Please read everything: In the first part I have put the information of the essay (please follow everything) and only use the readings that I will upload!!! In the second part, I have put the instructions (please follow them)!
What most philosophers today think about the character and prospects of contemporary societies, not only in Europe and the U.S., but across the globe, seems to turn on their analysis and understanding of the Enlightenment and, particularly, the Kantian articulation of it. Should we think of contemporary Western societies as representing the fulfillment of the Enlightenment and be proud of that? Or, do our contemporary societies reflect a turn away from the promise of the Enlightenment, so that we somehow have to revive the Enlightenment project to make this promise once more available? Or, are our societies in fact products of the Enlightenment but reflecting as such the deeply problematic nature of it, so that we need to understand this problematic legacy so as to make a new start? In your essay, compare and contrast Habermas’s and Foucault’s evaluation of the Kantian Enlightenment and describe the critique of contemporary Western society it leads them to. In your conclusion, tell me which of the respective philosopher’s points of view you find most convincing.
The authors are:
I will upload the readings of each one
!!!Please follow the following instructions:(really important)!!!
5. Focus directly on the writing of each author you discuss. Avoid filler.
6. Most important, if you don´t grapple with the readings, you will fail the assignment.
1. No internet sources.
2. For our readings, you are only allowed to cite from our readings in the course pack and using the page numbers in the course pack! YOU CANNOT USE OTHER EDITIONS OR TRANSLATE FROM ANOTHER LANGUAGE!.
1. You must note the page # for any author you cite…failing to do so is PLAGIARISM! Please note the page #. Should I say it one more time…each citation without a page number will result in an automatic 2 point deduction.
2. Your citations must flow within the context of your paper and be readable as full sentences or as part of full sentences. They are not ghosts that can somehow be made to animate your paper from the outside and give it a soul it does not otherwise have…
3. Use and above all DISCUSS citations in order to demonstrate your interpretation of an author. Cite an author especially when you feel you\’re making a surprising or controversial claim about his or her point of view. DO NOT use citations to say what you CAN and SHOULD say in fewer words, IN YOUR OWN VOICE.
On the Organization of Your Essay:
1. Make certain your essay has an argument and that you are building on and demonstrating THAT argument throughout. If you think simply summarizing is enough, if your essay reads as: \”Kant said this…Marx said that…Lenin said this\” and there is no point of correspondence between your claims about these authors—whether it be agreement, collision, conflict, divergence—you will be on your way down to an F.
2. Let your reader know early on in the paper what you will be arguing and how you plan to demonstrate your point of view.
3. My questions have provided you with a broad thematic frame—the role of individualization or historical consciousness in political theory—within which to judge and make an argument about the readings. The questions also all ask you to take your own positions on these matters. Remember, one of the easiest and most effective ways of demonstrating your own point of view and argument is to think of counter-arguments—what would someone disagreeing with you potentially say?—and then to explain to the reader why your position is more convincing than the counter-arguments.
On Your Prose:
1. Please try to write short and succinct sentences that communicate your point IN THE FEWEST WORDS possible. Good writing is not using 50 words to say what can be said, without loss of meaning, with ten. It is when you use those ten indispensable words and even imagine how you might effectively go down to nine. If you read my edits of your responses carefully, you\’ll see that I am very often striking out EXTRANEOUS vocabulary and constructions.
Currently 1 writers are viewing this order