Description Mini Essay #2; Primary Reading (850 words, 1 & 1/2 or double space): Read several times George Mavrodes’ short, but dense article on: Some Puzzles Concerning Omnipotence (the article is attached here at your Dropbox). This article is a rebuttal to the Paradox of the Stone; “Can God make a stone so heavy that He cannot lift it?” Your essay is to consists of two parts. The first part will be your summary of Mavrodes’ rebuttal response to the Paradox of the Stone that had been previously raised by an objector. The Paradox of the Stone is meant to demonstrate that omnipotence is logically incoherent. Your summary should be able to trace out Mavrodes’ entire argument with its main twists and turns and needs to be half the assignment (450 words). There are eleven paragraphs in the article and your summary needs to paraphrase andprogress through all eleven paragraphs. The second part of your essay will be your personal interaction with Mavrodes’ argument, which also needs to be 450 words. Tell me with your best thinking, what you think about his argument. What impressed you in terms of the conceptual analysis or where did you think Mavrodes’ reasoning came up short for you and why? Do you think he successfully refuted the Paradox of the Stone challenge to omnipotence or that he was unsuccessful? Be logically specific as to why or why not? You must interact with specific parts of the argument. Also convey to me that you understand the context for the paradox discussion and why it is significant or important (The objector is not raising just a silly puzzle). Part one (~425 words): Summarize Mavrodes rebuttal argument. Part two (~425): Personal interaction with Mavrodes’ reasoning and the question at hand. Please note: A detailed philosophy argument takes time to follow and outline. Do not be discouraged if the initial read-throughs are tough. As you study Mavrodes’ argument, paraphrase the main points from each paragraph. Let your thoughts simmer and come back to it again. The more time you spend on outlining Mavrodes’ reasoning, the clearer things will become and you will be encouraged.
Reflect on the ethical principles, ways of analysis, and ethical tools found within the criminal justice field as researched and use these principles to choose