The basic idea is to relate two or three of the papers we’ve read and discussed this semester.
 “Relate” means:   •  find and identify overlapping issues in the papers
                            • compare/contrast approaches to those
                            • make judgments about which approach is philosophically more
                                  impressive or interesting, and explain why

You’ll need to re-read the papers/selections you choose, and you should include sufficient
summary of the papers to show your general understanding of them.  Be sure to say which
papers/selections you are relating!

Length: about the same as papers #1 and #2 minimum (four printed double-spaced pages).

Options (refer to the web pages if needed for actual paper titles).  Do one:

1) Magee (first selection of the course) had a few positive and more negative things to say about
analytic philosophy.  Summarize some of his main positive and negative points.  Then pick two or
perhaps three (your choice) of the other readings that either confirm or disconfirm (or both) his
assessment.  Then clearly explain in what ways those other readings confirm andor disconfirm his
assessment.

Note for 2-9.  In case the assigned reading for a day included more than one selection, then it is
the major (longer) one that you should focus on!

2) Readings to relate: Evil Characters and Forgiveness

3) Readings to relate: Evil Characters and Resentment

4) Readings to relate: Forgiveness and Resentment.

5) Readings to relate: Determinism and Moral Luck

6) Readings to relate: National Interest and Multiculturalism

7) Readings to relate: Old Wives’ Tales and Knowledge (Bencivenga)

8) Readings to relate: Three Worlds and Possibilities

9) Readings to relate: your choice of two of the assigned readings, taking into
       account the above note on 2-9.