Assignment for Tuesday (Group #2)

Notes: Note: The first two options are the same as the ones from last week. The third is new.Regardless of which option you follow, you should write in the form of an essay with a clear thesis statement, and use detailed textual support (page references and/or quotes).

Option 1: Take one precise passage, in which Silver poses a direct challenge to religious belief -- possibly your own. Without distorting or ignoring the facts as you understand them (you may go beyond Silver, but stick to *scientific* sources, not random junk from the internet), discuss what impact you imagine this *particular* set of scientific facts will have upon religion in the decades and centuries to come. I believe this assignment will allow most of you to write about what interests you.

Option 2: Showing detailed awareness of Silver’s book, especially of the material in part 2, write an essay in which you propose a definition of “human nature” or “the human” which you both agree with and are prepared to argue survives Silver’s various challenges to conventional understandings of human behavior.

Option 3: Make a precise response to either Silver's argument that we should literally create the "ideal world" of our subconscious or, if you prefer, Marcuse's similar argument that we should "pacify nature," making use of multiple parts of Silver's book. What do I mean by "precise response?" I mean that you should defend it, attack it, or qualify it, using both Silver's own words (from elsewhere in the book), and, optionally, outside research. You might argue, for instance, that his idea of an "ideal world" is contradicted at various points in the book, and is therefore void; you might also argue that a particular set of moments in the text does a good idea of explaining how and why the ideal world should come into being. Regardless, you are the one attacking or defending Silver: you should be articulating your own point of view.