PHI 111: Philosophy of Space and Time

UC Davis
Spring Quarter 2019
Due Monday, March 18, at the beginning of the exam period

Write a 4-to-5 page paper on ONE of the topics below, in accordance with Jim Pryor’s
‘Guidelines on writing a philosophy paper’:
http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/guidelines/writing.html

1. Gilmore, Costa, and Calosi (GCC) discuss a series of answers to what they call ‘the Shape
Question’, which is a question about how to combine STR and the A-theory. For each
answer, they present an argument against it. You may either (i) pick one such answer, and
critically evaluate one of GCC’s arguments against it, or (ii) (this is harder) propose a new
answer that GCC do not discuss, say what its advantages are, and discuss some of its
potential disadvantages. You’re free to do both (i) and (ii) if you can do this without
spreading yourself too thin.

2. Explain and critically evaluate Zimmerman’s response to relativity-based arguments

against presentism. Optional: compare and contrast Zimmerman’s response with Markosian’s
response. (These readings are posted under ‘assigned readings’.)

3. Explain and critically evaluate the argument from STR against the ‘ordinary view’ of time
presented in the Ney reading.

4. Huggett (‘Space-time’, 1999: 189-195), Dainton (2010: 194-201), and GCC (2016: 14,
note 10) all discuss a certain argument for favoring spacetime unitism (specifically, Galilean
spacetime) over separatism. Explain and critically evaluate that argument. Can you think of a
way for the advocate of separatist substantivalism to avoid a commitment to facts about
absolute velocities?

5. Explain and critically evaluate ONE argument of your own choosing presented in one of
the readings. (If you take this option, you need to write up a proposal in the form of a short
paragraph in which you say which argument you plan to discuss and specify (by author,
work, and pages numbers) where it appears in the assigned readings; you must submit this
proposal to gilmore@ucdavis.edu by 5:00 pm on Thursday, March 14.)

Grading. You will be graded on the clarity and mechanics of your writing and on the accuracy
and philosophical quality of your paper. There is no mechanical recipe for philosophical quality.
Your goal should be to show us that you have read, thought carefully about, and understood the
material, that you are able to explain it in your own words to an intelligent person who has not
done the reading, and in some cases, that you are able to make original, relevant critical points or
original positive proposals about the topics under discussion – ‘original’ in the sense that you
have developed them on your own.

Some rough guidelines

A range: excellent mechanics, extremely clear and accurate explanation of the

material, unusually insightful/creative/original/persuasive critical points
 or unusually comprehensive, accurate, and well-crafted expository
answers

B range: good mechanics, very solid explanation of an argument with few or no

mistakes of fact or terminology, answers that are on-target, relevant, and
persuasive – though maybe not quite so dazzling as what one would find
in an ‘A range’ paper.

C range: some problems with mechanics OR some errors or lack of clarity in

explaining the material OR an off-target or unconvincing critical
evaluation

D range and below: two or more of the following: serious mechanical problems, major errors
or obscurity in explaining an argument, badly off-target or obviously
unconvincing critical evaluation

Outside Sources and Citations

You are not expected to consult outside sources in writing your paper. You are permitted to this,
of course, but a better way to spend your time is to get clear on what you think about the issues,
and about how to express your own thoughts as clearly and precisely as possible. Any sources
you do consult must be cited at the end of the paper, and any ideas or terminology that you take
from the outside source must be indicated in footnotes. Failure to appropriately cite outside
sources brings up the issue of . . .

Plagiarism. You are free to consult outside sources in writing your papers, though you should not
feel any obligation to do so. At this stage your time is usually better spent thinking through the
issues on your own. Any ideas you take from any sources (whether they’re listed on the syllabus
or not) must be cited, using footnotes, in the text of your paper; and any direct quotations must be
off-set, or enclosed in quotation marks, and cited.
Students are responsible for knowing what constitutes inappropriate behavior with
respect to academic integrity; university policies on the matter can be found in the Winter 2019
Class Schedule and Registration Guide. See in particular the University of California Standards
of Conduct for Students. Any student who violates these standards on an exam or assignment will
be referred to Student Judicial Affairs.