Learning Objectives: Students Will Demonstrate Their Ability ✓ Solved

Learning Objectives: Students will demonstrate their ability

Students will demonstrate their ability to construct arguments about issues of both personal and universal significance. Their writing should demonstrate that they can construct cogent, concise, and logically coherent arguments. Students should demonstrate that they can distinguish the relevant points that form a logically coherent argument. They should also be able to construct criticisms which effectively undermine, through the use of appropriate counter-examples, some premise of that argument.

Your assignment is to select any ONE of the following four articles found in the last chapter of our textbook, Competing Visions: Frivolity of Evil, How--and How Not--to Love Mankind, Ibsen and His Discontents, What is Poverty?

This assignment is designed to test your ability (after several weeks of reading difficult primary sources in philosophy) to comprehend, explain, analyze, and evaluate a philosophic essay of college-level difficulty. This is all about YOU wrestling with a difficult text and ascertaining its meaning in addition to articulating and defending your own position on the issues discussed in your chosen Dalrymple article.

For the article you choose to write on, you will type a word response in which you address EACH of the following points IN YOUR OWN WORDS: 1) What is the author's main argument? 2) How does he support his main argument (evidence, ancillary arguments, etc.)? 3) Do you agree or disagree with him? 4) Why or why not? 5) Apply the insights of at least two of the readings we have studied in this course (in chapters 1-10) to your analysis. Make sure to explain how the philosophers' insights are relevant to the topic you are discussing.

The purpose of this essay assignment is for you to demonstrate your ability to discuss, analyze, and evaluate complex philosophic arguments. Note: I only allow one attempt on this assignment. Students who do not fully address all of the components of the assignment will have to be content with the grade they earned. Please use MLA format.

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction

The importance of constructing well-reasoned arguments is often stressed in the study of philosophy. This essay aims to engage critically with the work of Theodore Dalrymple, focusing on the article “What Is Poverty?” as featured in the textbook Competing Visions. By dissecting Dalrymple's main arguments and evaluating the evidence he presents, this paper will explore my agreement or disagreement with him while intertwining insights from other philosophical readings discussed in this course. This examination not only deepens my understanding of poverty as a societal issue but also enhances my ability to articulate and defend my own position on the subject.

Main Argument of Dalrymple

The central thesis of Dalrymple's “What Is Poverty?” revolves around the notion that poverty is not merely a lack of financial resources but a complex condition that encompasses psychological, moral, and social dimensions. Dalrymple argues that poverty is often a reflection of a deeper malaise in society, marked by cultural decay and a loss of personal responsibility. He posits that the poor are not merely victims of economic circumstances but also reactionaries to their surroundings, trapped in cycles of behavior that perpetuate their condition.

Supporting Evidence

Dalrymple substantiates his argument through a series of poignant anecdotes and observations drawn from his experiences as a doctor in disadvantaged areas. He depicts the lives of impoverished individuals, illustrating how their circumstances are often interlinked with substance abuse, family breakdown, and a lack of ambition. For instance, he mentions patients whose lives are marked by the absence of parental figures and the prevalence of addiction, suggesting that these are not simply products of their economic situation but result from an ingrained sense of hopelessness and abandonment. This nuanced perspective challenges the idea that poverty is solely a financial issue, instead framing it as a multifaceted problem requiring deeper societal engagement.

Agreement with Dalrymple

I find myself largely in agreement with Dalrymple’s perspective on poverty. His argument prompts a reevaluation of how we perceive and discuss poverty within our society. Instead of viewing impoverished individuals through the lens of mere financial assistance, it is crucial to understand the psychological and social barriers that hinder their progress. For example, the effects of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are well-documented, showing that individuals who face neglect or abuse are at a higher risk of encountering difficulties throughout their lives, including economic hardships (Felitti et al., 1998).

Counterargument and Critique

However, it is essential to acknowledge a counter-argument to Dalrymple’s stance. Critics may argue that focusing too much on personal responsibility overlooks the systemic issues perpetuating poverty—such as institutional racism, inadequate access to education, and socioeconomic disparities (Piketty, 2014). While it is true that individual actions contribute to one’s circumstances, systemic barriers can create insurmountable challenges for many. Hence, the insistence solely on personal responsibility can lead to victim-blaming, limiting the efficacy of social policies designed to alleviate poverty.

Integration with Course Readings

To enrich my analysis, I will apply insights from Karl Marx and John Stuart Mill to Dalrymple’s arguments. Marx’s critique of capitalism highlights structural inequalities that are often ignored in discussions about poverty, positing that economic systems inherently favor the wealthy (Marx & Engels, 2002). Thus, while personal responsibility plays a role, the overarching structures must also be considered. On the other hand, Mill’s notion of utilitarianism demands a broader view of happiness and well-being. Mill posits that societal happiness is paramount (Mill, 1863), suggesting that the plight of the impoverished affects the collective well-being of society. Consequently, it becomes essential to address not only individual behaviors but also the broader societal constructs contributing to poverty.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while Theodore Dalrymple provides a compelling argument about the multifaceted nature of poverty, offering critical insights into the social and moral dimensions of this issue, it is vital to remember that this problem is not solely rooted in individual responsibility. Systemic factors play a crucial role in shaping the conditions people live under. By integrating philosophical perspectives from Marx and Mill, we can better understand how to confront poverty through a dual lens that emphasizes both personal accountability and systemic change. Thus, addressing poverty requires an interplay of individual responsibility paired with a critical examination of societal structures, ensuring that efforts to alleviate poverty are holistic and impactful.

References

• Dalrymple, Theodore. “What Is Poverty?” In Competing Visions.
• Felitti, Vincent J., et al. “Relationship of Childhood Abuse and Household Dysfunction to Many of the Leading Causes of Death in Adults.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, vol. 14, no. 4, 1998, pp. 245-258.
• Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto. Penguin Classics, 2002.
• Mill, John Stuart. Utilitarianism. Parker, Son, and Bourn, 1863.
• Piketty, Thomas. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Harvard University Press, 2014.
• Orshansky, Mollie. "Counting the Poor: Another Look at the Poverty Profile." Social Security Bulletin, vol. 28, no. 1, 1965, pp. 3-29.
• Sen, Amartya. Development as Freedom. Knopf, 1999.
• Friedman, Milton. Capitalism and Freedom. University of Chicago Press, 1962.
• Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press, 1971.
• Wilson, William Julius. The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy. University of Chicago Press, 1987.