Write an essay (of roughly 5-6 pp. or 1500-1800 words) in which you present two sides of an issue, one of which is found in the reading since Holmes, and develop your position on this issue. More specifically, your paper should meet the following specifications:

One possible pattern fitting these specifications would consist of (i) the description of some aspect of the views of someone you read during the part of the course noted, (ii) consideration of an objection to those views during which you identify the issue which divides the two sides, (iii) a statement of your own position on this issue, and (iv) a defense of your position against a possible objection.

However, a number of other patterns are possible. For example, it might be the objection, not the view it is an objection to, that you find in the reading. If this is not an objection to the views of particular person, your account of the issue may be part of your description of the position to which it is an objection. That is, in this sort of case, aspects of (i) and (ii) above are exchanged, with the description of something you’ve read appearing in (ii) and a statement of the issue appearing in (i).

And it could be that your own position is substantially the same as either the initial position you describe or the objection to it. In this case, you may find yourself needing to say less to explain your position, but you should do more to explain your reasons for holding it. That is, the contribution of your own thinking here comes less in the definition of your position than in the explanation of reasons for it. Of course, these reasons should respond to the other side of the issue, and you should also go on to defend your views against a possible objection that is not identical to your initial statement of the other side of the issue. That is, in this case, component (iii) takes a different form than it does in the possibilities described above, but (iv) is still different from (i) and (ii).

What I am asking you to do on this paper is not vastly different from what I asked for on the first paper, so the general advice I gave there still applies. In particular, be sure to keep your topic narrow. A broad issue may be involved; but, if so, you will be able to deal with it only in a very limited way, and you should be clear about the limitations of your treatment and make them clear to a reader. And be sure to give enough space to present your own views clearly and fully. You should think of components (iii) and (iv) of the various patterns described above as taking up roughly half of the paper.

Although I’ll be willing to accept your essay on paper, I’d prefer that you send a copy by e-mail (either as an attachment or, if there is no special formatting, in the body of a message).