Topic 3: Locke’s Distinction between Primary & Secondary Qualities Introduction: Briefly introduce the reader to the paper’s topic, structure, and conclusions.
Part One: Locke’s Essay is famous for its discussion of the distinction between primary and secondary qualities. Your first task is to explain what this distinction amounts to according to Locke. To do this, you should explain, for example, why Locke is concerned with the distinction; the relationship between powers & qualities; and, the criterion by which Locke distinguishes between primary and secondary qualities. Be particularly careful to explain what it means for secondary qualities to lack reality (but nevertheless exist as powers). Be sure to illustrate Locke’s account with examples.
Part Two: Locke presents several arguments that secondary qualities are not “real”. Your second task is to explain 1-2 of these arguments that you think are the most compelling.
Part Three: Your third task is to evaluate Locke’s arguments explained in Part Two. To do this, you should first raise an in-depth objection to (or compelling reason for doubting) Locke’s argument(s). You should then assess whether your objection is genuinely compelling. The best way to do this is to consider how someone might defend Locke’s arguments & views in response to your objection. Come to a conclusion about both Locke’s arguments & views, as well as your objection. (This conclusion might not be to pick a side but could amount to stating what further philosophical questions need to be answered in order to pick a side.)
Conclusion: Briefly summarize what you have accomplished in the paper.
It is a thought paper with the following structure:
Figure out how to interpret the text
Signposts very important: telling the reader whats going on use the first person. Ex: I’m going to argue or I’ve just shown or next I will criticize. Make it clear to the audience make it as straight forward and easy to the reader. Signposts are for yourself as well to know what you’re saying. Use some quotations
What to expect in this paper. Basically, here’s what I’m going to do…
Tell the readers what the organization is. Basically it’s a big spoiler alert to make it clear whats going to happen.
The part one
Refer to upper explanation.
Part two: views at stake
Focus on the arguments he gives like use the “fire argument” for sure and find another.
Part three:Objection is he right?
Response:Consider how someone like Locke might respond.
Summarize what was does the paper.
References must come directly from THE BOOK we use called : John Locke An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. You can find it online. I will be very anal to see if you used accurate passages.