First Take-Home Examination Justice (PHIL / PSCI 1103), Fall 2024
The Assignment. Choose two questions from the options below and for each one write a response
of roughly 1200-1500 words. The exam is open resource; you may consult any sources you wish
(though you are prohibited from using AI assistance). Your exam must be typed and double-
spaced. Please be sure to staple the pages of your exam. Your exam must be submitted in
hardcopy at the start of class on October 8
th
.
The purpose of this exercise is twofold. First, it gives you the opportunity to demonstrate
your command of the course readings and comprehension of the class discussions. Second, it
prompts you to engage in some original philosophical thinking. Accordingly, your work will be
evaluated according to how well you demonstrate your mastery of the course readings and
discussions, and how well you articulate reasons for your own ideas. The truth of the conclusions
you reach is largely irrelevant (it may be important only insofar as wildly false conclusions can
be difficult to support with a clear and compelling rationale).
A successful answer will achieve three things. First, it will accurately and precisely depict
the idea, argument, or position under discussion. Second, it will deploy some of the conceptual
tools we have been developing in class in assessing its topic. Third, it will clearly state a
philosophically reflective position of your own.
You needn’t consult sources beyond the course material, but you may do so (again, there
is a prohibition on using AI assistance). The usual norms concerning plagiarism and citation
apply. When you directly attribute an idea to an author, you must provide a citation. When citing
from The Democracy Reader, use a simple parenthetical in-text citation of the page number.
A bit of advice: start by thinking. Your task is not that of accurately repeating something
you’ve heard someone else say. Nor is it that of providing your professor with something he’s
“looking for.” Education is not a matter of meeting others’ expectations. The task is to think and
then craft responses that reflect your command of the materials we have been engaging with.
Questions
1. Roughly 73 million US citizens (22%) are under the age of 18 and thus cannot vote. Does this
render our laws nonbinding and our government illegitimate? Is there a defense of the status quo
that does not concede something to Plato’s idea that only the wise are fit to rule?
2. Assume the following is demonstrably true: Citizens in a society that embraces negative
liberty and state neutralism tend to be generally unhappy and unremarkable: they frequently
succumb to vices like greed and envy, they typically devote their lives to vapid pursuits, they
can’t sustain healthy interpersonal relationships, and they are motivated mainly by the desire to
get richer than their neighbors. Does this truth alone enable us to draw any philosophical
conclusions about the justice of such societies?
3. Imagine two cities that are very much alike but for the following difference. City A recognizes
a right to religious exercise. However, it also has a lot of traffic lights, and citizens do a lot of
driving. So, in the course of their day-to-day lives, A’s citizens are frequently required to stop
and wait for a red light to turn green. City B does not recognize a right to religious exercise; it
forbids religious worship of any kind. However, it has a very sophisticated transportation system
that enables citizens to travel throughout the city wherever they want without ever having to wait
at a red light. Which city is more free? What does you answer suggest about the debate between
negative and positive liberty?
