Instructions
Choose one of the following prompts and write a 3-4 page essay in response to it:
1. Does Descartes overcome solipsism in his Meditations on First Philosophy?
2. Does Descartes exonerate God from being the cause of error in human nature, defined as a combination or union of mind and body?
3. Develop a Cartesian analysis of a monster movie.
Instructions
Choose one of the following prompts and write a 3-4 page essay in response to it:
- Does Descartes overcome solipsism in his Meditations on First Philosophy?
- Does Descartes exonerate God from being the cause of error in human nature, defined as a combination or union of mind and body?
- Develop a Cartesian analysis of a monster movie.
Formal Considerations
When writing your essay, you should assume that your audience is not familiar with the material. Do not write for the instructor, but as if you were writing for an intelligent person who has never read or been educated in the author(s) you are discussing.
Type the paper double-spaced in standard 12 pt. font with standard margins; place name, course title, and assignment title in upper left-hand corner of the first page; provide a (creative) paper title; number all pages; properly and consistently cite all quotations and references; state style of citation on first or last page; proof read.
Honor Code
Please review University of San Francisco and course policies on plagiarism and other violations of the Honor Code before beginning your essay.
Evaluation
The short essay is worth 100 possible points. It will be evaluated on a scale from A to F (100 to 0 points).
Your essay is being assessed in terms of your ability to contend with and adequately interpret the primary sources we’ve read for the course, so use of secondary literature is not recommended. If you do make use of secondary sources, though, be sure to properly cite them.
Your essay will be evaluated according to the following criteria: argument, comprehension, creativity, style, and organization. Please see the Rubric for Philosophy Papers below for an explanation and breakdown of these criteria.
| EXCELLENT | GOOD | NEEDS IMPROVEMENT | UNACCEPTABLE | |
| ARGUMENT | ||||
| Thesis | The introduction contains a clear and specific statement of the main conclusion of the paper. | The thesis is obvious, but there is no single clear and specific statement of it in the introduction. | The thesis is present, but must be uncovered or reconstructed from the text of the paper.
|
There is no thesis. |
| Arguments | Each reason for believing the thesis is made clear, and, as much as possible, presented in single statements. | The arguments are all clear, although each may not be presented in a single statement. | The arguments must be reconstructed from the text of the paper or arguments do not correspond to thesis.
|
There are no arguments—the paper merely restates the thesis or summarizes the text. Or, if there are arguments, they are much more likely to be false than true. |
| Support | The arguments clearly support the thesis and together constitute a strong defense of thesis. The author thoroughly and specifically explains the support they provide.
|
The arguments support the thesis and the author indicates the general kind of support they provide. | The arguments somewhat support the thesis, but the author does not indicate or thoroughly explain the kind of support they provide. | The arguments do not support the thesis. |
| Counter-Arguments | The paper considers very strong counter-arguments and provides original and/or thoughtful responses. | The paper considers counter-arguments and provides responses. | Counter-arguments are not clear, thoroughly developed, or do not oppose thesis. Or responses are non-existent. | No counter-arguments are considered. |
| COMPREHENSION | ||||
| Text | The paper contains highly accurate and precise summarization of text in author’s own words. The paper uses appropriate textual support for these. | The summarization of text is fairly accurate and precise, but it seems to rely on class notes or secondary sources. It has textual support, but other supporting passages may have been better choices or more textual support should be provided.
|
The summarization of text is fairly accurate, but not precise or relies too heavily on class notes or or secondary sources. The textual support is inappropriate or insufficient. | The summarization of text is inaccurate and/or the essay has no textual support. |
| Issues and Ideas | The paper contains a highly accurate and precise account of the issues in author’s own words. It contains relevant examples, and indicates the issues the examples highlight.
|
The accounts of the issues are fairly accurate and precise, but seem to rely on class notes or secondary sources. Examples are given, but other examples may have been better or more examples should be used. | The accounts of the issues are fairly accurate but not precise, ill-described, or rely too heavily on class notes or secondary sources. Examples are given, but it is not made clear how they are relevant or there are an insufficient number of examples. | The accounts of the issues are inaccurate and examples are not provided. |
| CREATIVITY | ||||
| Thesis | Thesis is original, interesting, and relevant. | The thesis is interesting and relevant. | The thesis is slightly off-topic. | The thesis is totally irrelevant. |
| Examples | Examples are original, relevant, insightful, and well-used. | Examples are original, relevant, and well-used. | Examples are unoriginal, only somewhat relevant, insufficient in number and/or not well-used. | Examples are missing, irrelevant, and/or misused. |
|
STYLE |
||||
| Clarity | All sentences are complete and grammatical. All words are chosen for their precise meanings. All new or unusual terms are well-defined. Key concepts and theories are accurately and completely explained. Good, clear examples are used to illuminate concepts and issues. Information (names, facts, etc.) is accurate. Paper has been spell-checked and proofread, and has no errors, and no rhetorical questions or slang.
|
All sentences are complete and grammatical. Most words are chosen for their precise meanings. Most new or unusual terms are well-defined. Key concepts and theories are explained. Examples are clear. Information (names, facts, etc.) is accurate. Paper has been spell-checked and proofread, and has very few errors, and no rhetorical questions or slang. | A few sentences are incomplete and/or ungrammatical. Words are not chosen for their precise meanings. New or unusual terms are not well-defined. Key concepts and theories are not explained. Examples are not clear. Information (names, facts, etc.) is mostly accurate. Paper has several spelling errors, rhetorical questions, and/or uses of slang. There is improper citation. | Many sentences are incomplete and/or ungrammatical. The author does not acknowledge that key words have precise meanings. Information (names, facts, etc.) is inaccurate. Paper has many spelling errors, rhetorical questions, and/or uses of slang. |
| Coherence | Writing moves in a clear, logical, and sustained manner from the first sentence to the last, without redundancies, tangents, or inconsistencies.
Paragraphs are tightly organized in a logical, progressive manner.
Within paragraphs, sentences flow logically from one to the next.
|
Writing follows a logical organization in a sustained manner, but sometimes it goes on tangents or has redundancies.
Paragraphs are loosely organized in support of the main thesis. It has some problems with transitions.
Paragraphs have clear and logical internal organization that supports the thesis, but sometimes drifts from the thesis. |
Follows basic organizational pattern of Introduction-Body-Conclusion, but lacks a higher organizing principle that supports the thesis throughout the paper.
Paragraphs have basic elements, but lack proper internal organization and fluidity, which may put into question whether the arguments have been properly addressed and proven. |
The main points of the essay are ambiguous and are lost in the essay.
No discernable organizing pattern between paragraphs.
Paragraphs lack the basic elements: claim, evidence, and analysis. |
| ORGANIZATION | ||||
| Introduction | The topic is introduced with minimal fanfare. Thesis is clear, and contained in the introduction. It is made clear how the paper will get to this conclusion, not in a detailed outline of the paper, but rather in a concise summary of the steps in argument.
|
The topic is introduced with little fanfare. Thesis is contained in the introduction. It is generally clear how the paper will get to this conclusion, not in a detailed outline of the paper, but rather in a description of the steps in argument.
|
The topic is introduced with too much fanfare. Thesis is not contained in the introduction. The flow of the paper is described as an outline, and not as a description of the steps in argument. | Only the topic is introduced, with no thesis or description of the argument. Or, the paper is described inaccurately. Or, there is only a thesis, with no introduction to the topic or description of the argument. |
| Body | It is very easy to follow the argument. New arguments are each introduced in new paragraphs or sections. If there are sub-arguments, it is made explicit which argument is the main one, and which are the secondary ones.
|
It is generally easy to follow the argument. Usually, new arguments are introduced in new paragraphs or sections. If there are sub-arguments, it is clear which argument is the main one, and which are the secondary ones.
|
It is somewhat difficult to follow the argument. Separate arguments are lumped together in the same paragraphs or sections. If there are sub-arguments, it is not clear which argument is the main one, and which are the secondary ones.
|
Paper reads more like summary than thesis/argument. Or, it is impossible to follow the argument. It is completely unclear how the arguments are supposed to support the thesis. There seem to be many arguments, and it is completely unclear which is the main one.
|
| Conclusion | The paper uses the conclusion to tie up loose ends…
|
The paper uses the conclusion to tie up some loose ends, but combines this with a restatement of the introduction. | The conclusion is merely a restatement of the introduction. | The conclusion is missing. |
Instructions
Choose one of the following prompts and write a 3-4 page essay in response to it:
- Does Descartes overcome solipsism in his Meditations on First Philosophy?
- Does Descartes exonerate God from being the cause of error in human nature, defined as a combination or union of mind and body?
- Develop a Cartesian analysis of a monster movie.
Formal Considerations
When writing your essay, you should assume that your audience is not familiar with the material. Do not write for the instructor, but as if you were writing for an intelligent person who has never read or been educated in the author(s) you are discussing.
Type the paper double-spaced in standard 12 pt. font with standard margins; place name, course title, and assignment title in upper left-hand corner of the first page; provide a (creative) paper title; number all pages; properly and consistently cite all quotations and references; state style of citation on first or last page; proof read.
Honor Code
Please review University of San Francisco and course policies on plagiarism and other violations of the Honor Code before beginning your essay.
Submission
On Th 10/29, you are responsible for submitting your final draft on Canvas; this will process your paper through Turnitin.com and provide your instructor with a copy.
No late submissions will be accepted for this assignment.
Evaluation
The short essay is worth 100 possible points. It will be evaluated on a scale from A to F (100 to 0 points).
Your essay is being assessed in terms of your ability to contend with and adequately interpret the primary sources we’ve read for the course, so use of secondary literature is not recommended. If you do make use of secondary sources, though, be sure to properly cite them.
Your essay will be evaluated according to the following criteria: argument, comprehension, creativity, style, and organization. Please see the Rubric for Philosophy Papers below for an explanation and breakdown of these criteria.
| EXCELLENT | GOOD | NEEDS IMPROVEMENT | UNACCEPTABLE | |
| ARGUMENT | ||||
| Thesis | The introduction contains a clear and specific statement of the main conclusion of the paper. | The thesis is obvious, but there is no single clear and specific statement of it in the introduction. | The thesis is present, but must be uncovered or reconstructed from the text of the paper.
|
There is no thesis. |
| Arguments | Each reason for believing the thesis is made clear, and, as much as possible, presented in single statements. | The arguments are all clear, although each may not be presented in a single statement. | The arguments must be reconstructed from the text of the paper or arguments do not correspond to thesis.
|
There are no arguments—the paper merely restates the thesis or summarizes the text. Or, if there are arguments, they are much more likely to be false than true. |
| Support | The arguments clearly support the thesis and together constitute a strong defense of thesis. The author thoroughly and specifically explains the support they provide.
|
The arguments support the thesis and the author indicates the general kind of support they provide. | The arguments somewhat support the thesis, but the author does not indicate or thoroughly explain the kind of support they provide. | The arguments do not support the thesis. |
| Counter-Arguments | The paper considers very strong counter-arguments and provides original and/or thoughtful responses. | The paper considers counter-arguments and provides responses. | Counter-arguments are not clear, thoroughly developed, or do not oppose thesis. Or responses are non-existent. | No counter-arguments are considered. |
| COMPREHENSION | ||||
| Text | The paper contains highly accurate and precise summarization of text in author’s own words. The paper uses appropriate textual support for these. | The summarization of text is fairly accurate and precise, but it seems to rely on class notes or secondary sources. It has textual support, but other supporting passages may have been better choices or more textual support should be provided.
|
The summarization of text is fairly accurate, but not precise or relies too heavily on class notes or or secondary sources. The textual support is inappropriate or insufficient. | The summarization of text is inaccurate and/or the essay has no textual support. |
| Issues and Ideas | The paper contains a highly accurate and precise account of the issues in author’s own words. It contains relevant examples, and indicates the issues the examples highlight.
|
The accounts of the issues are fairly accurate and precise, but seem to rely on class notes or secondary sources. Examples are given, but other examples may have been better or more examples should be used. | The accounts of the issues are fairly accurate but not precise, ill-described, or rely too heavily on class notes or secondary sources. Examples are given, but it is not made clear how they are relevant or there are an insufficient number of examples. | The accounts of the issues are inaccurate and examples are not provided. |
| CREATIVITY | ||||
| Thesis | Thesis is original, interesting, and relevant. | The thesis is interesting and relevant. | The thesis is slightly off-topic. | The thesis is totally irrelevant. |
| Examples | Examples are original, relevant, insightful, and well-used. | Examples are original, relevant, and well-used. | Examples are unoriginal, only somewhat relevant, insufficient in number and/or not well-used. | Examples are missing, irrelevant, and/or misused. |
|
STYLE |
||||
| Clarity | All sentences are complete and grammatical. All words are chosen for their precise meanings. All new or unusual terms are well-defined. Key concepts and theories are accurately and completely explained. Good, clear examples are used to illuminate concepts and issues. Information (names, facts, etc.) is accurate. Paper has been spell-checked and proofread, and has no errors, and no rhetorical questions or slang.
|
All sentences are complete and grammatical. Most words are chosen for their precise meanings. Most new or unusual terms are well-defined. Key concepts and theories are explained. Examples are clear. Information (names, facts, etc.) is accurate. Paper has been spell-checked and proofread, and has very few errors, and no rhetorical questions or slang. | A few sentences are incomplete and/or ungrammatical. Words are not chosen for their precise meanings. New or unusual terms are not well-defined. Key concepts and theories are not explained. Examples are not clear. Information (names, facts, etc.) is mostly accurate. Paper has several spelling errors, rhetorical questions, and/or uses of slang. There is improper citation. | Many sentences are incomplete and/or ungrammatical. The author does not acknowledge that key words have precise meanings. Information (names, facts, etc.) is inaccurate. Paper has many spelling errors, rhetorical questions, and/or uses of slang. |
| Coherence | Writing moves in a clear, logical, and sustained manner from the first sentence to the last, without redundancies, tangents, or inconsistencies.
Paragraphs are tightly organized in a logical, progressive manner.
Within paragraphs, sentences flow logically from one to the next.
|
Writing follows a logical organization in a sustained manner, but sometimes it goes on tangents or has redundancies.
Paragraphs are loosely organized in support of the main thesis. It has some problems with transitions.
Paragraphs have clear and logical internal organization that supports the thesis, but sometimes drifts from the thesis. |
Follows basic organizational pattern of Introduction-Body-Conclusion, but lacks a higher organizing principle that supports the thesis throughout the paper.
Paragraphs have basic elements, but lack proper internal organization and fluidity, which may put into question whether the arguments have been properly addressed and proven. |
The main points of the essay are ambiguous and are lost in the essay.
No discernable organizing pattern between paragraphs.
Paragraphs lack the basic elements: claim, evidence, and analysis. |
| ORGANIZATION | ||||
| Introduction | The topic is introduced with minimal fanfare. Thesis is clear, and contained in the introduction. It is made clear how the paper will get to this conclusion, not in a detailed outline of the paper, but rather in a concise summary of the steps in argument.
|
The topic is introduced with little fanfare. Thesis is contained in the introduction. It is generally clear how the paper will get to this conclusion, not in a detailed outline of the paper, but rather in a description of the steps in argument.
|
The topic is introduced with too much fanfare. Thesis is not contained in the introduction. The flow of the paper is described as an outline, and not as a description of the steps in argument. | Only the topic is introduced, with no thesis or description of the argument. Or, the paper is described inaccurately. Or, there is only a thesis, with no introduction to the topic or description of the argument. |
| Body | It is very easy to follow the argument. New arguments are each introduced in new paragraphs or sections. If there are sub-arguments, it is made explicit which argument is the main one, and which are the secondary ones.
|
It is generally easy to follow the argument. Usually, new arguments are introduced in new paragraphs or sections. If there are sub-arguments, it is clear which argument is the main one, and which are the secondary ones.
|
It is somewhat difficult to follow the argument. Separate arguments are lumped together in the same paragraphs or sections. If there are sub-arguments, it is not clear which argument is the main one, and which are the secondary ones.
|
Paper reads more like summary than thesis/argument. Or, it is impossible to follow the argument. It is completely unclear how the arguments are supposed to support the thesis. There seem to be many arguments, and it is completely unclear which is the main one.
|
| Conclusion | The paper uses the conclusion to tie up loose ends…
|
The paper uses the conclusion to tie up some loose ends, but combines this with a restatement of the introduction. | The conclusion is merely a restatement of the introduction. | The conclusion is missing. |
Click here to have a similar A+ quality paper done for you by one of our writers within the set deadline at a discounted rate