Read the attached excerpt from Arthur, who reacts to Singer’s argument in Famine, Affluence and Morality”. The paper aims and format will be the same as before (see below), but this time the reading includes “discussion questions” at the end that might guide your paper topic. You do not have to write on those discussion questions, but you may.
Instructions from before, still applicable:
Identify a position or argument from him, either something he endorses or somethings he does not endorse. Then philosophically evaluate that position or argument. The paper should be anonymous, and no more than 4 pages in length (12 point font, no more than 1 inch margins, double spaced). You can cite the readings (e.g., (Harman, p. 84)), but do not cite class notes/slides.
Among the things you might do are
1) criticize an argument given by Harman,
2) offer a different argument for one of his positions,
3) clarify something that is left unclear in a way that helps us evaluate a position/argument better,
4) defend a position/argument against criticism from Harman or someone else,
5) discuss the consequences of a position and argue for/against it based on those consequences,
6) revise a position to make it more plausible (after showing why it is implausible).
Whatever you do, it always helps to give your reasons/arguments for thinking as you do. Examples are often helpful for clarifying a position or its consequences. And do not try to do too much, as you only have 4 pages. There is material under the Assignments tab that provides guidance on the writing style. In short, be concise but explain things thoroughly in a way that a smart but uninformed person might understand.
Last, do independent work. You can certainly discuss your paper with others from class and have them read it for feedback. But write it on your own in your own words.