Prompt A: Descartes and Skepticism

Your paper must use a readable 12-point font (e.g. Times New Roman, Arial, Cambria), be double-spaced, and have 1-inch margins. It should be formatted in MLA, APA, or Chicago Style (or some similar format); the most important part of formatting is that you cite the original source whenever you mention an idea that’s not yours, cite any page numbers that are relevant, and always use quotations marks for direct quotations. The paper should be 1,500-2,100 words in length (approximately 5-7 pages).

You must turn in this assignment as a Word document in Blackboard in through the “Paper 3” assignment under Assignments > Written Assignments > Paper 3. Prompts [these are the same as the ones for Paper 2]: While you can choose to write on and evaluate any argument from the philosophy readings from class, here are some (and only some) recommendations for things you might write on (and you can write on the same prompt that you wrote the first paper on in this assignment):

” Prompt A: Descartes and Skepticism At the end of “Meditation 1″, Descartes concludes that the senses cannot give us knowledge of the world around us. He shows this in part by arguing that the senses cannot distinguish between dreaming experiences and waking experiences, since any experience we have while awake can happen while we’re asleep (and vice versa). Explain Descartes’ argument (which is given mainly on page 6, in lines 28-61; the conclusion is discussed roughly from page 6, line 62 to page 7, line 26); that is, explain why Descartes takes the example of dreams to show that we cannot have knowledge of the world around us on the basis of our senses. Do you think his argument is a good one or not? After you explain Descartes’ argument, defend your answer to this question with your own arguments. ” Prompt B: Science and Morality In “Philosophy v Science”, Lawrence Krauss claims that science can “resolve even moral questions” (10). In support of that claim, he says that science tells us that homosexuality is not immoral because some people are naturally disposed to homosexual behaviors (see page 10, lines 39-45). Even though Julian Baggini agrees that homosexuality is not immoral, he claims that science’s discovery that there is a natural disposition to homosexuality does not show this. To show this, Baggini uses the example of rape. Explain Baggini’s argument (which occurs between line 63 on page 10 and line 11 on page 13); that is, explain how he argues (using the example of rape) for the conclusion that science’s discoveries about natural dispositions do not determine which actions are moral or immoral. Do you think Baggini’s argument is a good one or not? After you explain Baggini’s argument, defend your answer to this question with your own arguments.