Jason Brennan argues for a ‘moderate epistocratic’ position, according to which

Jason Brennan argues for a ‘moderate epistocratic’ position, according to which voting rights should be made conditional on passing a “voter qualification exam, akin to a driver exam, which tests general relevant basic social science and basic knowledge about the candidate.” Explain Brennan’s argument for this proposal, and carefully evaluate it. (To do so, you should raise what you think is the strongest objection to Brennan’s argument; consider what responses may be offered on Brennan’s behalf; and explain whether the objection defeat, or do not defeat, Brennan’s position. Your critical discussion may focus on Brennan’s general competence-based argument for moderate epistocracy; on his claim that, to enforce the Competence Principle, we should adopt a voter qualification exam; or on both.) All in all, do you agree with Brennan that citizens should have to pass a voter qualification exam before they are allowed to vote on important political matters?
NB: Whichever prompt you pick, make sure you clearly define any terms, and outline any arguments, that are relevant to your discussion. When critically discussing an argument or position, you should focus on what you consider the strongest objection to it, and discuss possible responses the author could offer to the objection. (Given the length of the assignment, it is unlikely that you will be able to address more than two objections with sufficient detail. Often considering just one objection in depth is your best choice. Similarly, it is unlikely that you can consider more than two responses to an objection in sufficient depth.) Even if the prompt does not directly ask for it, you are encouraged, but not required, to bring in views we have engaged with in the course. (If you do, then these views too should be clearly outlined.) In principle, there is no prohibition on also drawing on texts that are not on the syllabus for this course. But based on experience, I would discourage you from doing so: given the word limit, it is very difficult to extensively engage with outside texts without neglecting readings for the course that are essential to adequately addressing the prompt.
Guidelines on writing a philosophy paper:
I recommend taking a(nother) look at Jim Pryor’s “Guidelines on Writing a Philosophy Paper,” available online at http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/guidelines/writing.html. You may also wish to look (again) at his “How to Read a Philosophy Paper,” available online at http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/guidelines/reading.html.