Choose one of the following essay topics: 1. Campbell argues that 'common factor' theories of perception are not compatible with what he calls the 'explanatory role of experience' (see 134-137

of 'Berkeley's Puzzle'). Explain and assess this argument. 2. Siegel argues that the difference between the perceptual experience of a novice and that of an expert (e.g., in the pine tree example) must be explained in terms of the representation of high-level properties rather than in terms of the representation of something else, such as a configuration (or 'gestalt') of low-level properties (see 498-500 of 'Which Properties are Represented in Perception?'). Explain and assess this argument. 3. Siegel claims that some cognitively penetrated perceptual experiences represent that Pbut do not give the subject justification for believing that P. She argues that cognitive penetration presents a special problem for the epistemology of perception, because, unlike a 'zap to the head, it involves effects on a subject's perceptual experience that are under their rational control (see 'Cognitive Penetrability and Perceptual Justification, 212-215). Explain and assess this argument. 4. O'Callaghan argues that sounds (as the direct objects of auditory experience) seem not to be properties of material objects (such as those we experience in vision), and instead seem to be event-like particulars, whose identities depend on the way they change over time (see 'Lessons from Beyond Vision, 151-153). Explain and assess this argument. Each topic asks you to explain and assess an argument. • In your explanation, you should try to make the argument as clear as possible. Make sure to clearly identify the conclusion the author is arguing for, as well as the premises they use to argue for it. Explain how the premises are logically connected to the conclusion. o Make sure to explain any technical terms you use. Don't assume your reader is already familiar with these. o You should not attempt to summarize the entire reading. But you will need to provide the relevant background so that your reader can understand the argument. Part of the challenge in writing a good philosophy paper is deciding what is crucial to say and what isn't. You will not be able to paraphrase everything the author says, so you will need to make decisions about how best to present their ideas in the space you have. o Try to make your explanation clear enough that it could be understood by an intelligent reader who is completely unfamiliar with the subject matter (for example, one of your peers who hasn't taken the course). Don't assume that your audience is your professor or TA who already understands the topic. • In your assessment, you should explain whether you agree with or reject (or hold some other attitude towards) the argument. You should say whether the conclusion follows from the premises or not (i.e., whether the argument is valid) and whether you think the premises are true or not. o Make sure that you are assessing the author's argument and not just their conclusion. Don't merely say that you agree or disagree with their conclusion; explain why you think the argument for that conclusion is successful or unsuccessful. o You do not need to use additional sources for this part of your paper. The assignment is for you to analyze the argument rather than for you to research what others have said about it. o You must consider at least one objection to the position you defend. If you agree with the author, raise and address an objection to their argument. If you disagree, raise and address a response to your own criticism. Think of it like this: your paper will be putting forward an assessment of an argument. Then, you will take the conversation one step further by considering what someone who disagrees might say about your assessment and responding to them. Papers should be no longer than (and not significantly shorter than) 1500 words. You won't be penalized for being within about 100 words of 1500. Cite any sources you use including the course readings (please see the syllabus for policies on academic dishonesty and plagiarism). Use whatever citation style you like but use it consistently.