The paper should be a ciritical evaluation of Thomas Nagel’s Argument of “What Is It Like To Be a Bat”. Nagel focuses his argument in “What Is It Like To Be a Bat” focuses on bat echolocation. Is he right that we lack the ability to understand what it would be like to have this sense? Do blind people who use something akin to echolocation understand this?
Whether you are arguing for or against Nagel’s claim, make sure to use quotes of what he said/ what you are responding to (this is the only citations you need in the paper) – Philosphy wirting is OPINION so no need to have so many quotes – just support what you are saying and use EXAMPLES throughout the paper to explain what you are trying to say!
I have attached a screenshot of the grading rubric! This essay should have:
1. A clear thesis that makes it clear from the start what you are going to talk about and do in the paper.
2. The structure of the overall argument is clear and every part of the paper relates to defending the thesis!
3. Grammar is clear and to the point!
4. Demonstrate deep undersanding of the relevant issues
5. Contains highly accurate and precise summarizaiton, description and or paraphrasing of text used. (explain the views of others well)
6. Anallyze the central problem discussed i the paper and alternative solutions?
7. Make a strong argument to your thesis!
8. Consider and respond to the best objections to your view!
9. The paper should go beyond the reading and notes.
I have attached the full grading rubric and reading of Nagel below! Please message with any questions I greatly appreciate this!