The paper should be 4 to 5 pages long, double-spaced. It may be longer, but should not be too much longer. Please cite your sources, using in-text (Author, date, page#) citations.

Choose from one of the topics below; or, you may invent your own topic (but if you choose this option you must clear your topic with me). You may want to consult the guidelines on writing philosophy papers linked from the main course page.

1. Does either one of the "rate of passage arguments" show the moving spotlight theory of time to be false? Why or why not? Your paper should: explain what the moving spotlight theory of time is, and what the block universe theory is; clearly lay out the rate of passage argument you are discussing; explain what reason there might be to believe the premises of the argument; say why you think the argument is good, or bad. IF you think the argument is bad, you need to explain why. Is it invalid? Or do you think one of the premises is false? If so, which one? Why do you think it is false? IF, on the other hand, you think the argument is good, you need to say something to defend it. What is a reason someone has, or might, give for thinking that the argument is bad? Why is that in fact a bad reason to think that the argument is bad?

2. The "visual analogue of the argument from jumbled sounds" is an argument against the theory of the specious present. (You may want to look back at the first question on HW 5.) Is the argument a good one? Your paper should: explain what the theory of the specious present says; explain why it is supposed to be a better theory of the perception of change than Reid's theory; clearly lay out the argument you are discussing; explain what reason there might be to believe the premises of the argument; say why you think the argument is good, or bad. IF you think the argument is bad, you need to explain why. Is it invalid? Or do you think one of the premises is false? If so, which one? Why do you think it is false? IF, on the other hand, you think the argument is good, you need to say something to defend it. What is a reason someone has, or might, give for thinking that the argument is bad? Why is that in fact a bad reason to think that the argument is bad?

3. Write a paper defending one of the six hypotheses about subjective duration that we discussed. Your paper should: clearly explain the theory you aim to defend; and discuss at least one, but preferably two, arguments against that theory. You should clearly lay out the arguments you are discussing; explain what reason there might be to believe the premises of the arguments; say why you think the arguments are bad. Are they invalid? Or do you think each has a false premise? If so, which premise? Why do you think it is false?

4. Is hedonism true? If your answer is yes, discuss at least two arguments against hedonism, and say why they are bad. If your answer is no, discuss at least two arguments against hedonism, and say why they are good. You will need to clearly explain what hedonism says, and clearly lay out the arguments you are discussing. If you are showing the arguments to be bad, you must say why you think they are bad. Are they invalid? Or do you think each has a false premise? If so, which one? Why do you think it is false? If you are showing the arguments to be good, you must defend them against objections. What is a reason someone has, or might, give for thinking that the argument is bad? Why is that in fact a bad reason to think that the argument is bad?