First Essay Assignment

Prompts
Write on one of the following prompts:

1.  Compare and Contrast the level of autonomy present in the the Brave New World with that of our own society.  You will need to build your case by considering and responding to a counter-argument.

2.  Using the conceptual framework introduced in the textbook readings for week 3 ("Value" and the section of "Utilitarianism"), explicate and take a position on the debate between John "the Savage" and Mustafa Mond.

(Note:  at the bottom of this document is further commentary on each of these prompts.)

Requirements

• Typed, doubled-spaced, reasonable font-size (11 or 12) and margins (1-1.25"); all pages must be stapled.  (It is your responsibility to bring your work already stapled; we do not provide this service for you).
• Must include your name, your TA's name and your tutorial number (e.g. D1.01).
• About 3-4 pages in length (minimum 800 words; maximum 1200 words)
• The peer review portion is mandatory.  Failing to participate in this without a valid excuse (extenuating circumstances of the kind that would apply to missed final exams) will result in half-marks.

• Rough draft due in tutorial, week 5 (May 30-June 2)
• Final draft due in tutorial, week 6 (June 6-9)

So, the start of your paper will look like this:

Name
Tutorial leader; D1.0X

Thesis statement:  Based on Singer’s moral principle, the parents of conjoined twins, Mary and Jodie, have a moral obligation to have the twins surgically separated.
 

    Now the paper begins with a very brief introductory paragraph followed by the body of the essay.  It is a good idea to repeat the thesis statement at some point in the introductory paragarph.
 

Comments/Hints on Prompts and Organization
Students always want to know which is easier.  There is never a straightforward answer to this, as it depends on the student.

For both prompts, remember:

• Forget about the 5-paragraph essay!!!  Use as many or as few paragraphs as you need.
• Keep to the rule: one central point per paragraph, summarized in a topic/transition sentence.
• Do NOT think of the paragraphas as: Argument 1, Argument 2, Argument 3.  Rather, think of the entire paper as 1 continuous argument.
• Transition between your paragraphs -- show how body paragraph 2 builds on, or is related to, body paragraph 3 and so on. (for examples of transition sentences click here).

Prompt 1
This prompt is more creative and provides the most flexibility.  The biggest challenge with this prompt will be focusing and organizing your paper.  Also, the thesis statement will be particularly important for this prompt.  The most straightforward thesis statement would be of the form: "We are more free [are no more free] than those in the Brave New World because..."  What comes after the 'because' will represent your own thinking on the nature of autonomy.

• At some point in the essay you will need to precisely define what you mean by 'autonomy'.  Do not simply rely on the dictionary definition of "self-governed."  You will need to say more precisely what it means to be self-governed (this is the real challenge of the essay).
• You can choose to talk generally about the BNW or you can focus on specific characters (Does Bernard Marx, for example, strike you as more or less free than the average person in our society?).  But make sure you use the text as your primary evidence-base.
• It is up to at what point in the essay to raise the counter-argument.  Make sure your counter-argument is reasonable and not silly.  Think of the counter-argument as what an intelligent, reasonable person who disagrees with you might say.

Prompt 2
This prompt is more straightforward.  You are simply to translate the debate that takes place between John and Mustafa Mond into the vocabulary and conceptual framework provided by the textbook reading on Value and Utilitarianism.  For example, Pojman interprets Mond as defending a "sensualist-hedonist" conception of value.  One could also read Mond as defending a particular type of utilitarianism.  You cannot try to summarize all aspects of the debate, so you will have to narrow your paper to just one of them.

It is essential for this paper that you: (a) explicate John's position, (b) explicate Mond's position, and (c) provide your own analysis.  You can either: agree with John, agree with Mond, or come up with a third option.  In providing your own analysis, you give reasons for your opinion.  It is probably best to structure your paper as such: (i) position you agree with, or agree with most, (ii) opposition's argument, (iii) response to opposition.  So, for example, if you were agreeing with John, you should first state John's case, then Mond's response, then provide reasons why Mond's argument is less compelling than John's.

To explicate a position is not simply to describe it very briefly; rather, it is to provide a detailed presentation and analysis.  In philosophy this almost always means providing an analysis of the reasoning behind the view.  So in explicating the John's or Mond's position, make sure to make their reasoning explicit.  This might require adding missing premises or making explicit assumption that are merely implicit in the actual dialogue in the book.

In explicating the debate, do not let the characters speak for themselves.  You do not want to simply quote from the book.  Rather, you want to redescribe the positions in your own words, using the terminology provided in the textbook readings.