Curtis Brown
Spring, 2003

FINAL PAPER

basic requirements

The final paper should be between 8 and 12 pages in length. . (And . . . one-inch margins, 10 or 12-point type, no weird fonts, etc.).

The final paper is due on Monday, May 5.

In general, requirements for the longer paper are the same as for the shorter paper: you need to have a thesis, argue for the thesis, write clearly, and make use of some of the readings for the course. And, of course, give sources and page references whenever you make use of someone else's work. See the web page on the shorter papers for more details on these basic requirements. In addition, you should make it a point to evaluate your paper against my checklist for FYS papers before you turn it in.

content

Any topic we have discussed in class, or any related topic for which you can make significant use of class readings, is acceptable. However, given the that this is our final paper, and that it is substantially longer than the earlier papers, there are two things I would particularly like to see.

1. I would like the paper to integrate discussion of literary and philosophical readings. That is, regardless of your specific topic, I would like you to discuss both one or more literary works that illustrate or shed light on the issue, and one or more (probably more; see item 2) philosophical works that help to articulate the issues and argue for a position. The literary work(s) you discuss need not be ones we have read for class; if you have read a novel or story you find morally illuminating or challenging, you are welcome to write about it, making use of one or more of the philosophical writings we have discussed in class.

2. The paper should have a somewhat broader scope than the shorter papers. I'd like to see you use it to work out your position on an issue that several readings have addressed in various ways. (For example: what moral theory is most adequate (e.g. utilitarianism, Kantianism, Aristotelianism, "intuitionism")? Or: what kind of life is most worth living? (e.g. the pleasure-seeking life, the honor-seeking life, the life of Aristotelian virtue, etc.) Or: what is intrinsically good? (e.g. pleasure, happiness, a good will, etc.) Or: what would a "moral life" be, anyway? Would it involve obeying moral rules (Kant, Bentham), or emulating people you admire (Aristotle, Hawthorne), or trying to perceive all the relevant facts as vividly as possible and letting your "moral perception" guide you (Nussbaum, Ross), or . . .?

Note: it's OK to write the final paper on one of the "applied" issues we are about to discuss, but if you do then I'd like to see you relate it to some of the broader issues discussed earlier in the course. The most obvious way to do this would be to think about how advocates of different moral theories would respond to the issue you are addressing, but there might be other strategies as well.