•
Students will write a 800 word paper (cover page and reference page should be
included) on a topic posted on the class website.
The due date is 5/3/2021 (Monday, 11:59 pm).
Submission through the blackboard course content site.
Topic: Analysis of a philosophical argument (Aquinas’s efficient causation argument) for
the existence of God
Type: Cosmological Argument (The ultimate cause of the universe is God.)
Source: Summa Theologica (argument by efficient causation from the Five Ways)
(1) The second way is from the nature of efficient cause. (2) In the world of sensible
things, we find there is an order of efficient causes. (3) There is no case known (neither is
it, indeed, possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself; for so it
would be prior to itself, which is impossible. (4) Now in efficient causes it is not possible
to go on to infinity, because in all efficient causes following in order, the first is the cause
of the intermediate cause, and the intermediate is the cause of the ultimate cause, whether
the intermediate cause be several, or one only. Now to take away the cause is to take
away the effect. Therefore, if there be no first cause among efficient causes, there will be
no ultimate, nor any intermediate, cause. (4-1) But if in efficient causes it is possible to
go on to infinity, there will be no first efficient cause, neither will there be an ultimate
effect, nor any intermediate efficient causes; all of which is plainly false. (5) Therefore it
is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God.”
( Summa Theologica, Textbook, p. 334)
Recommended Structure of your paper
Introduction: Explanation of what you like to do in this paper.
Explanation of the argument: What are the premises and the conclusion of the
argument?
Strengths of the argument: What are the strengths of the argument?
Weakness of the argument: What re the weakness of the argument?
Conclusion: A quick summary of your discussion and your evaluation of the
argument.
Important Points of the Essay:
Whether the premises and conclusion of the argument is clearly presented
and explained or not.
Whether the meaning of efficient causation is explained or not.
Whether the Strengths of the argument is discussed or not.
Whether the Weaknesses of the argument is discussed or not.
Whether the hidden assumptions of the argument is discussed or not.
Whether the overall evaluation (validity, soundness, persuasiveness) of the
argument is presented and explained or not.
Whether the comparison with other arguments (such as ontological argument and
teleological arguments) are discussed or not.
Whether the persuasiveness of the argument is discussed or not
Whether the argument is discussed from logical and critical thinking
viewpoint or not.
Grammar, spelling and format (cover page, proper introduction, paragraph
organization)
Editorial Style
a. All written assignments should be thoroughly proofread for spelling and
grammatical errors and identified with your name and date.
b. All written assignments should be properly formatted; they should be typed with
Times New Roman, size 12 font. The sentences should be double spaced and pages
should be indicated.
c. Major points of all written assignments should be supported and connected to the class
and all sources be properly references using MLA or APA style.
d. Using outside sources is not recommended for the concerns of plagiarism and lack of
understanding. Students’ own critical thinking and logical analysis are recommended.
Plagiarism Free Policy
1. Students can freely search and study books, articles, and websites for their written
works.
If students need to use these materials for their written works, they should cite the
sources, clearly indicating where the materials (sentences and passages) came from.
2. All the written works of the students should be based on their own thoughts and
ideas. Students will receive “F” for the course if (all or part of) their written
works are either directly copied from the sources (without quotation marks
and citation) or they do not properly list sources (in the reference page). A
paper is not regarded as original and will receive “F” if the total area of
citations exceed 25% of the whole paper (even if the sources are cited and
used with quotation marks). PLAGIARIZED PAPERS OR PAPERS THAT
VIOLATE THE CODES OF “ACADEMIC HONESTY POLICY” WILL RECEIVE 0
POINT.
Late Submission: 10% deduction per day.
Other details and instructions are available in the class web page (in the blackboard
system). Please check those instructions and follow them carefully.
•
Term Paper Example (This is just an example) You need to write on
Aquinas's Efficient Causation Argument
Page 1: Cover Page: List title of your paper, your name, and your institution. For
example,
Anselm’s Argument for God’s Existence
Brad Pitt
* This is a simplified APA style cover page. APA style requires running head (on the cover page) and
abstract (next page), which are NOT required in this paper assignment.
Page 2: Introduction: For example,
Since the beginning of time, humans have asked many philosophical questions. God’s existence is
one of those hard philosophical questions that are not easily answered. Many ancient and
medieval philosophers including Anselm, Augustine, and Aquinas discussed God’s existence in
their writing.
In this paper, I* will discuss Anselm’s ontological argument. Anselm’s argument begins
with the definition of God and ends with the existence of God. Anselm believes that the definition
of perfect being should include existence. In this paper, however, I will challenge the idea of
proving God’s existence by using the definition of perfect being.
I will first explain Anselm’s argument from Proslogion. I will present the structure and
the content of the argument. Secondly, I will focus on the idea of “perfection.” I will argue that
perfection should not be confused with existence. Since perfection is a quality of a thing, it should
not entail existence. However, Anselm would respond to my criticism by arguing that perfection
must include existence because existence is better (more perfect) than non-existence. I will
discuss the relation between existence and perfection in the third part of the paper.
….
* “I” (first person pronoun) can be used to indicate the writer’s viewpoint/thought/ideas. It is not allowed to
express emotions/feelings and other personal situations. For this reason, avoid “I feel ….” Use “I think…” or “I
believe…” instead.
Page 2-3: Explanation of the argument: For example,
Anselm starts his argument by explaining who God is. God is defined as the most perfect being;
about whom none greater can be conceived. That is, God is the greatest being one can imagine.
Different religions define God in different ways but I believe that this is a neutral definition that
any religion or anyone who have thought about God would agree. Anselm then asks us to compare
God in the mind alone (in our imagination), and God in actual reality. Since the latter is greater
than the former, God should exist in the reality. This should be the case because nothing can be
greater than God. Therefore, Anselm argues, God must exist. This is Anselm’s argument for God’s
existence….
Page 3-4: Evaluation of the argument: For example,
In this argument, there is a hidden premise. It is Anselm’s assumption that existence is
better than non-existence. This seems to be true. If we compare actual one million dollars and
imaginary one million dollars, it is clear that the former is better than the latter. Because of this
premise, Anselm argues that God in reality is better than God in imagination. But is this really
right?
In some case, non-existence is better than existence. Compare imaginary hurricane and
real hurricane. Which one is better? Hurricane Katrina swept the Southern US and killed many
people. Considering this damaging effect of Hurricane Katrina, an imaginary hurricane is better
than a real hurricane. It seems that Anselm focuses only on some cases of existence in which it
comes with better qualities. Existence, however, is not always better than non-existence, as the
example of Hurricane Katrina demonstrates. If existence is not necessarily better than nonexistence, the argument does not stand.
To this challenge Anselm would respond that existence is always better because those
negative forms of existence (hurricane, earthquake, war, crimes) do not actually exist. They are
just our illusions. All existing things are supposed to be good, like Platonic forms….
Page 4-5: Summary and Your Opinion. For example,
Anselm argues that God must exist because he is the greatest and most perfect. Simply
imaginary God contradicts his nature (perfect being). So if he is perfect, he must exist. I pointed
out that existence is not necessarily a sign of perfection because the existence of deadly
earthquake, for example, is not better than its non-existence. Anselm would respond my challenge
by saying that truly existing things, like Platonic forms, are better than non-existence. Overall his
concept or God and his argument seem well thought out and nicely organized. However, as I
discussed earlier, I do not believe that we can prove God’s existence from the idea of God. Simply,
the idea of Santa Claus does not make Santa Claus real…
Page 6: Reference Page (List all the materials used in the paper): Please follow APA
or MLA format. For example,
Baird, Forrest (ed.) (2011). From Plato to Derrida. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Page 7: Plagiarism Free Statement
Copy and paste the following statement onto the last page of your paper. Type your
name and date.
I read and understand plagiarism free policy of the course listed in the course syllabus
(Introduction to Philosophy: Phi 105). I confirm that this paper is my original work. All of
the materials I use in my paper are properly cited and listed in the reference page and they do
not exceed 25% of the whole paper.
I also understand that my paper can be sent to turnitin.com for plagiarism check.
Name:
Date:
•
Spelling, Grammar, Expectations
Spellings and Grammar
For example, …
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
a. Better then nothing → Better than nothing
b. Principals of philosophy → principles of Philosophy.
c. I no that… → I know that…
d. I ask you to not press the button → I ask you not to press the button.
e. Their are many schools in this area → There are many schools in this
area.
f. All them are good → All of them are good.
g. A priori statement (x) → an a priori statement
For example,…
a. ( Avoid) I will be discussing...:
(Use) I will discuss…
Reason: Colloquial English, Not the kind of English used in academic writings.
b. ( Avoid) I feel…:
(Use) I believe (or I think)
Reason: There is no discussion of what you feel.
c. (Avoid) God is the greatest, meaning he can do anything.
(Use) God is the greatest. In other words, he can do anything.
Reason: Use of “meaning,” in the above sentence, is a colloquial expression, not necessarily
grammatical.
d. (Avoid) God is the greatest, right?
(Use) Surely, God is the greatest.
Reason: Present and discuss your ideas instead of asking questions.
e. (Avoid) …”Having said that,…” “ like what I said…” (these are colloquial expressions, good
for casual conversation but for serious academic/professional writings.)
Evaluation Criteria
Introduction (20%)
What? – A brief explanation of questions/issues/topics discussed in the paper
How? – A brief explanation of how the questions/issues are discussed in the paper
Why? – A brief explanation of why those questions/issues are important
Presentation of Questions/Issues/Arguments (30%)
Premises/evidence: What are the premises, evidence, background information, or things assumed
as true?
Reasoning: How are the premises/evidence used to support conclusion?
Conclusion: What are main ideas/principles drawn from the premises.
Example: Any example to be used to support the conclusion?
Critical Analysis (20%)
Are the premises true? Are they reasonably believable?
Is the evidence clear?
Is the reasoning logically acceptable?
Is the conclusion strongly supported by premises or evidence?
Are there any other conclusions drawn from the premises?
Are there any extra premises required to support the conclusion?
Summary and Conclusion (20%)
What is the main point of the paper?
How is the point drawn from the discussions?
What is philosophical significance of this point?
Grammar, Spelling, and Style (APA, MLA) (10%)
Any misspelled words/phrases
Any grammatical errors
Any style inconsistencies
Logical/Natural Flow of Ideas
General Expectations:
A, A- (Very Good)
Good Organization: (introduction, main body, conclusion/summary)
Presentation of Ideas: Good Understanding and Clear explanation (Presentation,
Justification, and Explanation of Arguments)
Solid Analysis: Critical Evaluation of Arguments and Philosophical Views,
Presentation of Alternative Views, and Unbiased Approach.
Grammar/Spelling: No major grammatical/spelling errors
Style: logical organization of paragraphs, intelligible and easily accessible sentences,
logical and/or natural flow of ideas.
B+, B, B- (Good)
One of the following criteria is not sufficiently satisfied.
Good Organization: (introduction, main body, conclusion/summary)
Presentation of Ideas: Good Understanding and Clear explanation (Presentation,
Justification, and Explanation of Arguments)
Solid Analysis: Critical Evaluation of Arguments and Philosophical Views,
Presentation of Alternative Views, and Unbiased Approach.
Grammar/Spelling: No major grammatical/spelling errors
Style: logical organization of paragraphs, intelligible and easily accessible sentences,
logical and/or natural flow of ideas.
C+, C, C- (Acceptable)
Two of the following criteria are not sufficiently satisfied.
Good Organization: (introduction, main body, conclusion/summary)
Presentation of Ideas: Good Understanding and Clear explanation (Presentation,
Justification, and Explanation of Arguments)
Solid Analysis: Critical Evaluation of Arguments and Philosophical Views,
Presentation of Alternative Views, and Unbiased Approach.
Grammar/Spelling: No major grammatical/spelling errors
Style: logical organization of paragraphs, intelligible and easily accessible sentences,
logical and/or natural flow of ideas.
D+, D, D- (Passing)
Three of the following criteria are not sufficiently satisfied.
Good Organization: (introduction, main body, conclusion/summary)
Presentation of Ideas: Good Understanding and Clear explanation (Presentation,
Justification, and Explanation of Arguments)
Solid Analysis: Critical Evaluation of Arguments and Philosophical Views,
Presentation of Alternative Views, and Unbiased Approach.
Grammar/Spelling: No major grammatical/spelling errors
Style: logical organization of paragraphs, intelligible and easily accessible sentences,
logical and/or natural flow of ideas.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment