这是一篇关于阅读和总结相关的原始材料，对困难的论点和观点进行仔细分析的作业代写

Assignment Objectives.

Good scholarly writing in philosophy requires developing a number of different skills. You must be able to read and summarize the relevant source material, provide a close analysis of difficult arguments and ideas, situate your position within some broader debate, and defend a coherent thesis supported by well-organized arguments. The first two of these are part of what we call exegetical skills, and they are critical to being a good philosopher. The aim of this assignment is to help students begin to develop these skills. To that end, students will be asked to complete three (3) short exegetical analyses throughout the term selected from passages the listed below (taken from the course readings).

An “exegesis” is the part of a philosophy essay in which you summarize and explain the  arguments, ideas, and concepts that are relevant to the project you are engaged with. For example, if you were writing an essay on Aristotle’s theory of character friendship, the “exegetical” section would be where you summarize and explain his account of character friends, including the relevant arguments he uses to support that account. Exegeses are immensely important to the ultimate success of any philosophy essay. Since the argument of your essay is essentially a conclusion that you have reached by engaging with the arguments of others, it is vital for you to be able to explain those arguments clearly and in sufficient detail. The reader is not going to be able to assess your argument, if you have not presented them with a convincing interpretation of the views you are discussing. It is also important keep your exegesis separate from your own evaluative arguments. Though it may be tempting to inject your own appraisal into the exegesis, it is important to present the views you are summarizing in their own right and explain them “charitably” without distorting them to suit your purposes.

In a word, your job in this assignment is to provide an interpretation of the relevant text that would be useful to a reader who is looking for a better understanding of what is going on in the passage.

Instructions.

In this assignment students are asked to give an exegesis of the arguments and ideas contained in the selected passage. Each passage articulates difficult concepts and ideas whose meaning is initially unclear and/or contains arguments that are complicated and require careful unpacking. Your job in this assignment is to summarize and explain those ideas and arguments in a way that makes them clearer to the reader. It is important to keep in mind that this is not an argumentative essay, and so you should avoid any evaluative claims or criticisms (“I disagree with…”, “I think the ideas are interesting because…”). The goal of the assignment is simply to provide an exegesis of the selected passage as described above.

Specifications.

Each exegesis must be four (4) full pages, double spaced, 12 pt regular font, and must be submitted through the course OWL site (*do not* email them to the instructor). For late penalties see the course syllabus.

Due Dates & Passages.

Assignment 1: Socrates & Plato

Due: September 30

Choose ONE passage from the following:

Apology 24b4-26a9

Meno 77b2-78b1

Phaedo 82d8-83c3

Phaedo 87a-88b6

Assignment 2: Aristotle

Due: October 28

Choose ONE passage from the following:

Nicomachean Ethics I.10, 1100a10-31.

• This selection will require you to read the whole chapter. But the main focus should be on working out what Aristotle’s basic worry is (as captured by the discussion of Solon and which is set up by the end of Chapter 9). If you find yourself with space, you may also discuss Aristotle’s general resolution of the worry which is worked out over Chapters 10 & 11.

Nicomachean Ethics Book IX.9, 1069b29-1170b19

• This is a longer selection that contains several complex arguments for the same conclusion. You may select one self-contained argument to analyze (which you will have to identify and isolate; provide the specific line numbers). Alternatively, you might see all the arguments as a variation on the some basic unstated argument, in which case you can use the space alloted to formulate that basic argument. Get creative!

Politics I 2, 1253a19-39

Assignment 3: Hellenistic Philosophy

Due: Nov 18.

Choose ONE passage from the following:

Epicurus. Letter to Herodotus 68-71 (“Further, the shapes and colours… …just as sense perception itself presents their peculiar traits.”)

Epicurus. Letter to Menoeceus 133-135.

Stoics. Diogenes 7 II.96-105 (p. 193-5), II.127-28 (p. 201-2).

• Your exegesis should use these passages as your guide with the aim of explaining (in a way that advances our understanding of) the Stoics’ views on the relation between virtue and happiness. Doing so will require you to draw on your understanding of the Stoics from other passages, which can include those not listed in the readings. But your focus should be on explaining the selected passages (the core of which is II.97).

Grading guidelines

A-A+ Assignment in this range exceed the expectations for students in this course. They demonstrate all of the requirements of the B-B+ range but do so in a superior way. They exhibit a sophisticated grasp of the relevant ideas, are able to identify the nuances of the argument, and may draw out connections between the passage and the broader philosophical context of the text.

B-B+  Assignments in this grade range are those that meet (but do not exceed) the expectations for student in this course. The exegesis should demonstrate a clear awareness of the relevant details of the passage. It should show that the student was able to sort out the basic moves in the argument and/or make clear the central ideas and concepts involved. It may not get all of the details right, but the bulk of the exegesis offers a helpful interpretation that sets out in clear terms the main ideas contained in the passage.

C-C+ Assignments in this range fall short in some area of what is generally expected of students in this course. The exegesis shows some awareness of the relevant passage, though it may not be very well grounded in the text (e.g. there are few, or no, actual references to the text itself in the form of line references and quotations). The exegesis demonstrates that the student was able to follow some of the argument and/or was able to identify some of central ideas and concepts involved, but it is not successful at making those clearer. Assignments in this range do not get the majority of the details right, although there is some attempt at an interpretation. Alternatively, they may just repeat what is in the text without any attempt to clarify or dig deeper into its meaning (“Plato says this, then he says this,…”).

D-D+ Assignments in this range do not reflect anymore than a cursory awareness of the relevant passage suggesting that the student did not read the text carefully (if at all). Although there is some attempt at an answer, the exegesis demonstrates a general lack of understanding of the relevant arguments and ideas. Assignments that attempt an exegesis of a passage that was not among the assigned ones will also fall into this range (unless the passage is approved by one of the instructors beforehand).