PHIOSOPHY PAPER
Response to my paper (posted March 13) by Dr. Stephens:
"Grade: B
"Generally: there's a lot to like about the paper--which makes it the more unfortunate that you made things much more difficult for yourself that they needed to be. It's easy to get lost in the intricacies of Kant's argument, which is why you weren't asked to reconstruct it at all, let alone to try to reconstruct it in its entierty. It's hard to know how close to the mark you might have come had you limited yourself to the issue--whence the advice that next time you make very sure you know what question you're being asked and then limit yourself to answering it and it only."
In the first paper I didn't pay close enough attention to the text, now I completely reconstructed the arguements in the text (and he never said I misunderstood Kant, quite a feat with his contorted prose) but that I misunderstood the question. Overall it was a nice
Dear John, letter. Maybe I'll try to deal with the question and the text next time.