It should be between 1000-1500 words.
Please select one question from the list below, and make sure to clearly state the question you are answering at the start of your essay.
Questions:
(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?
Answer preview
The second argument in favor of scientific realism is corroboration (Rowbottom, 2017). Those using this argument as a reason to advocate for scientific realism point out that any observable phenomenon, that can be seen, touched, or measured attributes its existence to scientific realism. The fact that a similar thing happens when two different measuring approaches and procedures are used to test a theory further enhances the credibility and validity of scientific realism (Rowbottom, 2017). I will use an example to illustrate this point. A person’s body comprises red blood cells. Identifying or measuring the volume of these red blood cells required the development of a couple of theories. All theories turned out to be effective in guiding frameworks when establishing the volume of red blood cells within a person’s body.
[1152 Words]
