2 prompt philosophy final — read instuction
Finding a Writer is guaranteed
The Student has already paid for this assignment an amount of $45.00, and has selected a Writer, but for some reason the order was returned to the Auction (for example, the selected writer couldn’t finish the assignment). If you offer your services for the same amount, the probability that the Student will choose you increases. The order has already been paid for, and this means that there is guarantee that a Writer will be selected. Feel free to suggest your own rate as well.
Description Details
Discipline Philosophy
Assignment type : Other types
Description
For each answer, be as complete as possible, but keep in mind that you are not being asked to write standard essays. These are exam questions for which you
supply an answer. Be direct. Be clear. Be persuasive. Again, these are not intended as stand-alone research papers, with introductions and conclusions, etc.
Simply make sure that they are clear, organized, and focused. Each answer will be graded on its own merits, with equal weight to writing/clarity, argument, accuracy, and originality. Each answer should require approximately 700-900 words.
THE PROMPT: (article Loving People for Who They Are (Even When They Don’t Love You Back) -Sara Protasi
- Protasi defends a perspectival, complex property view of love. One worry about property (or quality) views of love is that they seem to face a serious difficulty accounting for evidence from situationism. According to situationism, there is reason to doubt that we have stable personality traits, and so it seems unlikely that these properties can be the basis for love’s reason. Is this really a worry? On the one hand, Protasi’s use of perspectival properties may save her from this worry (if it is one), since she invokes the response-dependent properties available to the lover (not the objective qualities of the beloved). But then, to be an adequate solution, it seems she must after all commit herself to a kind of delusion-proneprojectivism (something she explicitly denies). Describe whether this is a serious dilemma, then answer in detail: what should Protasi do (if anything) to avoid it?
Second Prompt: (Love as Valuing a Relationship) — Niko Kolodny
Niko Kolodny states his Relationship View this way:
Love is a psychological state for which there are reasons, and these reasons are interpersonal relationships. . . Love is both a final valuation of a relationship, from the perspective of a participant in that relationship, and a nonfinal, noninstrumental valuation of one’s “relative” (the covering term I will use for the other participant). In other words, love consists (a) in seeing a relationship in which one is involved as a reason for valuing both one’s relationship and the person with whom one has that relationship, and (b) in valuing that relationship and person accordingly (150). One central worry about this view is that it seems to make love a reason for itself. First, describe the view Kolodny outlines in this selection, state and motivate the worry about rational bootstrapping (as he characterizes it), and describe Kolodny’s reply. Do you think it is a suitable reply? Why or why not?
Format MLA
Academic Level: –
Volume of 5 pages (1375 words)
Type of service: Custom writing
