two philosophical exegeses

/in /by

Exegesis’s Include:

You don’t need an introduction or a conclusion but your first sentence should be a stand-alone paragraph which states your thesis. Your thesis should say something like “I will argue that Peikoff has a better solution to the case at hand because ….” (This comes generally from the 4th task.) The because part is crucial — that’s the argumentative component of your thesis.

  1. Explain the case at hand back in your own words.
    1. This should be no more than one paragraph. It’s just a quick summary so I know how you’re understanding the case.
  2. Explain the theories of the two philosophers that are assigned in that particular week.
    1. This should be where you show that you understand the arguments of the philosophers that are covered in a particular topic. So if you’re writing on the Healthcare Case Analysis, you’d explain the arguments of Peikoff and Bradley.
    2. This should be completely neutral — just a succinct presentation of the arguments that isn’t influenced by or that mentions the case.
    3. This should be at least two paragraphs, and probably more like four.
  3. Present an argument applying the philosophers’s arguments to the case at hand.
    1. Here you should take the work you did in task two and apply that to the story. So if you were writing on Healthcare, you might say that Peikoff’s theory would put Jim in world X because of reason Y and then justify that. You’d then do the same with Bradley.
    2. This should be at least two paragraphs, and could easily be four.
  4. Present an argument explaining why one philosopher has a better solution to the case at hand.
    1. Do to this you need to explain what you think a successful solution to the case would demonstrate and then show how one of the philosophers does this better than the other.
    2. This should be one to two paragraphs.
  5. Explain what you would do and why.
    1. This should be exactly one paragraph.

First Exegesis:

Climate Change Essay Prompt

In this essay you have 5 tasks:

  1. Give a clear and concise explanation of the case at hand.
  2. Give a thorough, philosophical exegesis of the relevant aspects of Graham Long’s and Laura Westra’s arguments. (Click here for some tips on how to do a successful exegesis.)
  3. Present an argument using the relevant philosophers to develop a similar program in the California.
  4. Present an argument explaining why one of the philosophers can be viewed as offering a more successful proposal for how to apply the program in California.
  5. In no more than one paragraph, explain what solution you would propose for such a plan.

Read this article from Mother Jones . It lays out a very successful carbon tax progamme from British Columbia (the western-most Canadian province, right above Washington.) It also suggest the benefits that might occur were the United States to adopt a similar tax program.

You are the director of the California Environmental Protection Organisation. Your job is to take the BC model and make it work in California. To do that you need to explain what the program would look like in California and then come up with a way of getting California to implement the principle.

Link: http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/03/bri…

Starving Nations Prompt

In this essay you have 5 tasks:

  1. Give a clear and concise explanation of the case at hand.
  2. Give a thorough, philosophical exegesis of the relevant aspects of Peter Singer’s and Garrett Hardin’s arguments. (Click here for some tips on how to do a successful exegesis.)
  3. Present an argument applying Singer and Hardin to the case of Canadia.
  4. Present an argument explaining why one philosopher’s approach to dealing with Canadia is more successful than the other and why.
  5. In no more than one paragraph, explain what you think we should do

There is a country, called Canadia, that is becoming a global problem. Thousands of Canadianies are dying every day from starvation, disease, and exposure. The Canadiani population doubles about every 33 years, whereas the American population doubles about every 90 years. To try an increase their GDP, the Canadiani government mines oil from tar sands. This is an incredibly environmentally distructive process that injects pollutants into the air, pollutes aquifers, and kills plants and wildlife. There is also a rampant AIDS epidemic in Canadia because of lack of available condoms.