Please select a question from the list below, and make sure to clearly state the question you are answering at the start of your essay. Questions: (1) What is the ‘Mary’ problem against physicalism, and how effective is it? (2) What are philosophical zombies, and what problem are they meant to pose for physicalism? How plausible is the zombie argument? (3) What is the argument from illusion, and how is it used to motivate indirect realism over direct realism? Is it effective? (4) What is the problem of fiction, and how do you think one should respond to it? (5) Can the B-series capture everything there is about the nature of time? If not, what does it leave out? (6) What are abstract objects? Are there any? (7) What is the most persuasive mereological account of the relationship between parts and wholes? Defend your answer. (8) What is an indispensability argument? What problems do such arguments face? (9) How should we demarcate genuine science from pseudo-science? (10) Critically evaluate the merits of scientific realism by focusing on what you take to be either the strongest argument in its defense or the strongest argument against it. (11) Why is there something rather than nothing? (12) What is the problem of evil, and how compelling is it as an argument for God’s nonexistence? (13) Is it ever rational to have faith in God? (14) Does immortality have any essential role to play in an account of the meaning of life? (15) Is death necessary for one’s life to be meaningful? (16) If all that exists is the natural world, then can life ever be meaningful? For your essay, I'd recommend answering the question with a clear thesis statement. That is, it could read something like "although many people might say _____, I argue _____ because of a, b, and c reasons. then i would recommend that your essay proceeds in an organized fashion and explains those a b and c reasons. so for example you would have a first paragraph where you argue for a, second where you argue for b, and third where you argue for c. in each of these arguments i would make sure that you provide a quote or make some point as your evidence, and then analyze that evidence to show why it proves your point. to get full credit on your analysis, i would recommend the following: you should begin by explaining what this quote or evidence you provided is saying. this is where people usually stop with their analysis, but there are two more really important steps for a strong analysis. next, you should explain why that quote is significant. last, you should explain how that significant quote ties back into your larger argument. so with a 3 part analysis for each piece of evidence, you should expect that your analysis is longer than the evidence. make sure to end your essay with a conclusion. i don't really care about citation style but just make it so i am clear about where you got that from General advice for papers 1. Answer the prompt. Answer only the prompt. Answer all parts of the prompt. One of the most common mistakes that results in very low grades is failing to answer the entire prompt. If you are responding to a three part prompt and only answer two of the parts, you've only done 2/3 of the work, no matter how much you've written. 2. Have a clear thesis. The prompts are fairly straightforward, and it should be clear to me by the end of the first paragraph what prompt you are responding to, and what position you will be taking. Further, do not introduce topics, or the entire essay, with grand sweeping phrases like "Since the beginning of philosophy...", "Philosophers have always wondered whether...", "The biggest issue in philosophy is..." and so on. They are a waste of space. Additionally, there is no need to refer to the authors of sources by a full academic title and job posting. If you are citing Duncan Pritchard (i.e. the professor for this class) you can just call him "Pritchard" or "Prof. Pritchard". Do not write things like "Duncan Pritchard, Chancellors's Professor of Philosophy at University of California Irvine and author of the textbook we are using for this course..." As with the grand sweeping phrases, they are a waste of space. 3. Cite your sources. Papers without citations are, for all intents and purposes, plagiarized. I have no problem giving a D or F to every paper without citations. I do not care what citation style you use, just pick one and be consistent. Further, you should not need anything outside the book, lectures, and slides. If you do go outside of that material, the sources must be reputable sources. If you are unsure whether a source is good, err on the side of caution. In a pinch, ask me. 
Purchase answer to see full attachment