Karl Marx And Communist Critical
The readings are attached below.
Critical Essay Requirements
This 3 page essay is an exercise in exposition and critique. You will be asked to clearly present an argument that has been defended in an article assigned in the course (you may choose an article we have already covered or look forward to upcoming readings from later in the course). Next you will critique the argument or principle that you have presented. Note: if you do not complete the critical essay, then you won’t be assigned a peer review.
The essay should be at least 3 pages long. Each essay should contain Parts I-II. You will be asked to clearly present an argument that has been defended in an article assigned in the course (you may choose an article we have already covered or look forward to upcoming readings from later in the course). Next you will critique the argument or principle that you have presented.
Part I. From and an assigned article for the class, clearly present (explicate) the author’s position and arguments (if the author gives a number of arguments then pick one or two that you consider to be the most central). Be sure to explain what conclusion(s) they arguing for and what evidence or support they give for their conclusion(s). Note: this is the most important part of the essay because it lays the groundwork for the rest of the assignment.
Part II. Give, in your view, the most damaging criticism of the argument or position explicated in Part I. Be sure to develop your criticism in some detail. Where exactly does the author go wrong? What empirical claims (matter of fact claims) do they make that are false if any? Do not use the shotgun method — don’t briefly mention five or six problems, develop one or two in detail.
More Information: For more information about writing this sort of paper or essay see p. 64-70 etc. in A. Weston’s A Rulebook for Arguments
An Example of Good Critical Essay Structure
I. Review Critical Essay Requirements
The Critical Essay has two parts that are tightly linked. In Part I an argument (do you know what an argument is???) is presented and defended. In Part II the argument given in Part I is directly critiqued. A direct critique attacks a premise (showing it to be false or improbable) of an argument or the validity of an argument (do you know what validity means??).
A. Possible Overall Structure:
1. Part I of the Critical Essay:
Here is Smith’s argument for X.
Premise 1. Such and so is the case.
Premise 2. This or that is true.
Premise 3. If such and so is true and this or that is true, then X is true.
Conclusion. So it follows that X is true.
Discussion of premises and conclusion, what cases does the author give to support the argument, what evidence is given, etc. etc.
2. Part II of the Critical Essay:
The most damaging problem for Smith’s argument for X is that premise 1 is false, or premise 2 is false, or premise 3 is false, or the argument is invalid (it is not truth preserving — the premises may be true but the conclusion still false).
Here is why I think that premise 1 is false. . . . . . . or premise 2 is false etc. etc