ARISTOTLE'S ACCOUNT OF PLEASURE
Reading: Aristotle, Book
VII esp. Chaps, 11-14 and BOOK X, esp Chps.
1 - 5 Nicomachean Ethics..
Your
assignment is to write a carefully constructed critical exposition
of
Aristotle's account of "pleasure". The task of critical exegesis is
two-fold:
First, to explain the positions
presented and to given an account of
Aristotle's
arguments for or against those positions. Second, you are
expected to critically evaluate those
arguments. You should devote roughly
an equal
amount of space to each task. You may organize your paper in
whatever
way seems best: you may do the explication first and then follow
with
criticism, or you may combine the two as you go along. Whatever
your
chosen style, remember that it is important to demonstrate that you
understand a point before you
attack or support it.
Keep in
mind that the key to a well-written paper is a well-written
INTRODUCTORY
PARAGRAPH. A well-written introduction serves two
purposes:
1) it stands alone as an account of the text in your own
words, and
2) it serves as an introduction to your own paper by outlining
the
structure and organization of your
paper. Strive for a strong opening.
Somewhere
in the body of your paper you should tackle general
questions
such as the following: Explication: (i) With was main problem
regarding
pleasure is Aristotle concerned? (ii) What are the
standard
opposing views of pleasure? (iii) In what way(s) are they
opposed?
(iv) What claims does Aristotle attack and on what
grounds?
(v) Is pleasure, according to Aristotle, the chief good? If so,
how does
it relate to eudaimonia? If not, how does it relate to
eudaimonia?
(vi) Is pleasure good according to Aristotle. If not, why not?
If so, is
it an activity, among others, that humans pursue for its own sake?
(vii) How,
if at all, is pleasure related to eudaimonia? Evaluation (i) How
well does
Aristotle set out each side of the issue? (ii) How adequate andfair is
Aristotle's account of the alternative positions? Have any
key/persuasive
arguments in support of the standard views of pleasure been
overlooked
by Aristotle? Are there any defects in his conception of the
issues?
(iii) Are there any problems or tensions associated with Aristotle's
own
account of pleasure? (iv) Does Aristotle provide the reader with
persuasive
and substantial grounds for accepting his conclusion? Are the
arguments
valid, sound, undeniable? (v) Are you convinced of anything
because of
these arguments? Explain why or why not. Do you, in the
end, agree
or disagree with Aristotle? Be sure to provide an argument for
your
assessment.
You should
strive for a clear and simple writing style. In general, try
to use
short and straightforward sentences rather than long or elaborate sentences.
Also, remember that any evaluative remarks (for example
claims
that a position is strong or weak, well-founded or not) should be
backed by
a brief explanation of why you think so. Your explanation should
be a
carefully constructed argument, designed, to persuade
your reader.
Your
critical summary should be about 1000-1200
words in length,
preferably
typed double-spaced (normal font & margins). Essays notably
longer
than 1200 words may be penalized. You should be ready to hand-in
the
hard-copy of your paper at
the beginning of the lecture. Late
assignments will be penalized 5 points out of 100 points
for each day, or
part thereof. Each day ends at
4:30 p.m. Late hard-copies should be
submitted
to the Philosophy dept. dropbox. Located, 4th floor,
Ross South,
just
outside the main office. There is a series of slots, find the one with my
name on it
and submit your paper. It will be date stamped by the
secretary
at the end of the day.
In addition to submitting a hardcopy of
your paper in class, you should submit a copy of your essay to TURNIT.COM by
the
deadline. In the absence of documented extenuating
circumstances, AT LEAST ONE submission MUST MEET THE DEADLINE to avoid a late
penalty.
