Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Length: 3-4 pages double spaced, regular margins, 12pt font (around 750 – 1000 w
Length: 3-4 pages double spaced, regular margins, 12pt font (around 750 – 1000 words).
Citations and Bibliography: The response paper should include a bibliography at the end which includes references to any of the readings that writing engages with. It is also important to always include an in-text citation in the paper when you are discussing ideas that aren’t your own, or when you are directly quoting from the class readings. Any format is fine, so long as it’s clear which reading you’re referring to. Citations should include the year, last name, and page number for the relevant reading, e.g., a paper might say: “(Jones 2023, p. 41)”.
INSTRUCTIONS:
The objective of this assignment is to develop your own view on when, if ever, it’s rational to believe a conspiracy theory.
The assignment has three main parts.
Part A: Throughout the course we have looked at several readings which engage with the idea of whether it is ever rational to believe a conspiracy theory. Choose one of the following views and clearly explain it. Your explanation should answer the questions outlined below.
Nguyen (2018) on echo chambers and epistemic bubbles.
First, clearly explain the difference between echo chambers and epistemic bubbles according to Nguyen. Then explain how these notions are relevant to the question of whether it’s ever rational to believe a conspiracy theory. This discussion should include an explicit discussion of at least 2 different examples of conspiracy theories. Does Nguyen think that it could ever be rational to believe a conspiracy theory? Why or why not?
Rachel Fraser (2020) on Cartesian paranoia and epistemic FOMO.
First, clearly explain the difference between Cartesian paranoia and epistemic FOMO according to Fraser. Then explain how these notions are relevant to the question of whether it’s ever rational to believe a conspiracy theory. This discussion should include an explicit discussion of at least 2 different examples of conspiracy theories. Does Fraser think that it could ever be rational to believe a conspiracy theory? Why or why not?
Part B: In this section of the assignment you will develop a view of your own. In so doing, you should response to the following questions.
Do you think that it’s ever rational to believe a conspiracy theory? Why or why not? Your answer should give an argument in support of your view. If you think that it can sometimes be rational to believe a conspiracy theory, then you should clearly explain why you believe this and give positive reasons for why. Similarly, if you don’t think that it’s ever rational to believe a conspiracy theory, then you should clearly explain why you believe this and give positive reasons for why. You discussion in this section should contrast your own view with the discussion from Part A. Do you agree or disagree with the philosopher discussed previously in the assignment. Why or why not?
Part C: (1-2 paragraphs) Solutions and Challenges
Last, the assignment should end by considering some strategies for how we should approach people who believe conspiracy theories. What, if anything, should we do to prevent people from believing conspiracy theories? What are some challenges that might arise? What are some potential strategies going forward?
Note: this is a short writing assignment. There is no need for an elaborate introduction or conclusion. It is okay to just directly start the writing with a statement of your thesis. For example: “In what follows I will defend the view that…” or “In this paper I will argue that…”.
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY:
And, last (but certainly not least), please don’t plagiarize. I will report any cases of academic integrity I find, and it is very likely that this will result in you receiving a zero on the assignment, or possibly failing the class. Also, filing these reports is seriously the worst part of my job – it’s absolutely zero fun for everyone involved. Please just don’t do it. All students are expected to adhere to Bentley’s Academic Integrity policy which includes Bentley’s Honor Code (details on the policy can be found in the Undergraduate Student Handbook, the Graduate Catalog, and Bentley’s Academic Integrity). You should not represent someone else’s work as your own. It’s fine to use someone else’s work in your writing – you need to do this in order to write the response paper! But, make sure to always indicate which ideas are yours and which come from others. Failure to adhere to the academic integrity policy can have serious consequences, including course failure, suspension, or even expulsion from the university.
Guidelines for the use of ChatGPT (and other AI programs which use large language models):
Note that you are not permitted to use ChatGPT or any other AI tool to write your assignments for you. This is strictly prohibited and it constitutes an Academic Integrity violation. Writing should be done completely by you. In general, I strongly discourage students from using ChatGPT. That said, please review the following conditions under which the use of ChatGPT and related AI programs using large language models is permitted and also, crucially, the conditions under which it’s forbidden.
Note: I will check assignments for AI-generated content, if the possibility of AI-generated content is detected, then this will prompt a conversation with the student to discuss their assignment further. If use of AI violates our class policy, then an Academic Integrity report will be submitted.
Also, don’t trust anything that ChatGPT says! I’ve asked it many philosophy questions, and it doesn’t always get things right (and sometimes it gets things very embarrassingly wrong). So, again I strongly discourage you from using ChatGPT, and if you do, it’s at your own risk. This tool works best for topics that you already understand. You should always fact-check the results it gives you. You can do this by doing further research on the results to confirm them, or by talking with me in office hours.
Evidence of inappropriate AI use will be grounds for submission of an Academic Integrity report. All cases will be officially reported. Sanctions will range from a zero for the assignment to an F for the course.
I’m assuming we won’t have a problem in this regard but want to make sure that the expectations are clear so that we can spend the semester learning things together—and not worrying about the origins of your work.
These guidelines are adapted from the Academic Integrity guidelines used by Chris Beneke and Ethan Mollick. Many thanks to both of them!
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.