{"id":10831,"date":"2024-02-07T22:13:00","date_gmt":"2024-02-07T22:13:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/questions\/philosophy-2nd-year-module-question-explain-and-assess-at-least-one-objection-to-lockes-hypothesis-of-thinking-matter-aim-for-score-of-75-85-please\/"},"modified":"2024-02-07T22:13:00","modified_gmt":"2024-02-07T22:13:00","slug":"philosophy-2nd-year-module-question-explain-and-assess-at-least-one-objection-to-lockes-hypothesis-of-thinking-matter-aim-for-score-of-75-85-please","status":"publish","type":"questions","link":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/questions\/philosophy-2nd-year-module-question-explain-and-assess-at-least-one-objection-to-lockes-hypothesis-of-thinking-matter-aim-for-score-of-75-85-please\/","title":{"rendered":"Philosophy 2nd year module – Question: “Explain and assess at least one objection to Locke\u2019s hypothesis of thinking matter.” (aim for score of 75-85 please)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Question for <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Philosophy 2nd year module <\/span><\/span><\/u><\/b>
<\/p>\n

“Explain and assess at least one objection to Locke\u2019s hypothesis of thinking matter.” <\/span><\/div>\n

<\/span><\/div>\n
I have attached an example of a first class essay but please do not write a first class essay. Use this essay as an example of the level of writing required for a first class mark and then stay just below it so it is not obvious that I have used a support website for this essay. Thank you. <\/span><\/div>\n

<\/span><\/div>\n
Overview<\/u><\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n
To answer the questions well, you will need to draw on the material presented in lectures and the assigned and recommended readings attached below<\/span>  The 1,500 word limit includes footnotes, endnotes, subheadings and appendices; it excludes the bibliography.<\/span><\/div>\n

<\/span><\/div>\n
Markers will not penalise essays that go over the limit up to 200 words (+10%), but will ensure that anything over this cannot improve the mark. <\/span><\/p>\n

All submissions must be word-processed and in a standard font (e.g. 12-point Times New Roman). They should be double-spaced and include page numbers. Please use the Harvard referencing system for this essay. <\/span><\/p>\n


<\/u><\/b><\/span><\/div>\n
Reading list\/Bibliography<\/u><\/b><\/span><\/div>\n
Please ensure that you cite authors whose words you quote <\/span>or paraphrase<\/span>, giving <\/span><\/span>page references<\/span><\/span>. <\/span><\/div>\n

<\/span><\/div>\n
\n
    \n
  • John Locke, <\/span>Essay concerning Human Understanding<\/em> <\/span>(1689), extracts from Book IV Chapter iii – attached below<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
    <\/p>\n
      \n
    • Mary Astell, extract from <\/span>The Christian Religion, as professed by a Daughter of the Church of England<\/em> <\/span>(1717) – <\/span>\n

      attached below<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      \n
        \n
      • Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, <\/span>New Essays on Human Understanding<\/em> <\/span>(1705), extracts from the Preface – \n

        attached below<\/span><\/li>\n

      • \n

        Oxford University Press
        \n(2007), Oxford Paperback Dictionary & Thesaurus<\/i>, 2nd<\/sup>
        \nEdition, Oxford University Press, Oxford University, Oxford.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n

      • \n

        One more as you see fit. Not too difficult. <\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

        Notes and prompt questions on reading materials<\/u><\/b><\/div>\n
        \n

        Reading:<\/b> <\/p>\n

        Locke, Essay concerning Human Understanding (1689)<\/u> <\/p>\n

        \n

        John Locke (1632-1704) holds that all our ideas derive ultimately from experience (comprising sensation and reflection; Essay II.i). He defines knowledge as the perception of the agreement and disagreement of our ideas (Essay IV.i.2). Book IV Chapter iii of the Essay is concerned with the extent and limitations of human knowledge. In \u00a76 of this chapter, Locke argues that we cannot know that the soul is immaterial, because for all we know, God has given the power of thinking to \u2018some systems of matter fitly disposed\u2019.<\/p>\n

        Questions<\/u><\/p>\n

        \n

        1. Locke says that \u2018We have the Ideas of Matter and Thinking, but possibly shall never be able to know, whether any mere material Being thinks, or no.\u2019 How does he argue that we cannot know this?<\/p>\n

        \n

        2. How does he argue that, for all we know, perceptions of pleasure and pain could be in bodies themselves, rather than being caused in an immaterial substance by the motions of a body? What does he mean when he says, \u2018since we must allow He has annexed Effects to Motion, which we can no way conceive Motion able to produce, what reason have we to conclude, that He could not order them as well to be produced in a Subject<\/p>\n

        we cannot conceive capable of them, as well as in a Subject we cannot conceive the motion of Matter can any way operate upon?\u2019<\/p>\n

        \n

        3. According to Locke, we can be certain that there is in us something that thinks (which he calls \u2018the Soul\u2019), but we cannot know whether that thing is material or not. How does he object (in the latter part of \u00a76) against those who claim certainty on this question?<\/p>\n

        <\/p>\n

        \n

        \n

        Reading:<\/u><\/b> <\/p>\n

        Astell, extract from The Christian Religion (1717)<\/u><\/p>\n

        \n

        Mary Astell (1666-1731) adheres to the Cartesian view that the distinction between soul (thinking substance) and body (extended substance) can be demonstrated on the basis of clear and distinct ideas of each. In this extract, she argues against Locke\u2019s hypothesis of thinking matter.<\/p>\n

        Questions<\/u><\/p>\n

        \n

        1. How does Astell support her claim that \u2018Matter and Thought are as incompatible as any two different Figures or Textures\u2019?<\/p>\n

        \n

        2. How might Locke respond to Astell\u2019s objections?<\/p>\n

        \n

        \n

        Reading:<\/u><\/b> <\/p>\n

        Leibniz, extract from the Preface to New Essays on Human Understanding (1705\/1765)<\/u><\/p>\n

        \n

        Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) wrote the New Essays on Human Understanding as a commentary on Locke\u2019s Essay in dialogue form. The work was completed in 1705, but not published until 1765. In these extracts from the Preface, Leibniz comments on Locke\u2019s exchange of public letters with Edward Stillingfleet, Bishop of Worcester, before giving his own view on the possibility of thinking matter. In doing so, he gives a version of his \u201cMill Argument\u201d against mechanical materialism. The questions below relate to Leibniz\u2019s presentation of his own views on p. 2 of the extract onwards.<\/p>\n

        Questions<\/u><\/p>\n

        1. How does Leibniz support his claim that \u2018within the order of nature (miracles apart) it is not at God\u2019s arbitrary discretion to attach this or that quality haphazardly to substances\u2019 (bottom of p. 2)?<\/p>\n

        \n

        2. As Leibniz notes, he and Locke agree that matter cannot mechanically produce thought. (Locke argues for this in Essay IV.x.16.) How does Leibniz argue that a thinking thing is not a mechanical thing like a watch or a mill? How does he use this claim to argue that \u2018we cannot maintain that matter thinks unless we put into it either an imperishable soul or a miracle\u2019?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

        <\/span><\/span><\/div>\n


        <\/span><\/span><\/b><\/u><\/div>\n
        Essay Marking Criteria<\/span><\/span><\/b><\/u><\/div>\n
        <\/p>\n

        Essays are assessed according to the following criteria (not in order of importance). A higher level of achievement is expected at Level 6 than was expected at Level 5.<\/p>\n

        Answering the question:<\/span> the extent to which the work directly and clearly deals with the title question and provides a focused answer to the particular intellectual problem posed.<\/p>\n

        Structure and organisation:<\/span> the extent to which the work demonstrates coherent organisation of the material and an overall argument that proceeds logically from introduction to conclusion, as well as the extent to which it makes this structure transparent and easily comprehensible to the reader.<\/p>\n

        Conceptual clarity and accuracy:<\/span> the extent to which the work displays understanding of key terms and concepts, defines ambiguous terms, and employs terminology precisely and correctly.<\/p>\n

        Independence of thought:<\/span> the extent to which the work goes beyond a purely descriptive, expository, or narrative discussion. Independence of thought may be demonstrated in the way(s) that a paper critically analyses a problem, interprets arguments or theories, evaluates alternative positions, provides evidence or examples, and\/or solves a philosophical puzzle..<\/p>\n

        Quality of analysis and argumentation: <\/span>the extent to which the work offers insightful analysis and compelling argumentation in discussion of the philosophical issue(s) addressed. This includes the extent to which the work deploys apposite examples and pieces of evidence to support its claims and the extent to which these are well-integrated into the overall argument.<\/p>\n

        Literature:<\/span> the extent to which the work demonstrates familiarity with, and command of, the philosophical literature on the topic, especially and essentially that of the relevant literature assigned in the module.<\/p>\n

        Style, expression, and presentation:<\/span> the extent to which the work makes effective and correct use of the English language, is written in a clear and scholarly style and includes necessary elements such as correct citations and referencing.<\/p>\n

         The following outlines the expectations for work in each range of marks:<\/b><\/u><\/span><\/p>\n

        80-100: <\/span>Such work is marked by notable degrees of all, or nearly all, of the following: thoroughness and clarity; insight or critical ability; independence of thought; clarity and rigour of argument; mastery of the relevant readings, including those assigned in the module; particularly extensive or careful reading, often (though not necessarily) beyond the readings assigned in the module. Such answers will address the question directly and proceed lucidly from one paragraph to the next throughout the essay. Work in the 80-90 range shows exceptional independence of thought and makes a contribution to the body of knowledge on the topic at issue. Marks of 90 and higher are reserved for work that is truly exceptional and far exceeds what a student at this level would ordinarily be expected to produce.<\/p>\n

        70-80:<\/span> Such work will show all, or nearly all, of the following: thoroughness and clarity; insight or critical ability; independence of thought; clarity and rigour of argument; mastery of the relevant readings, including those assigned in the module; extensive and careful reading, often (though not necessarily) beyond the readings assigned in the module. Such answers will address the question directly and proceed lucidly from one paragraph to the next throughout. Answers need not be ‘perfect’: first class marks may be awarded either to work which, though not faultless, presents an argument exhibiting qualities of sophistication, originality and\/or judiciousness to a markedly high degree, or, conversely, to work which, though not exhibiting any truly exceptional intellectual qualities, possesses virtues of composition and clarity to a markedly high degree.<\/p>\n

        <\/span><\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

        Question for  Philosophy 2nd year module  “Explain and assess at least one objection to Locke\u2019s hypothesis of thinking matter.”  I have attached an example of a first class essay but please do not write a first class essay. Use this essay as an example of the level of writing required for a first class mark […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":[],"disciplines":[56],"paper_types":[],"tagged":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/questions\/10831"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/questions"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/questions"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10831"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/questions\/10831\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10831"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"disciplines","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/disciplines?post=10831"},{"taxonomy":"paper_types","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/paper_types?post=10831"},{"taxonomy":"tagged","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tagged?post=10831"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}