Clear Summary

Summary-Critiques are essays that analyze the strengths and weaknesses in someone’s argument, in this case in the arguments of one of the philosophers presented in our Pojman textbook. In order to critique an argument, one must first present a clear summary of the argument itself. Therefore, your critiques must include all the following:
An introduction with a thesis statement that states your position regarding the article’s core claims,
A summary of the article’s main points, and
An analysis of both strengths and weaknesses in the philosopher’s points.

A good critique is objective but not afraid to take a stand. It presents a thesis that either supports or questions the philosopher’s claims, then proceeds to ‘back up’ the thesis with specific examples—including analyzed quoted passages—from the article. Aim for about 30-40% summary and 60-70% critique. Proofread for punctuation and grammar errors. The absolute minimum length requirement is four pages, double-spaced Times New Roman in 12-font plus Works Cited page. Each critique is worth a maximum of 100 points. Note that you will be writing a total of two summary- critiques during the semester.

Critique due dates are set up such that the assignments are about two weeks apart in order to give you ample time to read and write.

Assignment: Write a total of 2 critiques over the course of the semester (dates for each are listed in the above link). Choose among the following essays that are in Pojman’s Moral Philosophy:

*Friedrich Nietzsche, “Beyond Good and Evil”, p 123
*Plato, “What is Right Conduct?”, p. 2
*Howard Kahane, “Sociobiology, Egoism and Reciprocity”, p. 94
*Thomas Aquinas, “Natural Law”, p. 21
*Bernard Williams, “A Critique of Utilitarianism”, p. 175
*William Frankena, “A Reconciliation of Ethical Theories”, p. 271
*Peter Singer’s “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” on p. 412.
*Sterling Harwood, “Eleven Objections to Untilitarianism”, p. 186

Note: Alternative assignment that may substitute one summary- critique of the above essays: If you have not yet received your textbook by Wk 2 when the first critique is due, or if you simply want to take a ‘break’ from the heavy reading and watch a heavy film instead as a substitute for one of the later summary-critiques, you may watch and do a summary-critique of one of the following movies: 1- Ayn Rand: A Sense of a Life (a documentary about the philosopher made in 1997), or 2- The Fountainhead ( a 1949 classic film based on Ayn Rand’s novel whose main character personifies Rand’s ideal of the ethical person) or 3- Mindwalk (a 1990 film based on a conversation between a poet, a philosopher, and a politician who discuss how the world view proposed by new physics offers a more ethical, environmentally conscious alternative to the mechanistic world view that prevails in our culture). All three of these movies should be readily available at most video stores or Netflix.  For example, if you choose The Fountainhead, what are the qualities of the ideal moral individual (the egoist) for Rand? What are the limitations and strengths of egoism?

Last, instead of analyzing one of the above videos, you may substitute one of the critiques by critiquing a discussion from the Philosophy Bites podcast. Please, get prior approval first for this substitution.