PHIL 101 \/ PHI 210 \/ PHIL 1001 \u00a0\u00b7\u00a0 Introduction to Philosophy & Ancient Greek Philosophy \u00a0\u00b7\u00a0 Assignment 2<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The first five weeks of this course have traced Western philosophy from its pre-Socratic origins to the Aristotelian synthesis of the fourth century BCE. Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle form the intellectual core of that arc, yet their methods, commitments, and conclusions diverge in ways that remain genuinely contested among scholars. A student who can map those divergences \u2014 and explain why they matter \u2014 has developed the primary analytical skill this course demands.<\/p>\n
Assignment 2 requires you to write a focused comparative essay in which you assess how these three philosophers understood the relationship between knowledge, virtue, and political justice<\/strong>. The task is explicitly analytical, not merely descriptive. You are expected to identify a specific point of philosophical tension or disagreement, argue for a clear interpretive position, and support that position with evidence drawn directly from primary texts.<\/p>\n This assignment type \u2014 the source-based comparative analysis \u2014 recurs across philosophy, history, classical studies, and political science because it trains the transferable skill of close argument-reconstruction from primary evidence. Instructors across programs at institutions including Southern New Hampshire University, Grand Canyon University, the University of Toronto, the University of Edinburgh, Monash University, and the Australian National University use structurally identical tasks in equivalent introductory modules.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n On successful completion of this assignment, you will be able to:<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Write a 1,050\u20131,400-word comparative analytical essay<\/strong> that addresses the following central question:<\/p>\n “To what extent do Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle agree on what virtue is, how it is acquired, and what role it plays in producing a just political community? Where they disagree, which philosopher’s position do you find most persuasive, and why?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Your essay must take a clear, arguable position in answer to this question. It is not sufficient to summarise what each philosopher says. The quality of your analytical argument \u2014 the strength of your thesis, the quality of your textual evidence, and the rigour of your reasoning \u2014 determines your grade.<\/p>\n Your essay must engage, at minimum, with all three of the following pairs:<\/p>\n You may extend your discussion to additional texts \u2014 the Phaedo<\/em>, Symposium<\/em>, or Aristotle’s Eudemian Ethics<\/em> \u2014 but breadth alone does not substitute for analytic depth. Choose a narrow enough focus that your argument can be fully developed within the word limit.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n One of the most productive fault lines in ancient Greek ethics runs between Socratic intellectualism and Aristotelian habituation. Socrates, at least as Plato depicts him in the Meno<\/em>, treats virtue as a form of knowledge that cannot be reliably taught through training or role modelling alone, a position that makes both Plato’s tripartite soul and Aristotle’s doctrine of moral habituation look like direct correctives to the Socratic starting point. Plato accepts that most citizens will never ascend to knowledge of the Form of the Good, so the well-ordered polis<\/em> must rely on philosopher-kings whose reason governs the appetitive and spirited parts of the civic body \u2014 a solution that ties personal and political virtue together through rational hierarchy. Aristotle, rejecting the Forms as metaphysically redundant, grounds virtue instead in practice: the virtuous person is not someone who has grasped an abstract truth but someone who has been correctly habituated to respond well to pleasure and pain, a conception captured in his definition of moral virtue as a stable disposition to feel and act in accordance with the mean (Alabi, 2023, p. 103<\/a><\/cite>). What distinguishes these three positions most sharply is their answer to a single question: whether knowing what virtue is, and doing what virtue requires, are the same achievement or two separate ones that demand different kinds of education.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n <\/p>\n Discussion Board \u2014 Week 4 Instructions<\/p>\n Socrates declares in Plato’s Apology<\/em> (38a) that the unexamined life is not worth living. Aristotle, by contrast, argues in Politics<\/em> I.2 that the human being is by nature a political animal (z\u014don politikon<\/em>), and that the highest expression of human virtue is realised only within the context of the polis<\/em>.<\/p>\n Initial Post (due by Day 3 of Week 4, 300\u2013350 words):<\/strong> Respond to the following question in a substantive, well-reasoned post:<\/p>\n Peer Response Posts (two responses required, due by Day 7, minimum 150 words each):<\/strong> Engage critically and respectfully with two classmates. Do not simply agree or summarise. Identify one specific point of philosophical tension in your peer’s argument and develop it with a counter-example or a competing textual interpretation.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n2. Learning Outcomes Assessed<\/h2>\n
\n
3. Task Description<\/h2>\n
Scope and Required Coverage<\/h3>\n
\n
4. Assignment Requirements<\/h2>\n
4.1 Essay Structure<\/h3>\n
\n
4.2 Sources<\/h3>\n
\n
4.3 Formatting<\/h3>\n
\n
4.4 Academic Integrity<\/h3>\n
\n
5. Week 4 Discussion Board Post \u2014 Pre-Essay Preparation<\/h2>\n
Discussion Prompt: The Unexamined Life and the Just Citizen<\/h3>\n
\n
Discussion Rubric \u2014 Quick Reference<\/h4>\n
\n
6. Marking Rubric \u2014 Assignment 2 (100 Points Total)<\/h2>\n
Grade Band Key<\/h4>\n
\nDistinction \/ A (80\u201389)<\/span>
\nCredit \/ B (70\u201379)<\/span>
\nPass \/ C (60\u201369)<\/span>
\nFail \/ D\u2013F (0\u201359)<\/span><\/div>\n