983089

Third Paper Topics

Write a 5 page paper on one of the following topics Do not write more than 5 pages Papers

should be double-spaced written in Times New Roman 12 with one inch margins Papers are

due via email to both AlptekinJohn and myself by 500pm on Friday of finals week (1213)

Questions

1) In book I of the Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle argues that Plato was wrong in postulating the

existence of the forms and offers a different account of The Good First you are to briefly

present a couple of criticisms which Aristotle makes of Platorsquos theory of the forms Second you

are to present Aristotlersquos alternative picture of The Good and explain how it is related to the

main themes he develops in book I such as the structure of human action happiness and the

Function Argument Third briefly explain the ways in which Aristotlersquos account is both similar

to and different from Platorsquos account Fourth assess Aristotlersquos account in book I In this last

part you are to a) bring out a general problem or two with the account b) suggest an issue

which Plato in particular would criticize and explain why Plato would criticize this issue

2) In book II of the Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle presents his Doctrine of the Mean First you

are the present the details of this Doctrine and explain why someone like Oedipus would be

unvirtuous on this picture (think both about some of the specific virtues that Aristotle discusses

on pp 32-33 and about specific examples from Oedipus Tyrannus) Second you are to

succinctly explain how this doctrine is related to a) the Function Argument in book I b) the role

of practical wisdom in book VI Third how are vices conceptualized on this picture and does

Aristotle have a good answer to what makes something a vice (For example why is committing

adultery with the right person in the right way not a virtue and is Aristotlersquos answer satisfactory)

Fourth conclude your essay with a general assessment of the Doctrine of the Mean

3) In book III of the Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle claims that involuntary actions are the result

of force or ignorance Regarding the latter he adds that ignorance of particulars is what makes an

action involuntary (p 39) Given the fact that in book VII Aristotle argues that incontinence

stems from a lack of knowledge of certain particulars (when affected by passions) is incontinent

action involuntary First you are to present Aristotlersquos distinction between voluntary

involuntary and non-voluntary actions in book III Second you are to succinctly present

Aristotlersquos account of incontinence in book VII Third you are to assess whether incontinent

action is indeed involuntary action (or rather voluntary or perhaps non-voluntary action) Fourth

983090

how would you explain the fact that while Aristotle says that involuntary actions are pardoned

and thus are not blameworthy (p 37) incontinent actions are blameworthy (p 120)

4) A central theme of the Nicomachean Ethics is that happiness is the activity of soul in

accordance with virtue However it seems that Aristotle has a somewhat different account of

happiness in book X in comparison to the previous books First explain what happiness is and

how it is attained on the picture presented in books I II VI (you are not expected to summarize

every detail Aristotle mentions in these books but rather focus on the aspects which constitute

the heart of his account) Second explain what happiness is and how it is attained according to

book X Third propose an explanation of how the account in book X might cohere with the

earlier account Fourth assess more generally whether happiness understood as individual well-

being is the result of having the right theoretical knowledge the right practical knowledge or

perhaps a combination of both (here you are asked to try develop your own mini-theory of

happiness but are also encouraged to incorporate ideas from any text that we read in the course)

983090

how would you explain the fact that while Aristotle says that involuntary actions are pardoned

and thus are not blameworthy (p 37) incontinent actions are blameworthy (p 120)

4) A central theme of the Nicomachean Ethics is that happiness is the activity of soul in

accordance with virtue However it seems that Aristotle has a somewhat different account of

happiness in book X in comparison to the previous books First explain what happiness is and

how it is attained on the picture presented in books I II VI (you are not expected to summarize

every detail Aristotle mentions in these books but rather focus on the aspects which constitute

the heart of his account) Second explain what happiness is and how it is attained according to

book X Third propose an explanation of how the account in book X might cohere with the

earlier account Fourth assess more generally whether happiness understood as individual well-

being is the result of having the right theoretical knowledge the right practical knowledge or

perhaps a combination of both (here you are asked to try develop your own mini-theory of

happiness but are also encouraged to incorporate ideas from any text that we read in the course)