here, not quantity.
Focus your efforts on being as clear and convincing as you can be (it will help here if you put yourself in
your opponent’s shoes and think seriously about what objections she might raise against your case). Don’t
leave the work of interpreting your argument to the reader: Lay it all out for us.
1.
The ontological argument:
A. Does Rowe’s criticism of Anselm’s argument succeed? Or do you think Anselm is right
after all? Explain the two positions, take a stand and defend it.
B. Do you agree with Rowe’s rejection of the Kantian view on this argument (that ‘existence
is not a predicate’)? Or do you think that the Kantian response is right? Explain Kant’s
response and Rowe’s criticism of it. Do you agree with Rowe’s claim that Merlin is a
magician?
2.
The cosmological argument:
Explain one version of Aquinas’ cosmological argument and how Clarke and Rowe’s appeals
to the Principle of Sufficient Reason strengthen it. What is Rowe’s criticism of the argument?
Do you agree with it? Do you have one of your own?
3.
The argument from design:
Give an account of Paley’s argument. Does it really succeed? How close an analogy is there
between watches and organisms (and between the ‘purposes’ each accomplishes)? What
disanalogies can you point out? How strong an argument does this analogy produce?
4.
The argument from evil.
Present the argument from evil. What do you think it shows (if anything) about God and her
existence? If you reject the argument, explain which premise you think fails and why. (Be
careful to explain this in some detail—and think about what someone on the other side of the
issue might say!) If you accept the argument, explain why you reject some of the standard
responses.
5.
The Rights and Wrongs of Belief.
Should we always believe only what the evidence supports, as Clifford argues? Or do we
have a right to believe (where we can) for other reasons, as James says? Can the
psychological importance of a belief to us be a sufficient reason for holding the belief? Does
adopting beliefs on such grounds involve self-deception? Why does evidence matter at all
here? Present the arguments carefully and take a stand.