How should we demarcate genuine science from pseudo-science?.
This essay is due noon Monday 14th December.
Choose one of the questions/topics below and write a 1000-1500 word essay with at least 3 credible sources. Make sure to clearly state the question you are answering at the start of your essay. The essay will be submitted through Turnitin so no plagiarizing. Use MLA format.
(1) What is the ‘Mary’ problem against physicalism, and how effective is it?
(2) What are philosophical zombies, and what problem are they meant to pose for physicalism? How plausible is the zombie argument?
(3) What is the argument from illusion, and how is it used to motivate indirect realism over direct realism? Is it effective?
(4) What is the problem of fiction, and how do you think one should respond to it?
(5) Can the B-series capture everything there is about the nature of time? If not, what does it leave out?
(6) What are abstract objects? Are there any?
(7) What is the most persuasive mereological account of the relationship between parts and wholes? Defend your answer.
(8) What is an indispensability argument? What problems do such arguments face?
(9) How should we demarcate genuine science from pseudo-science?
(10) Critically evaluate the merits of scientific realism by focusing on what you take to be either the strongest argument in its defense or the strongest argument against it.
(11) Why is there something rather than nothing?
(12) What is the problem of evil, and how compelling is it as an argument for God’s non-existence?
(13) Is it ever rational to have faith in God?
(14) Does immortality have any essential role to play in an account of the meaning of life?
(15) Is death necessary for one’s life to be meaningful?
(16) If all that exists is the natural world, then can life ever be meaningful?
How should we demarcate genuine science from pseudo-science?