For this assignment, find an assertion or argument that either Hobbes or Locke makes in the reading. (Not the big point (e.g. we need a Leviathan), but one of the intermediate arguments — for example, the relation between labor and property. In your post, identify the section (page numbers, chapter, etc.), so that other people can see which part of the text you are working with.
Then, in your post, in your own words, lay out the logical steps that the author takes in order to make his argument, i.e., “Locke begins from the premise that everyone starts with the property which they have in their own person. Then, he considers the various items we consume, and wonders when these items become an individual property, and whether humans must obtain explicit consent before something becomes their own. As he is doing this, he considers extreme situations, like the possibility of starvation…”
This post is a type of summary or paraphrase, and it’s designed to help you get a better grasp of how Locke and Hobbes are making their arguments — what smaller points their larger arguments are based on, and what stakes they are aware of — in the example above, the possibility of starvation is part of what’s at stake. Often, you will need to use paraphrases (in part, but sometimes in full) within college essays — they allow you to shine a spotlight on an author’s logic and methods, making it easier for you to perform your analysis.
This assignment will be useless busy work IF you simply choose an argument that has already been covered in lecture or quiz section, or which you know so well that you feel like you could describe the basis of the argument in your sleep. Find a section that you know less well, but which you think might be important — and use this exercise to get to know it better. However, pick a point that is manageable. For this assignment, that probably means a section that is somewhere between 1.5 to 3 pages in the original text.
When you comment on your peers’ posts, read the sections that they’ve paraphased, and treat this as a form of online peer review — a mini conference, so to speak. Does the paraphrase help you understand the section better? Does it raise questions for you, either about the topic, or about some other aspect of Locke or Hobbes? Is the paraphrase direct and clear? Or is it so direct that important details have been left out? (If you think this is the case, make sure you explain why you think the details (or something else) needs to be considered.)
Leave a Reply