Write an essay (of roughly 2-3 pp. or 600-900 words) framing an interpretative issue. This is the sort of exposition that is likely to form the initial part of your final paper (though there is no need for the issue you discuss in this paper to be the one you write on in your final paper).

The issue is not unlike the question that was at the heart of your paper on Kemp Smith, but it should be developed in ways that weren’t required for that exercise. In particular, you should consider two alternative ways of interpreting Kant. More specifically, you should (i) find a passage in Kant where you can see two alternative ways of understanding what he is saying, (ii) provide an exposition of the more straightforward aspects of the passage to provide context for the interpretative issue, and (iii) present each of the alternative interpretations you see. You do not need to decide between these interpretations; but, in presenting them, so should comment of their relative advantages.

Although the two interpretations should be live options from your point of view, they need not be ones that you have generated. Indeed, you might find both in Kemp Smith (e.g., one he holds and one he argues against) or in other sources. (Of course, you should cite any sources if they aren’t simply approaches that occurred to you as you read Kant.)

While I’d be happy to accept your assignment on paper, it is more convenient for me to receive work electronically; and, since I haven’t set up the course Canvas site for assignments, that means using e-mail—my address is helmang@wabash.edu. An e-mail attachment is probably most convenient.