Hi! Just make some edits to this philosophy paper based on this feedback.
Hi! Just make some edits to this philosophy paper based on this feedback.
For information about the initial assignment, visit – http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/courses/intro2024… All information needed should be there.
or your introduction, something I would do to make your paper stronger in your introduction paragraph is to introduce the prompt. I know for the last paper it was instructed to introduce the paper prompt. This would also help with your transition into your second paragraph because your paper goes from a wide statement on philosophy and what your paper seeks to do but then immediately jumps into proclaiming Beatrice’s non-guilty but the reader still does not know who Beatrice is. Yes, you introduce her later but it would structurally make more sense to be included before stating Beatrice’s guilt. Also throughout your paper, you reference free will and determinism or describe them but you never take a stance on the matter. You only really even reference certain types of thought, like incompatibilism, with Griselda, and while you did state if you think Beatrice is guilty or less responsible I still do not know why you think that. I also remember during a class that Felix said for this prompt try to provide other argument viewpoints and counter them. I also recommend trying to reorganize your conclusion paragraph as they generally should follow of model of going from the narrow essay topic to the broader topic as a whole. I feel like you already address all aspects you need to in it but I just think reorganization would improve its clarity. Also, I recommend trying to make your intro and conclusion paragraphs less wordy and try to be more simple in both. Good luck with your essay and the rest of your finals!
Charles Jones , Apr 21 at 8:52pm
First and foremost, a major critique that I have about the paper is that it does not seem to talk about how any of the free will theories would address the problem between Beatrice and Griselda. It instead seems as though you focus more on factors that are not related to any of the theories. To start at the top and make my way down, the introductory paragraph does not really seem to address the prompt at all and instead focuses on free will and moral responsibility. These concepts are important, but the thesis needs to give your side as to who should bear more responsibility between Beatrice and Griselda. Next, you outlined the reasons why Beatrice is not responsible, but they all seem to focus on the nature of what a brain tumor would do to a person, rather than focusing on the situation in a philosophical context. For example, it is important to highlight what advocates for different philosophical ideologies would say about the situation instead of simply saying that the brain tumor would mess with Beatrice’s thought process. This same issue follows in the next paragraph. You discussed the impacts of external factors and moral liability, which is good, but you then make the paragraph more about the legal system than anything else. In that same paragraph, you also talk about how the tumor causes her to “obtain joy from activities that are highly condemned,” which seems fairly irrelevant to the discussion because they aren’t backed up by talking about one of the philosophical ideologies. In the next paragraph, I love the point you make about Beatrice’s constraints preventing her from attaining free will, but then you veered off and talked about why convicting Beatrice would actually be problematic, which once again seems irrelevant to the topic. I think your paper could also be boosted by explaining some terms that may be unfamiliar to some people. For example, you talked about free will and determinism but did not explain what either of them are. I like your analyses between Beatrice and Griselda about how Griselda acted out of an ignorance to moral responsibility, while Beatrice physically could not take that into account. Once again, describing guidance control is very unique and expresses extended knowledge, but it does not further your argument by standards of a philosophical paper. I am also sort of confused with the structure. It seems to be going back and forth between explaining Beatrice’s side and Griselda’s side, but does not follow any linear path when doing so. You explained why Griselda appeared to be more guilty at the bottom when that really could have been used to contextualize your argument at the top. Overall, I don’t think you clearly expressed you understood the material because you talked about other, non-philosophical factors for the most part. Also, I think the structure could improve, which would make your argument seem more clear. Lastly, this was a great analysis of the situation and I believe your argumentation was spot on.
Matthew Fangmann , Apr 22 at 7:44pm
The paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the intricate relationship between free will and moral responsibility, focusing primarily on the case study of Beatrice, who exhibits violent behavior due to a brain tumor, and comparing her situation to that of Griselda, who displays similar behaviors without the influence of a medical condition. It begins by acknowledging the longstanding philosophical debate surrounding the ethical foundations of human actions and agency, setting the stage for a discussion on the tension between individual autonomy and external influences. The analysis delves into Beatrice’s case, arguing that her diminished moral responsibility stems from her lack of control over her actions due to the tumor, which has altered her cognitive functions and emotional regulation. Drawing on ethical theories and concepts, the paper contends that Beatrice cannot be held fully responsible for her actions, as she cannot exercise free will and make rational decisions. By contrasting Beatrice’s situation with Griselda’s, who is portrayed as acting out of choice rather than external compulsion, the paper highlights the role of free will in moral agency. While the paper effectively addresses opposing viewpoints and cites relevant literature to support its arguments, it could benefit from clearer signposting of the argument structure and deeper exploration of the ethical implications of cases like Beatrice’s for societal justice and individual autonomy. Overall, the paper contributes to the ongoing philosophical discourse on the interplay between free will and moral responsibility, offering insights into the complexities of ethical reasoning and human behavior.
Noah Heacox , Apr 22 at 9:06pm
We should assume that the reader is educated but uninformed. With this being the case, I believe that your introduction should introduce the reader to the scenario presented in the essay prompt (even if only tangentially). In the paragraph “Reasons why Beatrice is not responsible for her actions” you do accomplish this for one of the characters, but it is only done after you state that she is not responsible for her actions. I believe it would be far better for an uninformed reader to first learn about the hypothetical scenario, and then be informed of your argument stating that she is not responsible.
Kenneth Grant , Apr 23 at 8:56pm
In the “Reasons why Beatrice is less responsible than Griselda” you introduce the concept of “Incompatibilism.” This necessitates an understanding of Determinism and Free Will. Since we shouldn’t assume the readers knowledge of these concepts, I believe that following the use of these terms you should provide a description/definition of them.
Kenneth Grant , Apr 23 at 9:08pm
In the 1st paragraph on the 6th page I believe a “was” should be added in the following sentence, “She had the opportunity to be kind but [was] cruel and selfish instead.”
Kenneth Grant , Apr 23 at 9:13pm
In your paper you use the incompatibilist view to argue that Beatrice is less responsible for her crimes than Griselda. You state that the tumor had a “deterministic influence” on her to behave the way that she did, and this diminished her responsibility. But couldn’t you also use the incompatibilist view to argue that Griselda also didn’t have responsibility over her actions. This is because according to incompatibilism you have no free will, and everything can only follow one path. This then follows that Griselda doesn’t have responsibility for her actions because factors outside of her control (ex. parents, genetics, environment, past, etc.) established that she would commit the crime. I believe that you should address this point as a counter argument.
Kenneth Grant , Apr 23 at 9:23pm
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
![](https://collepals.com/wp-content/plugins/posts-import/files/order-now-with-paypal.png)