Write an essay (of roughly 5-6 pp. or 1500-1800 words) that responds critically to the secondary source on which you’ve led discussion.

This is intended to be a special case of a typical sort of philosophy paper, one in which you consider a position and an objection to it and evaluate the relative strength of the two sides.

In this case, the position should be one you find in the secondary source. It may be an interpretive position concerning Leibniz or it may be a philosophical position adopted in the course of discussing such interpretive issues. It may be the final position of the author of the source or one entertained along the way but ultimately discarded. But, in any case, it should be a position that you present via a discussion of a passage or passages in the secondary source.

The objection to this position can come from anywhere. It may be one of your own. It may appear in Leibniz or in one of the secondary sources you have read. It may even appear in the source containing the position to which it is an objection. In the latter case your paper will be an exposition of (one aspect of) the secondary source, a consideration of the relation between two views discussed there.

Whatever the source of the objection, you should give significant attention to the evaluation of the two sides. What that entails will depend on the relation between the initial position and the objection. In particular, if the objection is your own, you should not stop with your initial presentation of it but go on to consider a response or responses that might be made to your objection. And if both sides are presented in the secondary source you are considering, you should not merely report the evaluation of the two sides you find there but instead consider their relative strength for yourself even if you end up agreeing with the assessment found in that source.