ASSIGNMENT ON WADE DAVIS : PLANTS OF THE GODS

Paper due in Corbett's email box: July 20th

Assignment # 14A and 14B

Please note: This assignment is valued as though it were two. The grade will be recorded twice.

• ASSIGNMENT: Write a significant and lengthy commentary to Davis' essay. The primary focus of this essay will be to demonstrate the use of positive criticism, no matter what you happen to think about Davis' position. Organize your essay in such a way that the first part is a recounting of one particular important ARGUMENT Davis makes for which you will add positive criticism. The first part should not have one single word in it which reflects your evaluation, assessment, agreement or disagreement with the author, just tell us what the argument is. In the second part of your essay, develop at some length and depth one and ONLY one positive criticism of Davis' argument. This will be a paper of some depth and length.

• PRE-WRITING TASKS:
  1. First read Davis' essay all the way through with some care and reflect on it.
  2. Make notes on what the argument is and what your own thoughts about the argument are. Then separate them into two different parts to be sure than when you get to the writing part they are clearly separate.
  3. If you have initial simple questions of understanding, e-mail Corbett privately and indicate whether this e-mail may or may not be used to the whole class. (Note at times your puzzles will be likely puzzles that others will have as well. Getting them out to all may be a genuine class service.) But, on these e-mails, it is as you wish.

• WRITING THE ASSIGNMENT:
  1. Be sure to put your name and the number of the assignment at the top of every paper. See topic of this page for the number of this assignment. Also, please give the brief "name" of the assignment.
  2. Be sure your remarks reflect significant depth of reading and thought.
  3. First write a description of the argument itself. Do not put one single word of evaluation or personal views in this section.
  4. Secondly write an indepth positive criticism of one of Davis' central and important arguments, the one you focused your analysis on.
  5. Organize the essay in which the two sections are radically separate, but written in a style that has the first part flow easily and subtly into the second part.
  6. Don't belabor the obvious and trivial. Focus on the specially interesting or puzzling.
  7. Use careful and acceptable standard English. Give attention to spelling, grammar and style. These will matter throughout the course. Caution: internet writing often suggests contrary writing habits, allowing much less attention to these matters. In this regard this assignment (and all others) are quite different than many internet writings.

     This is a class assignment at a university and norms of university level writing at every level will be expected.

• GRADING CRITERIAL I WILL USE:
  1. Does the paper reflect a careful reading of Davis' paper?
  2. Is the analytic section (report on the argument) completely separate from the critical section (your evaluative assessment of somethings about the argument)?
  3. Does the writing style reflect a gracious seguy from the first section into the other without beating us over the head with it?
  4. Does it essay reflect significant depth of thought about the material analyzed and assessed?
  5. Are all comments accurate to Davis' position?
  6. The central focus will be: Is the positive criticism of Davis actually of the argument analyzed, and is the criticism in depth and accurate?
  7. Are grammar, punctuation, spelling problems minimal?
  8. Is the writing style free of confusion and awkwardness?

• THE GRADES THEMSELVES:
  • A grade of A will mean: Well-written and significant reflective paper with few mechanical mistakes. Analysis section is accurate to Davis' argument and, centrally, the critical section is a provocative, well defended and in-depth positive criticism of the argument which was analyzed. The two sections are clearly separate. All is expressed in clear and thoughtful language.
  • A grade of B will mean: Well-written and reflective paper, but without the significant edge of revealing depth of thought and attention to detail of expression (writing). Or it may be with a bit less depth in an otherwise successful positive criticism. Nonetheless, the analysis is accurate of Davis' essay and the criticism is positive, and well-defended, on target, signifant and central. The two sections are clearly separated.
  • A grade of C will mean: Paper does what is asked and all parts are there. There are some inaccuracies in the analysis or the criticism falls short of careful and reflected comments. Or the criticism does not really engage central issues in the main part of the content. Or the two sections are not clearly separated. Or paper may contain too many lapses of mechanics and style.
  • A grade of D will mean: Paper falls short of an adequate university level response to the assignment. This may be in fulfillment of the content or in more serious problems with mechanics and style.
  • A grade of F may mean anyone of three things:
    1. Not turned in at all.
    2. Not turned in on time.
    3. Significant failures to meet the assignment at the level of reasonable university level expectations of thought, attention to detail, attention to reading or expression. (specifics will be pointed out).
  • NO ASSIGNMENT MAY BE REWRITTEN FOR HIGHER CREDIT.  You are welcome to rewrite them to improve them, and I will happily comment on them. But the original grade will remain as it was on the first and only graded attempt.

  ---

  My Philosophy Page

  Webster U. Philosophy Department

  ---

  Philosophy for Children	Critical Thinking	Current Semester	Education	Existentialism
  Miscellaneous Topics	Moral Philosophy	Peace Issues	Voluntary Economic Simplicity

  ---

  HOME

  Bob Corbett corbetre@webster.edu