Social and Political Philosophy

Part A: 500 words, plus or minus ten percent
In the final part of her paper, Cherry argues that moral anger can express “agape love”. Describe this conclusion. Explain her argument in favour of it.
Part B: 1500 words, plus or minus ten percent
In that final section of the paper, Cherry is making a move in a conversation, the conversation about the social, moral, and political value of anger, and the nature of anger. In this second part of the paper, you should make a creative, argumentative contribution to that conversation, one which responds to or in some way builds on the work that Cherry has done.
There are a few different ways this contribution of your might look. But one important constraint on your contribution is that it involve just one or two arguments that you develop in detail, and not a large number of separate lines of argument. Here are some examples of what you might do. You do not need to do any of these in particular. But I am including them here to give you some options, and to help you understand what an appropriate scope would be for your contribution.
Example 1: You might make one argument. You might argue that Cherry’s conclusion is mistaken because a different account of the nature of moral anger is the correct account of the nature of moral anger, and that the correct view of the nature of moral anger problematizes her view about what moral anger can communicate.
Example 2: You might make two arguments, entirely unrelated to Cherry’s, which support the conclusion that moral anger can express agape love.

Last Completed Projects