PHIL 5450/6450 Paper 2

Instructions:

(1) Papers may be on any topic of your choosing, but they should substantially engage the classroom readings and discussion. Topics below are suggestions. If you’d like to discuss your paper topic [recommended if you are not writing on one of the topics below], feel free to contact me during my office hours or via email at rmallon@philosophy.utah.edu.

(2) Papers should be original. Plagiarism will result in a punishment not to exceed a failing grade for the course. (Note also that work produced for another course cannot be submitted for this one.)

(3) Papers are DUE Thursday, March 31, 2005.

Some advice:

(1) Your paper should have an argument that you introduce, present, and conclude.

(2) It's often easier to start with a position you disagree with.

(3) Considering objections to your view will enhance the quality of your written work and your thinking.

(4) Rewrite, rewrite, rewrite.

Topic Suggestions

1. Brian Loar argues that psychological content is distinct from the content attributed by 'that' clauses. In particular, he argues that sameness of that clause attribution is insufficient for sameness of psychological contents. And he argues that difference of that clause attribution is insufficient for difference of psychological content. Assess one or more of his arguments.

2. Robert Stalnaker argues that concerns with "methodological solipsism" and "psychological autonomy" raised by Twin Earth-style cases are misplaced. Assess his argument.

3. Ned Block provides a host of arguments for a conceptual role semantics. Choose and assess one or more of these. If appropriate, consider objections by Fodor and Lepore.

4. Assess one or more of Fodor and Lepore's arguments against conceptual role semantics.

5. Fodor defends an informational or causal theory of content. Assess this theory in light of the objections raised by Adams and Aizawa or in light of one of its alternatives.