Descartes’ argument in the Meditations

Choose one of the following 5 topics to write your minor essay on. Topic 1. In your own words, briefly outline the main points of Reid’s position on common sense realism and critically evaluate his argument. If you think his argument presents a plausible outlook, explain what you think the strongest parts of his argument are and why you think they are. You should present and respond to one strong objection to his position. If you think his argument presents a highly implausible outlook, discuss in detail what you think the weakest parts of his argument are and what makes them weak, as well as suggest how a common sense realist might want to respond to these points in order to defend his or her position. Topic 2. Briefly summarize and then critically evaluate the argument against direct realism that Russell presents in his chapter “Appearance and Reality”. Make sure to include explanations of which parts you think the most cogent in his argument and what you think the weakest as a part of this process. (Note: Russell is not a skeptic, but he is critical of direct realism – do some research if this distinction isn’t clear.) Topic 3. Explain to your reader how the JTB Theory of Knowledge could be modified (by adding an additional necessary and sufficient condition to the theory perhaps) in order to fortify this theory against (or render this theory resistant to) Gettier counterexamples (feel free to use your own counterexample for illustration purposes). Make sure to identify and respond to an objection that a critical reader might have with respect to your additional condition. Topic 4. In your own words, sketch out in detail the “detachment problem” that seems to confront some versions of coherence theory (with respect to truth) and provide your own example that can serve to illustrate this particular problem to your reader. Anticipate and respond to at least one critical point against your argument. Topic 5. Many scholars have suggested that Descartes’ argument in the Meditations is fatally flawed because his reasoning involves a circle of reasoning (now known as the “Cartesian circle”) involving two propositions in which each proposition is needed to support or justify the other: a) a clear and distinct idea can be recognized by us as being true. b) the concept of God (in particular as a non-deceiving being) is a clear and distinct idea. The problem is that we need to assume a) to be sure of b), and that it is the existence of Bb) (a non-deceiving God) that guarantees a). Give a detailed explanation why you think this either does, or does not, represent a fatal flaw for Descartes’ argument. 2 of 2