PHIL 130 Aveda Institute Leibnizs View of The Best World Argumentative Essay Argumentative Essay Prompt Assignment: Choose one of the prompts from below t

PHIL 130 Aveda Institute Leibnizs View of The Best World Argumentative Essay Argumentative Essay Prompt

Assignment: Choose one of the prompts from below to write your essay on. Your essay should follow the

guidelines outlined in what follows. You will be graded according to the point breakdown schema as given in

this document. A digital copy is to be uploaded to Canvas by the due date.

Formatting

5 – 7 pages (1250 – 1,750 words)
Double-Spaced
1 inch margins
12 point Times New Roman Font see attachments for more Philosophy 130
Argumentative Essay Prompt
Assignment: Choose one of the prompts from below to write your essay on. Your essay should follow the
guidelines outlined in what follows. You will be graded according to the point breakdown schema as given in
this document. A digital copy is to be uploaded to Canvas by the due date.
Formatting
•
•
•
•
5 – 7 pages (1250 – 1,750 words)
Double-Spaced
1 inch margins
12 point Times New Roman Font
Point Breakdown:
1. Introduction/Thesis (20 points)
2. Argument Reconstruction (25 points)
3. Evaluation of Argument
a. Objection (15 points)
b. Response (15 points)
4. Adjudication (20 points)
5. Conclusion (5 Points)
Critical Reading Response Components:
1.
Introduction/Thesis: Introduce the topic of the paper that you will be analyzing. State your thesis as
precisely as you can.
Before you write your thesis, answer the following questions:
•
What is the conclusion (the statement, claim or belief) the author is attempting to persuade
the reader to accept? [note: a statement is truth functional, i.e., can be either true or false;
therefore, you can take a stand on whether you think the conclusion is correct or incorrect]
•
Has the author provided adequate reasons to accept the statement, claim or belief he or she is
asserting? If so, why do you find these reasons compelling? If not, why do you find these
reasons lacking?
Your thesis should be a clear and concise articulation of the position you are taking and why you are
taking that position (one to two sentences).
Example thesis: Author A argues that X; however, Author A’s position that X is open to the serious
objection Y.
2. Argument Reconstruction: Reconstruct the author’s claim and argument in your own words. (1-2
paragraphs)
In your own words, lay out the argument the author is putting forward. You will want to make the
logical content of the argument explicit by demonstrating that you understand the reasons that are
being given in support of the author’s central claim.
Paragraph Structure:
•
Topic Sentence (1): Articulate the main idea that is the subject of your paragraph (a paragraph
should deal with no more than one central idea. Since this is an argument reconstruction, the
main idea of the paragraph will be the author’s central claim.)
•
Sentence (2) – Elaboration of the topic sentence. The reasoning the author gives in support of
their central claim.
•
Sentence (3) – Elaboration of sentence (2). Further reasoning .
•
Sentence (4) – Elaboration of sentence (3). Further reasoning.
•
Concluding sentence (5) – Summarize and restate the central idea of the paragraph.
3. Evaluation of Argument: Evaluate the author’s argument or claim (1-2 paragraphs).
a. Raise an objection to the argument or claim.
What objections can be raised to the argument that you just reconstructed? Even if you agree
with the claim the author is putting forward, raise a potential objection.
Paragraph Structure: Just like with the argument reconstruction, your topic sentence should be a
clear and concise articulation of the central claim your objection consists of. Your supporting
sentences should offer the reasons why you think this objection is warranted. Your concluding
sentence should sum up all that you have said thus far in the paragraph.
4. Respond to objection: Can the theory/author respond to the objections you have raised? Address the
objections the theory/author might raise in response to your objections. Do the theory/author’s
objection(s) successfully address the objections you have raised? Give reasons why. (1-2 paragraphs)
5. Adjudication: Now that you have responded to the objection you have raised, you are in a position to
determine whether you think the objection you raised undermines the author’s argument, or whether
the author’s argument can handle the objection you put forward. [Tip: think of it this way – you have
set up a debate between Objection A and Response B. What is the final outcome of this debate? Who
has gained the upper hand in the argument, A or B?]. (1-2 paragraphs)
6. Conclusion: Write a conclusion and, if necessary, rewrite your introduction: Invariably, papers require a
rewritten introduction when we finish drafting them. A good time to write the final draft of your
introduction is when you write your conclusion, since both paragraphs have as one of their main
purposes to clearly state the main thesis of your paper. However, do not just summarize in your
conclusion; instead, try to convey what it is that you find gripping or important about the view you have
been presenting and defending in your essay, or point the reader in the direction of further lines of
reflection opened up but not addressed in your essay. (1 paragraph)
Writing Prompts:
*Note: You do not need to slavishly adhere to these prompts, they are provided simply to help you start
thinking about the subject and content of your essay.
1. In David Hume’s Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, the character of Cleanthes offers an argument for the
existence of God by way of analogy with a machine made by humans. How does this argument go? What
objections does Philo raise to the argument? Do you think Cleanthes can respond to these objections? Why or
why not?
2. Philo argues that the amount of suffering in the world tells against the existence of a God that is omnipotent,
omniscient, and omnibenevolent. Why does Philo think this? What kind of objection might the theist raise in
response to Philo’s argument? Can Philo respond to such an objection. Why or why not?
3. In order to defend the existence of God in the face of evil, Leibniz argues that the actual world is the best of
all possible worlds, that the evil the world contains is accompanied by a greater good. How might an atheist,
for instance, object to Leibniz’s position? Can Leibniz respond to such objections? Why or why not?

Purchase answer to see full
attachment