Aristotle: Am I A Bad Person? Is God Punishing Me?

A copy of the following letter was sent to two addresses–Aristotle's and Spinoza's–asking each (I did Spinoza's already so your job is just to do Aristotle's letter) of them for advice on the same issue. You should write on a letter in response on behalf of each of them (two letters in total). The length of the letter should be 450-500 words. (no longer) You will find detailed instructions and an explanation of how your answer will be graded on the prompts sheet on Blackboard. (I pasted this below) Two additional points you should consider regarding this specific assignment: (a) Although you are writing in the first person, you must write on behalf of Aristotle and Spinoza, representing their worldview, as you understand it from their texts, rather than your own. This means that, instead of quoting you should paraphrase their statements (put them in your own words). You do not need to imitate their voice or form of writing. Nevertheless, each argument you make should be followed by a parenthetical reference to a specific, relevant passage in the text (see instructions for how to make references on the prompts sheet). (b) Even if you feel you do not know how Aristotle or Spinoza would respond to this particular situation, you should nonetheless write down everything you've learned about the two philosophies, based on the texts we read. The majority of the grade for each letter will be given in assessment of your knowledge of the philosopher's thought, whether you succeed in tailoring it to the situation or not (see grading format in the prompts sheet). “Dear Spinoza / Dear Aristotle, I am writing to ask for your life advice. I was involved in a terrible car accident, in which a man has been killed. Although I was acquitted in court, I believe it was my fault, and I have not been the same since the accident. I am constantly in pain. I have sought advice from psychologists and from religious counselors, and nothing they said or did helped alleviate the pain. I am plagued by regret, and keep thinking: If only I hadn't left my house that day, or had chosen a different road, or had paid more attention… But I didn't, and now a man is dead because of me. Am I a bad person? Is God punishing me? Am I condemned to live in pain because of the pain I caused others? Is there any purpose left to my life? (I sometimes think it would have been better if it was me who died that day instead…) I am now turning to philosophy, with the hope that, perhaps, your wisdom can help me make sense of what happened and put my life back on course, perhaps even achieve some degree of happiness. Any advice or lesson would be so greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Mary Jane.” Answer: “Dear Mary Jane, …. …. …. …. Yours, Aristotle / Baruch Spinoza.” Prompts for the Midterm Exam I. General 1. 1) Format: The midterm exam will describe a moral problem. You will be asked to write to two short essays about this problem (50 points each), one addressing the problem from Aristotle's perspective, and the other from Spinoza's. You will not be asked to compare the two directly, but the different responses will show that you understand the differences between their approaches. II. Instructions for writing the essays: 1. 1) Scope: The length of each of the two essays must not exceed 500 words. 2. 2) Focus on the philosopher's thought rather than your own: We are not asking for your own opinion, either about the philosopher or about the case at hand, but rather we want to see how well you understand the philosopher's thought. In general, you should state ideas and arguments rather than opinions and feelings. 3. 3) Showcase your knowledge: Your answers should make it clear to us that you have re- read the texts carefully and can discuss not only the most general points (e.g., that the highest good for Aristotle is happiness and for Spinoza is the intellectual love of God or Nature) but also nuances and details (e.g., what are these philosophers' views on the emotions, on virtue, on freedom or necessity, on activity and passivity, and so on). A complete answer will include at least six different arguments or talking points for each of the philosophers, from a variety of different parts of the texts we've read. Note: Do not repeat the same argument in different words. Each sentence should add new information or layer to your answer. 4. 4) Make specific references to the texts: You do not need to directly quote the text, it is better to paraphrase it in a way that fits your answer, but, wherever it is possible, you should add in parenthesis, at the end of each new argument you introduce, a reference to the specific passage in the text in which this argument is found. 1 5) 6) III. References to Aristotle should specify both the page number, which appears on the top of the page, and the paragraph and line numbers, which appear on the sides of the text. Example: a) “The virtues arise in us neither by nature nor against nature (Nic. Ethics, Book 2, Chp. 1, p. 317, 1103a24).” References to Spinoza's “Treatise” should specify both the page number at the top of the page, and the number on the side of the page. Example: b) “There will be no sorrow if it is lost (Treatise, p.5, par. 9).” References to Spinoza's Ethics should specify the Part number, Proposition number, and whatever else is relevant. Example: c) “God is absolutely the first cause (Ethics, p. 227, Part I, Prop. 16, Corollary 3).” Note: If you use a different text than the ones we uploaded for you on Blackboard, you should include a full reference to the book and edition you are using in a footnote. Keep your answer organized and coherent: Do not simply list arguments or randomly pour out everything you know about the philosopher. Show your understanding of how the ideas are connected to each other in a unified line of thought. Write and edit your answer well: Leave time to edit your answers before submitting. In the version you submit, your phrasing and grammar must be clean and clear. How your essays will be graded: 2 Criterion Points Positive points (what we want to see in your essays): 1 Show of knowledge and understanding of the philosopher: 6 points for each argument by the philosopher that is well-stated, and, wherever possible, accompanied by specific reference to the text (0 to 36 points). 2 Success in tailoring/applying the philosopher's thought to the question or case at hand: Note: This part is only relevant if your answer shows knowledge and understanding, because there is only meaning to “tailoring” if there is what to tailor. 0 points: not tailored. 5 points: scarcely tailored. 10 points: well-tailored. 14 points: excellently tailored. TOTAL 0 - 50 points Negative points (what we do not want to see in your essays): 1 Repetition: -5 points for each repetitious claim. 3 2 Failure to connect the arguments to each other: -5 points for each idea that appears disconnected to the rest. 3 Inadequate references: -5 points each. 4 Disorganized answer: -5/-10 points. 5 Poor writing/editing (confused grammar, unclear phrasing): -5/-10 points.