phi paper 1800 words
i already have a topic and it is the philosophy of a controversial joke. the three sources to use for the reaserch are
Mosch,Isadora.2015. “Philosophy Now: The Philosophy of a Controversial Joke.” Issue 111 :: December 2015 / January 2016.
Morreall, John. “Philosophy of Humor”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition)
Holt, Jim. “Stop Me If You’ve Heard This: A History and Philosophy of Jokes.” 2016 Guardian News and Media.
you can use more sources if you would like i just have to use those three. Also i need a cover page and bibliography. the paper is in chicago format.
Intro to Philosophy Research Project
There are many, many topics in philosophy. Your task is to identify,
research and present a claim, position or thesis within a topic that you find
interesting.
You are welcome to pick any topic that you find interesting. This may seem a
bit daunting at first, but it’s not as hard as it seems. This semester I will ask you to look
for an article in Philosophy Now, a magazine available in our library (see the
instructions for the “Topic” assignment).
When considering your topic please take these general comments into consideration.
A good project should address three distinct tasks :
i. Present and explain central thesis and main argument of your
chosen topic.
ii. Present and explain one significant problem for the selected thesis and
argument.
iii. Consider whether or not the philosopher can overcome the given
objection.
(This should include one of the following concerns.)
1. If you decide that the philosopher cannot overcome the objection,
what effect does that have on the overall project.
2. If you decide that the philosopher can overcome the objection, what
does the philosopher have to do to overcome the objection and how
does this effect the overall project.
Example 1: You might begin by (i) discussing Plato’s position on piety, then (ii)
argue that this position fails to consider the role of free-will in morality. Finally, you
might (iii.1) argue that Plato’s account is not sophisticated enough to overcome this
oversight and that therefore his theory is doomed to fail. Alternatively, (iii.2) you could
conclude that his theory can indeed account for the complication of free-will and that
indeed his central insight is left unscathed.
Example 2: You might wish to argue that Stephen King is a better writer than E.
L. James. You might begin by (i) giving an explanation of what makes for a good novel—
what aesthetic qualities are had by good writing. You might then argue the King’s works
have more of these features than James’s. You would then (ii) provide a counter
argument, perhaps showing that James’s work is surprisingly good. Finally you would
(iii) conclude whether or not the initial thesis survives the objection and why.
Example 3: You might (i) argue that it is unethical to use Apple Computer
products. Then, (ii) attempt to argue that their use is perfectly fine. And finally, (iii)
consider whether the objection defeats the thesis any why.
There is no particular length designated for each of the three tasks. However, you
must spend enough time on each task to do a proper job.
Notice that I want you to discuss the issue and not merely summarize your
research. For, example a summary of Anselm’s ontological thesis would involve a
straightforward retelling of how the concept of a perfect God is meant to guarantee the
existence of the same. A discussion of what the ontological argument means might
involve a discussion of why the concept of a perfect God is different from other concepts
or what relationship is between concepts and existence.
I also want to stress that the quality of your argument and analysis is more
important than your conclusion. You can feel free to argue for any conclusion
that you think is correct. Of course, understanding the theory and essays that you
discuss is also very important.
Finally, you must argue for something! Don’t just discuss a controversy or
summarize various viewpoints pick a side and try to persuade your audience.
