Your paper should be no more than 1250 words long.
Answer ONE of the following questions, in a standard essay format.
1. At the beginning of Book II of On the Nature of Things, Lucretius offers a famous analogy involving an aloof perspective upon certain dangerous, painful or evil events.
Explain why this short passage (the first 20 or so lines, but you may extend your discussion to include the first 61 lines, if you wish) at the beginning of Book II is significant for the argument of the entire work. How can this single image be used to explain Lucretius’ basic philosophical position?
2. In various ways, all of the philosophers we have looked at have insisted that the ordinary or everyday manner of understanding things is deficient. They argue that, in order to truly understand and to live life correctly, one must look at things from a more “profound” viewpoint. This deeper viewpoint is the metaphysical viewpoint.
In every instance of the philosophers we have studied, this metaphysical perspective is more expansive and more inclusive, less restricted and less conditioned. To use some philosophical terms, this perspective is more universal and unconditional.
But why is it necessary for one to take on a more universal and unconditional viewpoint? Why must the truth necessarily be unconditional and universal? Why cannot someone insist that they are perfectly fine with their merely particular, limited everyday perspective on life?
Make your argument from the perspective of at least ONE of the philosophers we have studied.