PHIL 2600 Assignment 1

PHIL 2600 Assignment 1 | Tulane University

SWA #1  

Answer one and only one of the following three prompts. Your response should be around 1,000 words. This assignment is due via Canvas on 9/16 at 10am. Late assignments will be penalized 2 points for each day that they are late. Thus, a paper turned in after 10am on the 16th will be penalized two points. A paper turned in on the 17th will be penalized 4 points and so on. When quoting a direct passage or idea from someone else, please cite page numbers as indicated below. You do not need a reference page as long as you are only citing the articles that we discussed in class.  

Prompt #1  

Milton Friedman claims that once the law and ethical customs are accounted for, “There is one and only one social responsibility of business […] to increase its profits” (214).  What is Friedman’s argument for this claim? Recapitulate Friedman’s argument as a set of numbered premises (format this argument in the same way in which you would format a block quote). Once you have given Friedman’s argument, do ONE of the following: give ONE criticism of Friedman’s argument OR (note exclusive or) consider an objection to Friedman (perhaps from the Mulligan article) and defend Friedman’s shareholder account. If you choose the first option, your criticism should be that either one of the premises in Friedman’s argument is false or that his argument relies on an assumed premise that is false. Try and be charitable to Friedman. Be specific in your objection and give real world counterexamples if applicable. What I am looking for is an intellectually rigorous and stimulating discussion. Do not try and summarize the entire article. Be terse. If a sentence is not necessary for your argument, delete the sentence. 

Prompt #2 

In his article “Defending the One Percent”, Gregory Mankiw argues that concern about income inequality, “cannot be founded primarily on concern about […] inequality of opportunity” (26). Although Mankiw admits that being raised by the right family does give a person “a leg up in life”, he claims that “we [Americans] are not far from a plausible definition of equality of opportunity” (25). In support of these claims, Mankiw cites a few genetic studies and his own “personal experiences” regarding education (24-26). In your paper, try and spell out Mankiw’s argument for these bold claims about the equality of opportunity in America. Particularly, what is his response to the Stiglitz passage? Then, give an analysis of Mankiw’s arguments. It’s not hard to see that in this section—Equality of Opportunity as a Desideratum—Mankiw’s arguments are poor; they are not in the top 1% of arguments. 

Prompt #3 

Choose your own adventure. Perhaps you are interested in a specific argument or passage in the Friedman, Mulligan, Brenkert, Mankiw, or Baumann articles. You may come up with your own prompt in response to a particular passage/argument in one of these readings. If you choose this option, you must email me your paper idea (subject to approval) by 9/8.  

Jesse