Prof. K. DeRose
Fall 2002

Short Paper

Write a 4-6 page (typed, double-spaced) paper on one of the following topics.  Papers are due October 16, at the start of lecture.  Successful papers will clearly explain the issues involved and the key argumentative moves made in the readings and/or discussed in class and sections, and will also advance the discussion/argument in significant ways with new considerations or lines of argument of your own.

1.  Explain the problem, known as the “Cartesian Circle”, that many think infects the method by which Descartes seeks to verify his “clear and distinct perceptions”.  Then explain, and critically discuss, James Van Cleve’s interpretation of Descartes in “Foundationalism, Epistemic Principles, and the Cartesian Circle,” Philosophical Review 88 (1979).  Is Van Cleve’s reading of Descartes plausible?  Is Van Cleve right that Descartes escapes the charge of circular reasoning in the way Van Cleve suggest?  Explain and defend.

2.  Explain the problem, known as the “Cartesian Circle”, that many think infects the method by which Descartes seeks to verify his “clear and distinct perceptions”.  Then explain, discuss, and critically compare James Van Cleve’s treatment of the circle “Foundationalism, Epistemic Principles, and the Cartesian Circle,” Philosophical Review 88 (1979) with Keith DeRose’s treatment in “Descartes, Epistemic Principles, Epistemic Circularity, and Scientia,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 73 (1992).  Which is the more defensible treatment?  Explain and defend.

3.  Explain and critically discuss Alvin Plantinga’s handling, in Does God Have a Nature? of Descartes’s doctrine of the eternal truths.  Is Plantinga right to interpret Descartes as accepting “universal possibilism”?  How strong is Plantinga’s argument that universal possibilism should be rejected?  Explain and defend.