PHIL 681: Tenth Short Paper
Due April 13
(Reminder: You do not have to do this particular paper. You need to do
any four short papers (or three short papers plus a presentation), plus
the major semester paper, over the course of the semester.)
Option
One
What does Democritus' and Leucippus' "void" (or "the
empty," to kenon) seem to be?
In what sense do they appear to suggest it is "not being," and in what
sense "is" it? That is, how can it both "be" and "not be," according to
the pre-Socratic Atomists? Why is "the empty" a necessary part of the
Atomist cosmology and cosmogony?
You may find particularly useful the recommended
articles by Berryman, Sedley, Longrigg, and Mourelatos; and the
recommended chapters in
Curd's The Legacy of
Parmenides
and Graham's Explaining the
Cosmos.
You may certainly quote the text, but when you do so
you must explain what you think the quotations mean and imply. There is
no need to use any sources other than the assigned texts and listed
recommended texts. Your discussion of these secondary texts should not
simply repeat or paraphrase their arguments, but should also show your
assessment of their accuracy and of the sufficiency of the support they
give for their points. This paper should be approximately 4-5 pages
long (typed, double-spaced, 12-point font, one-inch margins). It is due
in class on April 13.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Option
Two
Graham argues (Explaining
the Cosmos Chapter 9) that Democritus and Leucippus represent a
second stage of responses to Eleatic challenges, the first stage being
represented by Empedocles and Anaxagoras. Democritus and Leucippus,
Graham argues, respond not only (or perhaps not mainly) to Parmenides,
but rather to points raised by Melissus and/or Zeno; and where
Democritus and Leucippus do treat Parmenidean concerns, their focus is
different from that of Anaxagoras and Empedocles.
Using the text of the fragments of Anaxagoras,
Empedocles, Leucippus and Democritus, discuss Graham's argument: Are
his suggestions about the issues and philosophers that engage the
interest of the pre-Socratic Atomists supported by the fragments? How
so, or how not? Is his analysis of the problems these Atomists tried to
resolve supported by the fragments? (For example, are they trying to
address ontological problems, epistemological problems, or both?)
Explain.
You may certainly quote the text, but when you do so
you must explain what you think the quotations mean and imply. There is
no need to use any sources other than the assigned texts and listed
recommended texts. Your discussion of these secondary texts should not
simply repeat or paraphrase their arguments, but should also show your
assessment of their accuracy and of the sufficiency of the support they
give for their points. This paper should be approximately 4-5 pages
long (typed, double-spaced, 12-point font, one-inch margins). It is due
in class on April 13.