Please help with the questions for the writing.
4. Give what you think is the strongest argument against the premise you chose in section 3. The idea of this section is that you are giving an objection to that premise of your argument, from the point of view of someone who thinks the premise is false. Note that the objection should be specifically against the premise you chose in section 3, not against some other part of your argument. Depending on what your objection is, it is sometimes useful to indicate that it comes from the point of view of someone who holds one of the other two views of the human person. So, for example, if you are arguing for hylomorphism, you might raise an objection from the point of view of a dualist. Or your objection might be more "universal," that is, an objection that anyone might raise. The important thing is to choose the strongest objection you can come up with. This section must be one or two paragraphs long.
The strongest objection to the third premise is that it is not clear that only minds can have intentionality. It could be that some non-mental things, such as rocks, also have intentionality. The assertion that physicalism can also explain the oneness of the human being is the strongest counterargument to the notion that hylomorphism does so. Physicalism can explain how the human being is one by claiming that it is material.
5. Give a response to the objection you gave in section 4, defending your view against it. This should take no more than two paragraphs. There are two possible strategies that you might choose for doing this:
(a) The most common strategy is to simply respond directly to the objection in 4, arguing that it does not give us good reason to think the premise is false.
(b) In some cases, rather than trying to argue directly against the objection, you may want to revise your argument from 2 so that the objection given in 4 is no longer a threat to it. If you take this route, you will need to explain (i) how you are revising the argument and (ii) why your revision avoids the objection in 4. If you are in doubt about which of these two startegies to use in responding to the objection, probably you should just choose strategy (a). Section 5 of the paper must be one or two paragraphs long.
I would argue that the objection does not consider that mental states are physical. It could be that some non-mental things, such as rocks, also have intentionality. Hylomorphism can better explain how the human person is united than physicalism, in response to the claim that it may also account for it. Hylomorphism can describe the unity of the human being by emphasizing that it combines substance and form. The objection in 4 is that physicalism cannot account for the unity of the human person. I would argue that this objection does not consider that mental states are physical. It could be that some non-mental things, such as rocks, also have intentionality. Hylomorphism can better explain how the human person is united than physicalism, in response to the claim that it may also account for it. Hylomorphism can describe the unity of humans.
6. The end for your paper with a brief conclusion in which you explain whether and why you think the argument is sound, in the end. If you are not sure whether it is sound, say that, then explain why you are unsure. This section must be one paragraph.
In conclusion, hylomorphism is the philosophical view that all things combine matter and form. The form of something is its essential nature, while the issue is the stuff it. It can use perspective to explain how people behave. The main argument in favor of hylomorphism is that it is the best approach to conveying the unity of the human person. It is because the form of a person is their soul, which person united with their body. The weakest tenet of this view is that it better explains the unity of the human being. The strongest argument against this is that physicalism can also explain how humans are united. Physicalism is the view that all things are physical, so the unity of the human person could be explained by the fact that we are all made of the same matter. Because the soul makes us unique, hylomorphism better explains our individuality. I think there is a compelling argument for hylomorphism.
