The way I went about this paper was by addressing my own personal complaints about Socrates’ and Goldman’s argument. With Socrates, I disagreed with his statements about tacit consent and owing the country you were born in since you were raised there. Goldman’s argument was more logistical. Since humans create government, there must have been a time in history where Goldman’s “no-government” world existed, and that obviously did not work since government was created.
I then looked at how each would attack the flaws in the argument. This allowed me to have specific topics to narrow down on and find specific, textual evidence that was on topic. It was actually great, as I found questions in the text that I had Socrates pose to Goldman and vice versa. The biggest obstacle was connecting these two ideas, but after conferences, I have a lot of ideas on how to do that.
Pingback: John Reuel
Pingback: Catherinew64
Pingback: cmc16