Topic: justifying forgiveness for wrongdoing
Come up with a way you wronged someone and made up for it according to the
views of either Aristotle, Locke, or Boxill (say which one), but NOT according to
either Radzik, Bovens or Hieronymi (say which one), and so the victim refuses to
forgive you. Say why. What action can you take that overcomes this remaining
complaint of theirs, but without using the explicit or implicit performative form of
apologies (which the victim never accepts)? Make a convincing argument for why
this further action justifies forgiving you, and then an equally convincing
argument for why it doesn’t. Finally, give a critique of one of those two
arguments.
(NOTE: an argument makes a convincing case for a conclusion, using reasons
designed to move a reader who does not yet agree. In contrast, a critique
identifies a flaw, defect or weakness in the reasoning of an argument, without
taking sides on whether the argument’s conclusion – what it is arguing for – is
correct.)
Requirements: 4 pages | .doc file
Answer preview:
word limit:1364