Overview
General Instructions:
Address two of the below questions in 3-5 pages each (total of 6-10 pages of writing) (your choice of two of the three questions!). See rubric below.
No AI use allowed. ONLY USE TEXT PROVIDED TO YOU DO NOT REFRENCE ANYTHING OTHER THAN TEXT PROVIDED TO YOU
Please only cite from the readings covered in this class(use numbers in the text when you cite the course material). When other parts of the texts are referred to in student writing, it is often a demonstration of AI use.
- How does Rousseau’s understanding of the social contract differ from both Locke and Hobbes? Please explain, compare, and contrast each thinker’s views on the state of nature (especially how people treat one another, are there natural rights), the establishment of the state (why it is established, how it is established), and what the state is designed/intended to do.
- Explain what the racial contract is, according to Charles Mills, along with its political, moral, and epistemological elements. How does it differ from classical social contract theory (explain each of these three elements in social contract theory) and why racial contract theory is more accurate (to explain historical actuality) than social contract theory?
- What is the ignoble paradox of modernity according to Cornel West? How does Mills’ racial contract theory explain, or make sense of, this paradox? Choose one figure that Mills discusses (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, or Kant) and explain how this contradiction or paradox appears in their work as well as how the racial contract as an idea makes sense of it.
If you have any questions, please reach out!
RUBRIC FOR WRITING
Exemplary | Competent | Needs Work | Unsatisfactory |
Demonstrates an accurate and complete understanding of the question. | Demonstrates a basic and adequate understanding of the question. | Demonstrates some understanding of the question, but gets off topic. | Fails to grasp or answer the question. |
Demonstrates knowledge, clarity of thought, reflection, and insight. | Demonstrates basic knowledge of the issue(s) and is clear. | Demonstrates some knowledge of issue, but also some misunderstandings. Very limited insight. | Answer lacks clarity, is incomplete and/or confused. No insight. |
Uses details from assigned readings, videos, and class lecture that are useful to support the answer. | Uses some info from assigned readings, videos, and class lecture, but without much detail and/or not clearly in support of the point being made. | Very limited use of assigned readings, videos, and class lecture. | Does not use information from assigned readings, videos, and class lecture. |
Clear, concise (without sacrificing content), and organized. | Presents information fairly clearly and concisely, but with some organizational problems or loss of content. | Not clear, concise, or organized. | Presentation is confused and unclear. |
Well written and easily comprehended. | Writing is basically good and meaning understandable. | Writing is confused and hard to understand in places. | Writing is distracting and confuses meaning throughout. |