Descartes Meditations on First Philosophy
Descartes Meditations on First Philosophy
1. Describe the argument in its textual context as accurately as possible. This is the argument from
your topic selection.
a. State the author’s thesis from your passage and the author’s premises or reasons supporting their
position.
b. Ask yourself: What is the problem that the passage is trying to address? What is the passage
trying to demonstrate? What is the role of the passage in the author’s argument?
c. Define any terms and concepts that are relevant to the author’s argument. This will show your
mastery of the passage.
a. State the author’s thesis from your passage and the author’s premises or reasons supporting their
position.
b. Ask yourself: What is the problem that the passage is trying to address? What is the passage
trying to demonstrate? What is the role of the passage in the author’s argument?
c. Define any terms and concepts that are relevant to the author’s argument. This will show your
mastery of the passage.
2. Provide a thoughtful critique of the idea and argument expressed in the passage you selected.
Although your critique and reasons may be based on your opinion, you cannot simply give your
opinion without
supporting it with logical argumentation:
a. State your counter-thesis and the premises and reasons supporting your critique.
b. Ask yourself: does what the author claims work? Are there implicit assumptions that are not
stated and that could weaken the author’s claim/argument?
c. The critique is to consist of one or more of the following:
• Counter-examples that weaken the argument (“the author claims that x is a well-
established fact, or argument x generated by the author is meant to demonstrate theory y;
however, well-established fact x is weak or theory y is countered by empirical fact z”)
• Other philosophers’ counter-arguments
• One’s own logic and reasoning (e.g., if the argument x is true, y would follow; but y is
false, then x is not true, rather if the argument z is true, p would follow; but z is true,
then p is also true)
Note: Examples are very useful in presenting and building an argument! The paper MUST be composed of at
least two paragraphs, that is, of an accurate rendering of a philosopher’s argument and a coherent
supporting it with logical argumentation:
a. State your counter-thesis and the premises and reasons supporting your critique.
b. Ask yourself: does what the author claims work? Are there implicit assumptions that are not
stated and that could weaken the author’s claim/argument?
c. The critique is to consist of one or more of the following:
• Counter-examples that weaken the argument (“the author claims that x is a well-
established fact, or argument x generated by the author is meant to demonstrate theory y;
however, well-established fact x is weak or theory y is countered by empirical fact z”)
• Other philosophers’ counter-arguments
• One’s own logic and reasoning (e.g., if the argument x is true, y would follow; but y is
false, then x is not true, rather if the argument z is true, p would follow; but z is true,
then p is also true)
Note: Examples are very useful in presenting and building an argument! The paper MUST be composed of at
least two paragraphs, that is, of an accurate rendering of a philosopher’s argument and a coherent
and plausible critique of this argument
