Philosophy Question

There is one exegesis paper on a passage from the Gospel of Luke Chapter 8: 22-25.The paper is to follow this basic format:

  • 1800 to 2400 words, typed, double-spaced pages, 12 point Times New Roman font, one inch margins all around, DO NOT RIGHT JUSTIFY, use standard English, spelling, and grammar
  • use the essay form with introduction, body and conclusion
  • evaluation will pertain to the quality of writing and expression, the content, and depth of analysis
  • page numbers, title, single spaced heading with name, class, time of class, etc.
  • standard method of citation: MLA or Chicago Manual of Style

The main purpose of the paper is to discuss a passage from the Gospel of Luke in detail and interpret it in relationship to the theology and narrative of the Gospel of Luke. 

  • A passage will be assigned to you when we start to study Luke
  • Discuss the details of the passage and its fit within the context of the Gospel of Luke. Read Byrne, pp. 8-22. These pages will help you to see how your passage fits within the overall context and themes of Luke’s gospel.
  • Attend to the historical and theological analysis.Use the sources from the list below. 
  • Offer a reflection on the meaning of the passage for Christians today.
  • For your passage, you must use the following commentaries: 
  • 1)    Fitzmyer, Joseph A. The Gospel According to Luke. 2 vols. Anchor Bible Series. New York: Doubleday, 1981-85. 2)    Johnson, Luke Timothy. Luke. Sacra Pagina Series. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1991. 
  • 3)    Byrne, Brendan. The Hospitality of God: A Reading of Luke’s Gospel. Revised Edition. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2015. OR                         OR                   OR                   OR             OR LaVerdiere, Eugene. Luke. New Testament Message Series 5. Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1980.
  • 4)    Karris, Robert J. “The Gospel According To Luke.” In The New Jerome Biblical Commentary. Edited by Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fiztmyer, and Roland E. Murphy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990.       OR                         OR                   OR                   OR                   OR   Stuhlmueller, Carroll.  “The Gospel according to Luke.”  In The Jerome Biblical Commentary.  Edited by Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland E. Murphy.  Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1968. 
  • 5)    If you find some overlap with Lohfink, Jesus of Nazareth: What He Wanted, Who He Was, feel free to include any insights that he might offer for your passage specifically or generally.

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

Posted in Uncategorized

Philosophy Question

For many of you, this is your first philosophy class. To give direction to your writing, this paper will be highly structured. I’ll give you the outline of a great philosophy paper, and you fill it in with content. Assume that your reader knows nothing about philosophy. Write in a way that would make sense to a friend or roommate. Your paper should be concise and on point. Once you’ve written a draft, read each sentence in isolation and ask yourself “what does this contribute to the argument as a whole?” Maybe the sentence is already perfect, but more often than not a sentence can be tightened up or deleted entirely.

Paper specifications:

  • Answer *one* of the following prompts. The choice is yours.
  • Your essay should be 1,200-1,500 words (about 4-5 pages, double-spaced).
  • Submit your paper through iLearn by 11:55pm on Friday, November 19.
  • The file format must be a pdf or a word doc. Pages files and Google doc files will not be accepted.
  • Include in-text citations and a works cited page using MLA or APA formatting.
  • Do not use outside sources.
  • Late papers will be penalized 1/2 point per day, rounded up.

  • Prompt 1

    You are walking down Market St. in San Francisco when a homeless person asks you for money. You happen to have twenty dollars in your pocket, and you stop to think about what you should do. You can tell that this money would make a difference in this person’s day, while you would hardly notice its absence.

    In this paper, you will argue that you should, or shouldn’t, give this person twenty dollars. First, you will analyze this ethical situation using two of the moral theories we’ve discussed in this course: utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, and virtue ethics. Think of these theories as three different perspectives on how to think through an everyday moral dilemma. Then you will use one or both of these theories to construct an argument about what you should do in this situation.

    1. In the first paragraph, introduce the issue and state your thesis, all in four sentences or less. Space is limited, so you’ll have to get to the point quickly!
    2. In the second paragraph, use one of the three ethical theories to analysis the situation. What is the theory? What does it say you should do? Why? Be specific.
    3. In the third paragraph, use a second ethical theory to analysis the situation. What is the theory? What does it say you should do? Why? Be specific.
    4. In the fourth paragraph, argue that you should or shouldn’t give the person some money. In your argument, explicitly consider the implications of at least one of the ethical views above.
    5. In the fifth paragraph, provide a brief conclusion.

    In making your arguments, it will be useful to refer to lecture notes, online slides, and the assigned readings on iLearn.

    Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

    Posted in Uncategorized

    Philosophy Question

    Essay Writing Tips

    Choose either Topic A or Topic B. To answer these topics completely, it takes a minimum of 2 pages – 8-10 paragraphs. Use the topic questions and the scoring rubric to see if your draft responds fully to all parts of the question. A complete, thoughtful answer is more important than word count.

    Topic A:

    In this essay you will address the controversy between free will and determinism. You will go deeper into the problem of determinism by choosing whether it is the predictability or the unpredictability of our actions that poses a bigger threat to free will. Using passages from the textbook, explain in detail what determinism is and why determinism threatens the idea of free will.

    Now consider these two opposite points of view about our ability to predict behavior:

    1. Everything you do is predictable to those who know you well. This predictability means your life is determined by choices beyond your control.—Paraphrase from Vaughn, p.258
    2. “He sat a long time and he thought about his life and how little of it he could have foreseen and he wondered for all his will and all his intent how much of it was his doing.”—Cormac Mc Carthy (reprinted in Vaughn, p.255)

    Explain what these two points of view mean and then give your own reasoned opinion about which point of view is correct. Defend your answer.

    Topic B:

    Describe the theory of knowledge called skepticism. Consider the skeptic’s charge that we can never be confident about the reliability of our normal sources of knowledge (perceptions, memory, introspection, and reasoning.) Describe why and how, for each of the 4 sources mentioned, the source is unreliable. Use examples to show your understanding.

    If a source of knowledge is unreliable, it means these sources can trick us into believing falsehoods. Does it follow from the fact that we are sometimes mistaken when we rely on these sources that we are always mistaken? In other words, once we admit is possible that we are mistaken, does that mean that we need to admit that we might never be correct? How would you respond to the skeptic?

    Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

    Posted in Uncategorized

    Philosophy Question

    the essay must talk about what should be done with the school funding from the government in Miami Florida * according to one of the six theories Egoism, Virtue ethics, care ethics, right ethics, deontology , utilitarianism . In class he said we discuss what should be done in the state of florida the city of Miami where we live because here the government fundings apparently are not being fairly distributed, the government gives larger amounts of money to the richest schools frequented by better students who come mostly from well-off families and have greater economic benefits ( which also come from better high schools),then how these universities promote more students they are granted with more benefits (rich universities promotes more students and with better grades and more likely to get better jobs than those students who attend public universities(less well-off students that possibly have to work, have children, debts, etc)) What is not fair and we should give a better solution in the essay of what should be done , giving more fundings and benefits to wealthy people or to more needed people in this case students. Thats what he said should be discussed and ofc according to one theory ( u can pick one)

    and should be based on the following two readings 1. Read the Stanford entry (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/race/)

    2. Florida, like some other states, has imposed performance based funding on its state universities. The basic idea is that each state school is evaluated by ten standards and then the schools are ranked. The top schools are rewarded and the bottom schools are punished.

    As a runner and a professor, I certainly get the idea of linking rewards to performance. As a runner, I believe that better performance merits the better awards (be it a gold medal, a fat stack of cash, or a ribbon). As a professor, I believe that performance merits the better grades and that poor performance merits the corresponding lower grades. However, I also recognize the importance of fairness.

    In the case of running, a fair race requires that everyone must compete on the same course and under the same conditions. The age and gender of the runners is also taken into account when assessing performance and there are even age-graded performance formulas to take into account the ravages of time.

    In the case of grading, a fair class requires that everyone is required to do the same work, receives the same support from the professor, and that the assessment standards are the same. Fairness also requires that special challenges faced by some students are taken into account. Otherwise, the assessment is unjust.

    The same applies to performance based funding of education. If the goal is to encourage better performance on the part of all the schools, the competition needs to be fair. Going with a classroom analogy, if a student knows that the class is rigged against her, she is not likely to be motivated to do her best. There also seems to be an obvious moral requirement that the assessment be fair and this would require considering the specific challenges that each school faces. Laying aside the normative aspects, there is also the matter of accuracy: knowing how well a school in performing requires considering what challenges it had to overcome.

    While all the schools operate within the state of Florida and face similar challenges, each school also faces some special challenges. Because of this, a proper and just assessment of a schools performance (how well it does in educating students, etc.) should reflect these challenges. To simply impose standards that fail to consider these challenges would be unfair and would also yield an inaccurate account of the success or failure of the school.

    Consider the following analogy: imagine, if you will, that the Pentagon adopted a performance based funding model for military units using various standards such as cost of operations, causalities, how well the units got along with the locals and so on. Now imagine that the special challenges of the units were not properly considered so that, for example, a unit operating in the deserts of Iraq fighting ISIS was assessed the same way as a unit stationed in Kentucky. As might be imagined, the unit in Iraq would certainly be assessed as performing worse than the unit stationed in Kentucky. The unit in Kentucky would presumably cost less per person, have far fewer causalities, and get along much better with the locals. As such, the unit fighting ISIS would find itself in funding trouble since its performance would seem rather worse than the unit in Kentucky. Of course, this approach would be irrational and unfair—the unit fighting ISIS might be performing extremely well relative to the challenges it faces. The same, it would seem, should hold for schools. Turning back to performance based funding, I will consider the relevant standards and how they are unfair to my school, Florida A&M University.

    Florida A&M University is an HBCU (Historically Black Colleges and Universities) and is still predominantly African-American. The school also prides itself on providing educational opportunities to students who have been denied such opportunities as well as those who are first generation college students. Put roughly, we have many African-American students and a large number of students who are burdened with economic and educational baggage.

    As I have mentioned in a previous essay, FAMU fared poorly under the state’s standards. To be fair, we honestly did do poorly in regards to the state’s standards. However, there are the important questions as to whether the standards are fair and whether or not the assessment of our performance is accurate.

    On the one hand, the answer to both questions can be taken as “yes.” The standards apply to all the schools and the assessment was accurate in terms of the results. On the other hand, the answer is also “no”, since FAMU faces special challenges and the assessment fails to take these into account. To use a running analogy, the situation is like comparing the true 5K times of various runners. This is fair and accurate in that all runners are using their 5K times and the times are accurate. However, if some runners had to run hilly trails and others did their 5Ks on tracks, then the competition would not be fair. After all, a slower 5K on a hilly trail could be a much better performance than a 5K on a track.

    To get directly to the point, my claim is that FAMU faces the special challenge of racism and the legacy of racism. This, I contend, means that FAMU is being assessed unfairly in terms of its performance: FAMU is running hills on a trail while other schools are enjoying a smoother run around the track. In support of this claim, I offer the following evidence.

    One standard is the Percent of Bachelor’s Graduates Employed and/or Continuing their Education Further. A second is the Average Wages of Employed Baccalaureate. The third is the Six Year Graduation Rate and the fourth is the Academic Progress Rate (2nd Year Retention with GPA Above 2.0). These four break down into two general areas. The first is economic success (employment and wages) and the second is academic success (staying in school and graduating). I will consider each general area.

    On the face of it, retention and graduation rates should have no connection to race. After all, one might argue, these are a matter of staying in school and completing school which is a matter of personal effort rather than race.

    While I do agree that personal effort does matter, African-American students face at least two critical obstacles in regards to retention and graduation. The first is that African-American students are still often victims of segregation in regards to K-12 education and receive generally inferior education relative to white students. It should be no surprise that this educational disadvantage manifests itself in terms of retention and graduation rates. To use a running analogy, no one would be surprised if the runners who were poorly trained and coached did worse than better trained and coached runners.

    The second is economic, which ties directly into the standards relating to economic success. As will be shown, African-Americans are far less well off than other Americans. Since college is expensive, it is hardly surprising that people who are less well-off would have a harder time remaining in and completing college. As I have discussed in other essays, the main (self-reported) reason for students being absent from my classes is for work and there is a clear correlation between attendance and class performance. I now turn to the unfairness of the state’s economic success standards.

    While I do not believe that the primary function of the state university is to train students to be job fillers for the job creators, I do agree that it is reasonable to consider the economic success of students when evaluating schools. However, assessing how much the school contributes to economic success requires considering the starting point of the students and the challenges they will face in achieving success.

    To be blunt, race is a major factor in regards to economic success in the United States. This is due to a variety of historical factors (slavery and the legacy of slavery) and contemporary factors (persistent racism). These factors manifest themselves quite clearly and, as such, the relatively poor performance of African-American graduates from FAMU is actually what should be expected.

    In regards to employment, the University of Chicago conducted a study aimed at determining if there is racial bias in hiring. To test this, the researchers responded to 1,300 job advertisements with 5,000 applications. They found that comparable resumes with white sounding names were 50% more likely to get called for an initial interview relative to those with more African-American sounding names. The researchers found that white sounding applications got call backs at a rate of 1 in 10 while for black sounding names it was 1 in 15. This is clearly significant.

    Interestingly, a disparity was also found in regards to the impact of experience and better credentials. A white job applicant with a higher quality application was 30% more likely to get a call than a white applicant with a lower quality application. For African-Americans, the higher quality application was only 9% more likely to get a call than a lower quality black application.

    This disparity in the hiring process seems to help explain the disparity in employment. For whites, the unemployment rate is 5.3% and it is 11.4% for blacks. As such, it is hardly surprising that African-American students from FAMU are doing worse than students from schools that are mostly white.

    Assuming that this information is accurate, this means that FAMU could be producing graduates as good as the other schools while still falling considerably behind them in regards to the employment of graduates. That is, FAMU could be doing a great job that is getting degraded by racism. As such, the employment assessment would need to be adjusted to include this factor. Going with the running analogy, FAMU’s African-American graduates have to run uphill to get a job, while white graduates get to run on much flatter course.

    In addition to employment, a graduate’s wages is also one of the standards used by the state. FAMU fared poorly relative to the other schools here as well. However, this is also exactly what should be expected in the United States. The poverty rate for whites is 9.7% while that for blacks it is 27.2%. The median household wealth for whites is $91,405 and for blacks $6,446. Blacks own homes at a rate of 43.5% while whites do so at 72.9%. Median household income is $35,416 for blacks and $59,754 for whites. As such, it would actually be surprising if African American graduates of FAMU competed well against the statistics for predominantly white schools.

    It might be contended that these statistics are not relevant because what is of concern is the performance of African-American college graduates and not the general economic woes of African-Americans. Unfortunately, college education does not close the racial wealth gap.

    While the great recession had a negative impact on the wealth of most Americans, African-Americans with college degrees were hits surprisingly hard: there net worth dropped 60% from 2007 to 2013. In contrast, whites suffered a decline of 16% and, interestingly, Asians saw a slight increase. An analysis of the data (and data going back to 1992) showed that black and Hispanics had more assets in housing and more debts and these were major factors in the loss of wealth (the burst of the housing bubble crashed house values). In terms of income, researchers take the main causes of the disparity to include discrimination and career choices. In addition to the impact on salary, this wealth disparity also impacts retention and graduation rates. As such, the state is right to focus heavily on economics—but the standards need to consider the broader economic reality as well.

    It is reasonable to infer that the main reason that FAMU fares worse in these areas is due to factors beyond the control of the school. Most of our students are black and in the United States, discrimination and enduring historical factors blacks do far worse than whites. As such, these poor numbers are more a reflection of the poor performance of America than on the performance of Florida A&M University. Because of this, the standards should be adjusted to take into account the reality of race in America

    Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

    Posted in Uncategorized

    Philosophy Question

    DISCLAIMER: THERE ARE TWO ASSIGNMENTS HERE THAT NEED TO BE SUBMITTED DIFFERENTLY. They have the same instructions but they are about two different topics. I have labeled the ‘Assignment #1’ and ‘Assignment #2’. I have also outlined in the instructions what attachments go with which assignment.

    THIS IS ASSIGNMENT #1 – PHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE. The attachments that belong to it are labeled ‘Research 5 Submit #1’ and ‘Philosophy of Language’

    1. Analysis – read and analyze that article (not just the abstract): (THE ARTICLES WILL BE ATTACHED BELLOW)

    A. Briefly summarize your presentation from Research 5 (THIS IS ALREADY DONE. I WILL ATTACH THIS PART BELOW SO YOU CAN REFERENCE IT AND SUMMARIZE IT FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT)

    B.The author’s argument, resolution, or thesis (250 words): Explain the author’s argument, analysis, and the conclusion or resolution reached.

    For example, the author might offer an argument, a critique, a new approach

    (a)Argument: the author(s) may be offering an argument such that they may even say “we shall argue that…”. Look for stated assumptions, either as identified premises, or necessary principles that underlie the position.

    (b)Interpretations are also arguments (especially if they are being offered as a new rake on something: basic concepts, definitions, standing theories may be controversial and in need of interpretation or re-interpretation. A philosophical treatment may offer a new interpretation of it may critically examine an already given interpretation. The author(s) might even say “we think a new way of defining XYZ is needed…etc.). This can also be construed as the opening of an argument. It has parts that fit together a certain way.

    (c)Prescription: the author(s) may argue for, layout a proposal for, a new concept—or again, a criticism of a given prescription (perhaps a standard one in the field. It might also have an argument structure, a rationale for why this or that should be so.

    3. Your Assessment. 250 words: What makes this article a philosophical article in general and also for the area in the philosophy of X? (FIRST ARTICLE WILL BE IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE)
    Three specific questions here.

    a. What significance does it have for the “X” area in the philosophy of X? (PHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE)

    b. How does a specialized inquiry/argument of this sort reveal the nature of philosophy?

    c. In what ways is the philosophy of this sort (done by the author of the article) different from the “popular” notion of philosophy as being a personal belief system?

    THIS IS ASSIGNMENT #2 – PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION. The attachments that belong to it are labeled ‘Research 5 Submit #2’ and ‘Philosophy of Religion’.

    1. Analysis – read and analyze that article (not just the abstract): (Attachment labeled ‘Philosophy of Religion)

    A. Briefly summarize your presentation from Research 5 (THIS IS ALREADY DONE. I WILL ATTACH THIS PART BELOW SO YOU CAN REFERENCE IT AND SUMMARIZE IT FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT. Attachment labeled ‘Research 5 Submit #2)

    B.The author’s argument, resolution, or thesis (250 words): Explain the author’s argument, analysis, and the conclusion or resolution reached. (This part is already partially done and is included in ‘Research 5 Submit #2’. You just need to adjust it to these specific instructions.)

    For example, the author might offer an argument, a critique, a new approach

    (a)Argument: the author(s) may be offering an argument such that they may even say “we shall argue that…”. Look for stated assumptions, either as identified premises, or necessary principles that underlie the position.

    (b)Interpretations are also arguments (especially if they are being offered as a new rake on something: basic concepts, definitions, standing theories may be controversial and in need of interpretation or re-interpretation. A philosophical treatment may offer a new interpretation of it may critically examine an already given interpretation. The author(s) might even say “we think a new way of defining XYZ is needed…etc.). This can also be construed as the opening of an argument. It has parts that fit together a certain way.

    (c)Prescription: the author(s) may argue for, layout a proposal for, a new concept—or again, a criticism of a given prescription (perhaps a standard one in the field. It might also have an argument structure, a rationale for why this or that should be so.

    3. Your Assessment. 250 words: What makes this article a philosophical article in general and also for the area in the philosophy of X? (PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION)
    Three specific questions here.

    a. What significance does it have for the “X” area in the philosophy of X? (PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION)

    b. How does a specialized inquiry/argument of this sort reveal the nature of philosophy?

    c. In what ways is the philosophy of this sort (done by the author of the article) different from the “popular” notion of philosophy as being a personal belief system?

    Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

    Posted in Uncategorized

    Philosophy Question

    Interview Paper Assignment-PL 200

    The name of the person that I decided to interview is Hassan (My husband)

    The subject that I chose is “Honesty between the past and now”

    I chose this subject because I’m interested on, and I know my husband will be too. Also, because people in the past consider being honest as a very important thing, but now I don’t think people are honest enough, and most of people think lying is ok in some cases. ( Make sure that you also follow the questions in the assignment so that you can help describe his context and how that impacted his worldview).



    Each student will conduct an interview with a family member or friend/acquaintance whom they consider to be a mentor. Following the interview, the student will write a 3-4 page essay about the interview. The paper should be written in Times New Roman, 12 pt. font with 1” margins.

    The goal of this paper is for the student to learn about their mentor’s context (time and place in history). How has their context has shaped the mentor’s worldview? Below are a list of questions to ask in the interview; students may choose to ask more questions. Interviews can be conducted in person, via phone conversation or video call.

    1. What was your childhood like?
    2. What is the most important thing in your life right now?
    3. What was the path you took to your current place in life? (This can refer to the person’s job or other activities that are important to them.)
    4. Do you have a religious belief or philosophy of life that has guided you? If so, can you share it with me?
    5. What was a major event that happened in your lifetime (this can be a personal event, or a much larger, national or global event) that changed/shaped the way you thought about the world? (As an example, some people might talk about the birth of a child, the death of a loved one, or even some larger event such as wars or attacks. Events can be either ‘bad’ or ‘good’.) Please explain the impact of the event.
    6. Do you have any words of wisdom or advice for me?

    After conducting the interview, please note the following:

    -The paper should NOT be just a listing of the answers to the questions. Please weave the questions into the paper to help the reader understand your mentor’s context and worldview.

    -The beginning of the paper should take at least a paragraph to explain why you chose the person to interview. Who is this person to you and what impact have they had on your life?

    -The middle section of the paper (longest section) should explain what you learned about your mentor. Again, don’t just list the answers to the questions, but please paint a picture of who this person is.

    -The conclusion of the paper should answer the following: How has this person’s context affected how they view the world? How would you summarize their worldview? How has your interview influenced the way you understand your mentor?

    Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

    Posted in Uncategorized

    Philosophy Question

    For the second writing

    * you must choose to discuss only ONE argument for the existence of God (either the design argument OR the problem of evil) – NOT BOTH

    * no matter which argument you choose to discuss, you can take either the side of the believer or the atheist.

    Here is one way for you to decide which argument to discuss.

    First, ask yourself whether you are a believer or an atheist (non-believer) or at least more inclined toward one position rather than the other.

    Second, once you have determined which position you *initially* are more inclined to support, pick the OTHER side. E.g. if you are an atheist, pick the believer side. This is the side that you are going to do your best to defend in your writing.

    Then, you pick which argument you want to discuss, either the design argument or the problem of evil – you can choose either, but I would recommend choosing the argument that you believe makes the stronger case for the side that you are defending in your writing.

    Atheist

    Let’s say that you are writing on behalf of the believer (given that you are initially more inclined toward atheism). And you think that the believer might have a better case in favor of the existence of the Omni-God by appealing to the existence of COP in the universe. In this case, your discussion should be limited to the design argument.

    If instead you think that the believer has a better case in support of the existence of God by showing that God can better explain the existence of evil and suffering, then your discussion should be limited to the problem of evil.

    Believer

    Vice versa, if you are more inclined toward the belief in the existence of God, you are going to write on behalf of the atheist. If you think that the atheist might have a better case against the existence of the Omni-God by appealing to the existence of COP in the universe, your discussion should be limited to the design argument.

    If instead you think that the atheist has a better case against the existence of God by showing that God’s nature is incompatible with the existence of evil and suffering, then your discussion should be limited to the problem of evil.

    Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

    Posted in Uncategorized

    Philosophy Question

    Brooklyn College

    Introduction to Philosophy

    Prof. Moris Stern

    Paper Assignment 2

    Due: Monday, Nov 8th, midnight on Blackboard.

    I will make announcements on Blackboard about the email address and the date to which you need to email the claim you will work on and the breakdown of it into the necessity and sufficiency components. I will work with you during this initial process to assist you in getting it right.

    In this paper, you will articulate, defend, and evaluate a claim.

    Format: double-spaced, 12 point font, 1.25 inch margins, no specified length.

    Penalty for lateness: each 24 hours of lateness after the deadline is a reduction in the grade by one notch (from A to A-, for example). Sorry, but I have to be and will be firm about this.

    Here is the claim you need to adopt:

    **** The claim and counterexamples should include and demonstrate mastery of what we studied with Rauhut. Use Rauhut to generate justification for the claim and the counterexamples. Do not respond to these questions just using common sense without employing Rauhut’s thought. ****

    On Free Will

    • libertarianism is required for the best account of moral responsibility

    – You will have to emply and define concepts of metaphyical libertarianism, free will (through principle of alterntaive possibilities), moral responsibility, compatibiliism, determinism, assess strengths and weaknesses of each. Failure to do the above is likely to result in a failing grade.

    Use the claim in question 4) of the paper.

    Instructions: write a six-part part (but responding to twenty one questions) paper. In Part One, you introduce the topic – What is the topic that is relevant for thinking about the human being. Part Two consists of you articulating a claim relevant to the topic (from the list above, readings, exam, or review questions), that you want to spend time thinking about in this assignment. In part three, you defend that claim, or offer reasons why it makes sense. In part Four, you offer a criticism of the claim from Part Two – you offer reasons why the claim is not likely to be true. In Part Five, you evaluate your claim in light of the criticism – you state, after the consideration of the criticism, the reasons why the claim is or is not likely to be true. In Part Six, you reflect on what you have done: a conclusion about what you have learned and what you think about the topic in light of your consideration of the claim and its criticism.

    Do not just sit down and write “from your head” without cracking your book, notes, quizzes, review questions open. I would set apart some time during at least three days to write the paper.

    IMPORTANT: There must be twenty one labeled parts in your paper. Do not hand in a text that is not divided into sections. You will receive four points for the successful completion of each section.

    START BY WRITING PARTS II, III, IV, AND V FIRST – AND THEN DO THE INTRODUCTION AND THE CONCLUSION. But the parts should be in their natural order (I-VI) in the final version that you submit. And you should consider revising your paper after you have written the introduction – you may think of something in the introduction that you have not taught of while writing the other parts and revise your paper accordingly (especially, perhaps, the conclusion).

    The Paper (Do the following tasks)

    Part I: Introduction

    • Introduce the topic (the broader issue that has to do with a human being is – for the sake of which you are investigating the claim that you choose) and briefly discuss what it involves. What is the puzzle with regard to this topic? [For example: “The topic is that of the relation between knowledge and power, and their role in the life of a human being. Human being is distinguished from other beings by their capacity for knowledge – that can be as complex as books and that can be passed down from generation to generation and improved upon by succeeding generations. To a large extent, it is this capacity for knowledge that makes human beings more powerful than any other on our planet. But, when it comes to individuals, individuals can choose how much to make knowledge a part of their lives. How much knowledge do specific individuals need in their lives? Is a person better off doing other things with their time then dedicate it to pursuit of knowledge? ” ]
    • Discuss your relation to the topic. Do you have a position on the topic? Do you have a history of engaging the topic in any way? How are you affected by what happens with regard to what is thought on this topic? [For example: “I am very affected by this topic. On a daily basis, I ask myself whether I devote too much or not enough time to learning, or participating in and acquiring knowledge. Should I change my life and devote less time to activities that are simply pleasures or simply social interaction with others and have little learning involved in them? ” ]
    • What is the importance of the claim that you bring up in part II with regard to the topic? Why is examining this claim important – in order to make sense of the topic? Is it a controversial issue – what are the reasons for each of the sides? Does it run counter to common sense? What does the common sense say? You will have to complete 4) before you can complete 3) here. [For example: “The common sense agrees with the thought that knowledge is power. But common sense would probably also add that there are different kinds of power – and the one acquired by knowledge is not the only one. Common sense may also question the very desirability of power – whether everyone needs to have power in order to be happy. But, the question is a good one to explore in order to have deeper insight into what a human beings is – since knowledge and power are, arguably, what distinguishes human beings from other kinds of beings.” ]

      Part II: The claim

      Part III: The justification for the claim

      • Explain to the reader of your paper why what is claimed in 4) makes sense. What can you say in support of 4) to convince the reader? Give general reasons or use examples to persuade your reader. Make sure that you explain your answer here and show an understanding of the discussion of the issue in our readings. Use Rauhut’s actual reasons for this conclusion – if appropriate.

      [For example, not related to our class: “We often hear the slogan that knowledge is power. Everyone is encouraged to become educated, attend college, etc. as a means to better careers and personal growth – the sorts of things which we can think of as growth in power. The world is becoming increasingly more complex and technologically advanced – and so it would seem that greater knowledge is required to navigate such a world. It seems that people in professional careers are the big earners, and they also tend to be educated. It also seems that the persons that we go to for advice, or whose opinions we want to pay attention to – are the ones with knowledge. It would also seem that the sorts of things we often greatly enjoy or find to add meaning to our lives (watching serious films and engaging other fine arts and literature, discussion of and participation in politics, many hobbies, collaborating on projects with our friends, watching and playing serious sports, etc.) – require knowledge.”]

      Part IV: The challenge to, or criticism of, the claim: the refutation by means of counterexamples and explanations

      Part V. Interpretive Evaluation of the claim – after considering its challenge.

      However, while it is possible that knowledge is not necessary to have some power, as shown by examples above, knowledge will increase whatever power one has without knowledge. A person who inherits wealth, works a simple job, has strength by nature, etc. will be more powerful if they acquire knowledge. That person will increase and put to good use (as opposed to foolish and destructive or even self-destructive use) the wealth or strength they have inherited. A person who works a simple job, due to acquired knowledge, can take a more complex and rewarding job.

      But, more importantly, it is very probable, and not only possible, that knowledge is not sufficient for power. Knowledge must be applied in order to be actual power. It is required for application of knowledge that a person chooses to do so, has the discipline to continually do so, and does not live in unfortunate circumstances (oppressive social and political circumstances, unsupportive family and friends, poor health, etc.) in which they do not have the opportunity to apply that knowledge, as hard as they might try. Right choice, discipline and circumstances are needed – in addition to knowledge – in order for knowledge to be power.”]

      Part VI: Reflection

      Grading criteria: in addition to evaluating how adequately you have fulfilled the task of each part of the paper, you will be graded on the depth of your writing. What you write must not be overly simplistic and obvious, but must show an effort to explore the topic. Depth means that you discuss what you are writing about in detail and with explanation that is made possible by what we learn in this class. Your paper should show mastery of what we learn (such as applying concepts and arguments that we learn in a way that shows comprehension of those concepts and arguments.). The paper should not be such that could have been written by an intelligent person who never took this class – but must be such that is written by an intelligent person who applies what is learned in this class with some depth. The paper must be informed by what we learned. If a response to what you are writing has been addressed by one of the authors we read, you need to address that author’s response to you.

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question


      Read

      Writing a Philosophy Paper (http://www.sfu.ca/philosophy/resources/writing.htm)” by Peter Horban, especially the section called ‘Some Suggestions for Writing Your Philosophy Paper’.

      Consider the following scenario:

      You are currently being considered for a major promotion within your company to vice president of marketing. In your current position as manager of advertising, you supervise five managers and two hourly workers. As part of the annual salary review process, you have been given the flexibility to grant your employees an average 3 percent annual salary increase; however, you are strongly considering a lower amount. This would ensure that your department’s expenses stay under budget and would send the message that you are able to control costs.

      Source:
      Reynolds, George W. 2019. Ethics in Information Technology (6th ed.). Boston: Cengage Learning, Inc.

      Submit:

      Write an essay that addresses the following, in order:

      1. Describe your initial impulse about what to do.
      2. Give a description of how your initial impulse about what to do would be regarded by the different ethical views we’ve studied: utilitarian ethics, Kantian ethics, and virtue ethics. Note that in order to do this well, you will have to describe the views before you apply them. Do they present any objections to your initial impulse about what to do? What are they? If they don’t, why not? [Note: When applying Kantian ethics, do not discuss the good will. Use one of the other Kantian approaches we’ve studied.]
      3. Describe an objection to your initial impulse that has not been considered yet.
      4. How would you respond to the objection(s) raised in 2 and 3?
      5. What is you final decision about what you ought to do? In other words, having carefully subjected your initial impulse to the scrutiny of the different ethical perspectives, what recommendation do you give yourself about what to do?

      General Advice:

      1. Be sure to show your understanding of the different ethical views by explicitly referring to them and their central concerns.
      2. You are not being asked to apply the various ethics tests step-by-step. Instead, you should demonstrate your understanding of the views by considering how they would regard and critique your initial impulse. Note that each ethical view prioritizes different ethical considerations and values.
      3. Think of this essay as you defending your particular educated-in-ethics view of what ought to be done in this scenario
      4. Do not include an introductory paragraph or summary of the case–just get straight to your analysis!! You have limited space, use it well.

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      PHL 11 Final: The first two questions compose the final, the last question is (optional) extra credit. The paper should be typed, 3-4 pages (you can go over if needed), EC 1-2 pages.

      When discussing/interpreting – quote/reference the texts of our course (this is a good procedure to ground your arguments/concerns). If you use secondary literature (outside sources) you must quote (“ ”) and reference that material as well. No work will be accepted/pass that does not clearly indicate where your own words/arguments are, compared to where the words of an author is used/referenced.

      Consider: Kant’s advocacy for enlightenment argued for a critical ideal for the individual (to think and “publicly” speak for themselves). This ideal was then argued to entail a notion of human freedom/rights that should be respected in (civil) society by government, and offer a hope for human progress in culture and (legal) relations.

      First, discuss how Marx is presenting an analysis of the economic relations of capitalism such that property (ownership) and work relations are viewed as counter human dignity – such that capitalism appears anti-enlightenment, blocking further human “progress”; with a critical “political economic” focus which then goes further than (Kant’s) call for critical thinking, a (protected) public space of free speech, and consented law.

      Next, Discuss how both Mills (White Supremacy) and Held (Feminist Transformation) reveal that the notion of “the public” (as well as any progressive hopes here) is deeply impacted by social ideals that impact “who” is a participant in a public space or forum, and this, in turn, effects what politics and polices become normal or typical.

      (Extra Credit) discuss how Tommy Curry (Michael Brown) adds to this critical analysis of standard public notions and institutions, by pointing out that the defense of “democracy” and “justice” can reinforce the violence and oppression that black men face, and thus calls for his own transformation of concepts/values through a new “genre” study of black, male life.

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      Attacthed is the exact way on how to do it.https://learn-us-east-1-prod-fleet02-xythos.conten…

      FISH! PHILOSOPHY ASSIGNMENT
      OVERVIEW
      This book analysis will provide students an opportunity to explore the FISH! philosophy and the
      applications to leadership and management in the workplace.
      FORMAT REQUIREMENTS
      All work must be typed and submitted by the due date to be considered for full credit. See course
      blackboard calendar for deadline and manner of submission.
      Students will work independently to complete this assignment.
      APA style including title page, running head, section headings, and reference page should be used.
      Margins are 1” on all sides, the header is .5” from top, include page numbers, and use 12-point font.
      Details and examples are available online – click on the writing format button in the left margin on
      blackboard. Contact the instructor with questions.
      DIRECTIONS
      Begin by reading the FISH! book posted in blackboard. Take notes to describe the setting and the core
      concepts. Next, identify examples of the core concepts from your internship experience or from the 2
      movies selected from the approved list posted on blackboard. Contact the instructor with questions.
      WRITTEN PAPER STRUCTURE
      Title page – required – prepare using APA style (see blackboard examples).
      Introduction (use the headings listed; bold, no italics or colon or underlined)
      This paragraph does three things: (a) grabs the reader’s attention in some way, (b) tells what you
      are going to cover in the essay, and (c) how the information is organized (order of presentation).
      This paragraph is 3-5 sentences long; indent first line, and double space.
      Setting the Stage
      Provide a brief summary of the story. What is the location? Who is involved? What is
      happening?
      The Fish! Philosophy
      The Fish! philosophy involves 4 essential core concepts: Play, Make Their Day, Be Present, and
      Choose Your Attitude. In your own words, describe each core concept as if telling a co-worker
      who has not read the book then provide at least 2 examples for each core concept from your
      internship experience/approved movies watched. Describe the examples in sufficient detail so the
      reader can picture the scene THEN explain how the example matches the specific core concept.
      Please start each core concept in a new paragraph.
      Fish! based Management & Leadership
      Leadership and management are distinct concepts that go hand in hand in the modern workplace.
      Explain how the FISH! philosophy can impact each of the following: (a) management behaviors,
      (b) leadership behaviors, (c) management processes, and (d) leadership processes. Please start
      each response in a new paragraph. Hint: Review the slide posted on pg. 2
      2
      Follow-up Discussion
      If you could speak with market employees about how FISH! core concepts affect the sport
      manager’s (a) ability to influence staff members and (b) ability to achieve organizational goals,
      how might they respond? Please start each response in a new paragraph.
      Conclusion
      This paragraph summarizes the key points of the essay. In other words, what do you want the
      reader to remember? This paragraph is 3-5 sentences; indent first line, and double space.
      Note: References – none required for this assignment
      People often use the terms leadership and management interchangeably, but these concepts are not the
      same thing. They do go together; yet, someone can be a good manager and a poor leader and vice
      versa. The confusion is often grounded in the idea that leadership AND management involve (1) the
      process of influence and (2) a focus on goal/outcome attainment

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      3. Should all beliefs require evidence? Answer with reference to Clifford and James.

      Please submit your paper through Engage, preferably in MS word document form. The place to submit is on Engage, in the ‘Assignment 2: MID TERM Paper’ section. Papers should be 1000-1500 words, 1.5 spaced and in size 12 font. Please note that you need to hit the ‘submit’ button once you’ve uploaded your paper.

      Guidance on the Task

      This assignment synthesizes the understanding, thinking, critiquing, and creating skills we have been working on so far. You are being asked to answer a question, and to supply a reasoned argument in support of the answer you give. As a result, it is important that you think about how you will structure your paper. Make sure you are clear at the outset about what you are arguing for. In your introductory paragraph give a clear statement of what you are going to conclude as your answer to the question. Then inform the reader how you are going to set about arguing for it. In the main body of the paper, lead your reader through the steps that you are taking. Make sure you are clear about the role that each point you are making plays in your overall argument. It is important that you explain the views you’re discussing clearly and accurately: assume that the person reading the paper does not know anything about the material you are discussing, and explain everything accordingly.

      You must include detailed discussion of at least one of the works we’ve read and discussed appropriate to your question. And remember: you must indicate where and how you have used sources in the text in your paper. There must be clear distinctions between your words and the words from your sources. Using direct quotations is the best way to do this. You must also include a list of works cited list at the end of your paper after the conclusion.

      Please also see the additional document about writing philosophy papers, and along with the document on citations, and the document on paper structure. There is also a video on writing a philosophy paper to have a look at, which talks through these documents.

      A couple of things to remember:

      1. Please submit your paper by uploading a file, preferably an MS Word one. If you use Google docs, you go to File – Download – Microsoft Word (.docx) to download your Google doc as a word document that you can then upload.

      2. Remember to click the SUBMIT button – don’t just leave your paper up there as a draft.

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      3. Should all beliefs require evidence? Answer with reference to Clifford and James.

      Please submit your paper through Engage, preferably in MS word document form. The place to submit is on Engage, in the ‘Assignment 2: MID TERM Paper’ section. Papers should be 1000-1500 words, 1.5 spaced and in size 12 font. Please note that you need to hit the ‘submit’ button once you’ve uploaded your paper.

      Guidance on the Task

      This assignment synthesizes the understanding, thinking, critiquing, and creating skills we have been working on so far. You are being asked to answer a question, and to supply a reasoned argument in support of the answer you give. As a result, it is important that you think about how you will structure your paper. Make sure you are clear at the outset about what you are arguing for. In your introductory paragraph give a clear statement of what you are going to conclude as your answer to the question. Then inform the reader how you are going to set about arguing for it. In the main body of the paper, lead your reader through the steps that you are taking. Make sure you are clear about the role that each point you are making plays in your overall argument. It is important that you explain the views you’re discussing clearly and accurately: assume that the person reading the paper does not know anything about the material you are discussing, and explain everything accordingly.

      You must include detailed discussion of at least one of the works we’ve read and discussed appropriate to your question. And remember: you must indicate where and how you have used sources in the text in your paper. There must be clear distinctions between your words and the words from your sources. Using direct quotations is the best way to do this. You must also include a list of works cited list at the end of your paper after the conclusion.

      Please also see the additional document about writing philosophy papers, and along with the document on citations, and the document on paper structure. There is also a video on writing a philosophy paper to have a look at, which talks through these documents.

      A couple of things to remember:

      1. Please submit your paper by uploading a file, preferably an MS Word one. If you use Google docs, you go to File – Download – Microsoft Word (.docx) to download your Google doc as a word document that you can then upload.

      2. Remember to click the SUBMIT button – don’t just leave your paper up there as a draft.

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      With the recent spate of police shootings in the United States, there has been an uproar regarding police discrimination against the black community. Technology has played a large role in these events, making the job of a police officer even more challenging. This same technology has the opportunity to improve policing policies across the country, especially when it comes to managing and building community relations.

      Imagine a scenario where your department is considering using body cameras and social media as part of a digital dive initiative to build community relations. You have been asked to provide your observations on the future challenges in the field of policing and how the implementation of these technologies can contribute to building safer communities.

      Write a 700- to 1,050-word white paper for your department. According to the Purdue Online Writing Lab, “…the purpose of a white paper is to advocate that a certain position is the best way to go or that a certain solution is best for a particular problem.” In this case, your white paper is meant to help your police department better understand the issues and opportunities around technology, including the use of body cameras and social media.

      Address the following in your white paper:

      • Describe challenges the field of policing will face in the future. Provide examples.
      • Explain how community relations impact the challenges police officers face.
      • Research and describe an incident for which using a body camera has helped the police in accountability and effectiveness.
      • Research and state an example for which social media was used as a tool by the police in crime control and community relations.
      • Identify new technologies that can be used in policing in the future to build safer communities and how. Provide examples.
      • Recommend to your department what decision it should make regarding new technology, including the use of body cameras and social media. Justify your recommendation.

      Include 2 academic resources outside of your textbook in your white paper.

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      Professional Ethics Fall 2020

      Topic

      For the first paper, you will explore professional ethical responsibility, in terms of your profession’s code of ethics and the ethics for experts that we examine in class. That is, you will need to be able to articulate a defensible conception of ethical professional expertise (referencing key readings from class) and how it relates to your profession’s sense of ethical responsibility, drawing on a relevant professional code of ethics.

      For the focus of the essay, you should construct an argument in answer to the following question (set in the context of your own potential future profession:

      What should be required to be an ethical expert, especially in [insert potential future profession here]?

      To answer this question, you will at minimum need to do the following:

      1. Argue (giving supported reasons) that your future career can be identified as a profession.

      2. Summarize and explain the main focus of your profession’s code of ethics (supported through

      reference to specific provisions of that code).

      3. Argue to what extent you feel that your code of ethics provides an adequate basis for being an ethical

      expert. That is, to what extent is the code itself adequate, and to what extent is the code compatible with other criteria used to determine the ethical responsibility of an expert? To answer the first question, you need to engage with Davis’s argument and show examples of interpretation in your analysis. For the second, you should engage with either Hardwig or Elliot, or both. You can also explore other readings (from in class and from outside research) to compose your argument. Be sure to use relevant concepts in your analysis, including ideas like rational deference, trust, self- determination, and interpretative obedience.

      4. Employ specific kinds of reasons, like those from the “Basic Points about Argument” (e.g., hypothetical examples, analogies, definitions, appeals to authority, preemptive critiques), in order to strengthen your overall presentation. A strong argument will, at the very least, make appeals to appropriate authorities, employ a hypothetical example drawn from the specific work of your stated future profession, and address potential critiques of the position you take.

      Importantly, I want you to ARGUE, essentially, that you have a strong sense of what it means to be a professional, the roles professionals play in society, the ethical responsibilities inherent in those roles, and the complexities that experts must at least acknowledge with regard to expert decision making. Your argument must include support for the claims that you make – such support MUST include quotations/citations from the relevant works (which include, at minimum, Bayles, Davis, Hardwig, and your professional code of ethics). If you want to claim that a particular expert acted in a particular way, give a quotation from the text that indicates that you are correct (it could be something the expert actually said, or it could be a claim the authors make about the expert). Arguments lacking relevant support will not be strong enough to earn a passing grade.

      Thesis Statement and Structure

      Your paper must have a thesis statement that is presented at the end of the first paragraph. EVERY body paragraph must have a topic sentence that indicates what you will be presenting in that

      paragraph. Additionally, you need:

    • APA formatting (for heading, spacing, margins, page numbers, etc.) – be sure to include a content- specific title (not “Essay 1” but rather something reflective of the content of the essay – be creative)
    • Works cited page (see above)
    • Appropriate reference to relevant works, including quotations and citations
    • Should be 4-6 double-spaced, type-written pages (around 1000 words
    • Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      Write a Position Paper

      The study of various world religions and religious movements, along with the accompanying belief systems, cultural practices, and social phenomena that arise from religion, brings up an important set of questions for philosophical consideration. For this final assignment, write a “position paper,” which is a particular style of argumentative essay, of somewhere between 1600 and 2000 words that addresses the controlling question and related considerations listed below. (A controlling question raises the main or central idea of an essay or position paper.)

      Here is a link to a detailed article, including an example, that explains how to write a position paper. Also, please be sure to review the grading rubric for this assignment to ensure that your paper fulfills all evaluation criteria to the best of your ability.

      Here is your controlling question:

      A consideration of the history of world civilization as well as current world events suggests that there exists a chasm, a very wide gap, which must be crossed in order for interreligious communication to take place. In your view, given that the different historical backgrounds and cultural settings of people around the world entail that at least some sort of gap or divide does indeed exist, should there be an effort to bridge this to allow for interreligious communication? Is closing this gap even possible?

      • What are some specific elements that create the gap?
      • What are some of the reasons that may be advanced in favor of interreligious communication and understanding?
      • What are some of the commonalities among religious belief systems that might form a basis for communication? Do the differences among various religious belief systems outweigh the commonalities?
      • Should the cultural diversity stemming from such differences be valued and maintained, or should attempts be made to overcome or even erase some of the differences that make interreligious communication difficult?

      Here are the specific guidelines for writing the paper:

      1. Write a position paper of @ 1600-2000 words in response to the controlling question and related considerations listed above. A position paper is one in which you take a stand on a particular issue or question that you identify in your introductory paragraph, and your thesis statement [included in your introductory paragraph] asserts your position clearly and concisely.
      2. In the body of the paper, support the position you take in your thesis; support may be in the form of facts (historical, political, aesthetic, sociological, psychological, etc.), statistics, expert opinion and argumentation, personal experience, logical deliberation, and so on.
      3. It is a good idea to bring in specific examples of religious beliefs and attitudes and refer to particular historical or current events to illustrate your supporting points or premises.
      4. Additionally, in a separate section of the paper, first present, and then respond to, at least one other possible position in response to these questions. Typically, this will be a position in opposition to yours, but it may simply be an alternative view that does not necessarily oppose your view. It should, however, be a view that you reject in favor of the position you have asserted in your thesis. Be sure to answer any objections or counterclaims to your view that you raise in this section. If you have no response to an important objection, you may need to change your original position.
      5. Finally, summarize the argument(s) you have made in support of your thesis and re-state the thesis in an expanded form in your concluding paragraph.
      6. Two essential components of this paper are (a) demonstration of your attainment of the Course Learning Outcomes that are relevant to your argument(s); and (b) the incorporation of any relevant philosophical insights you have gained from the assigned readings and other learning materials you have studied throughout the course.
      7. Cite at least three credible sources outside the course text and include at least two citations from different sections of the course text, Living Religions (9e) by Mary Pat Fisher. Your sources should be from credible and academically respectable sources. Please note that Wikipedia is not acceptable as one of the three required sources. Use Wikipedia for basic information and as a starting point for more advanced research and a guide to other reliable sources. You may use MLA, APA, or CMS documentation style and formatting guidelines. Choose whichever style best suits your purposes, but note that philosophy papers generally use MLA or CMS.
      8. Approach the assignment in a spirit of critical inquiry, which implies a receptive, reasonable, discerning frame of mind that is open to considering different perspectives. A concern for accuracy, precision, and truthfulness is assumed.

      As a reminder, here are the Course Learning Outcomes:

      • Analyze differences and similarities among familiar religious traditions and other, less familiar or foreign, religious traditions.
      • Analyze different ways of understanding the concept of the divine through cognitive, experiential, and emotional pathways.
      • Explain how the idea of “having” or “being” a soul, conceived as the basis or essence of personal identity or ego, informs one’s worldview and behavior towards others.
      • Analyze what the various world religions understand by the term or concept, “God.”
      • Evaluate the value and importance of religious belief and practice in human society both historically and in the present day.
      • Create notions of how tolerance for people of other religious traditions can be built through understanding those traditions while reflecting on the value of religious tolerance itself.

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      See the general instructions in the Essay Discussion Instructions section of the course menu.

      Once you choose which question you’d like to write about, write your essay and post it in the discussion board and also save it as a Word document.

      To create your post, click the blue Create Thread button. To be able to read and respond to others’ posts, you will first need to publish your own post. Your first post is the one that will be graded–a blank post WILL be graded if it is your first post in the board. You can save your post as a draft, but it will not be published for students to view, nor will it be queued for grading until you click the Submit button.

      When you refresh the board, after you publish your post, it will allow you to view everyone’s posts. If you hover your cursor at the bottom of a post, the button to reply to that student’s post will appear.

      Use your course texts to help you respond to the topic, and when you quote and summarize from the course texts, include information about the page reference.

      You are discouraged from using additional sources. If you do choose to use an outside source, be sure to cite your source, just as you do when you use the course texts. If you use a quotation or an example from a website, cite the website’s url and the date accessed.

      Once you are ready for your classmates to read it, post the thread containing your essay. Then go to the TurnItIn dropbox section here in Blackboard and post your Word document into the dropbox. You do not need to include your response to another student in the file that you upload to TurnItIn.

      Finally, read your classmates’ posts. A complete assignment includes your written response to at least one essay besides your own–part of your score is based on your reply to at least one of your classmate’s posts. It should be a meaningful reply that continues the discussion, points out something good about the post, and makes a constructive suggestion for improvement.

      Essay Length tips–To answer these topics completely, it takes a minimum of 350 words. Use the topic questions and the scoring rubric to see if your draft responds fully to all parts of the question. A complete thoughtful answer is more important than word count.

      Topics for your Essay, Choose one

      Topic A:

      Compare the advantages and disadvantages of act-utilitarianism and virtue ethics. Which do you think is the better theory? How would you combine the two approaches to fashion a better theory?

      Topic B:

      Suppose you have an opportunity to either: (1) send $800 to an area suffering from famine to save a dozen people from starvation or (2) give the money to your little sister to buy books for college. Which would you do? Why? Explain which moral theory aligns with your decision making process.

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      • Due Sunday 11:59 pm
      • approximately 500 words (about 2 pages double spaced)

      Please discuss the following prompt:

      There is a story of a Buddhist monk who was on a ship with a maniac who was killing everyone on board. The monk eventually decided to kill the man in order to prevent further harm of others on board. Do you think this conforms with the principles set out in Buddhism? Why or why not? How do you think karma and compassion come into play in this story?

      Below is writing tips for essay

      1) Please remember to use Chicago Style (or CMOS). Over the years, I’ve seen quite a bit of confusion over Chicago Style formatting. For this class, we are using the CMOS Notes/Bibliography (NB) format. A good resource for this style can be found online at Purdue OWL: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/c…

      (Links to an external site.)

      Here’s a sample of NB format in a paper: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/c…

      (Links to an external site.)

      Regarding “Ibid”, the newest CMOS discourages the use of Ibid, however, I will accept it this semester.

      4) Be sure to write the prompt out fully at the start of your paper. This not only lets me know what you are going to be talking about, but also ensures that you are answering the prompt in its entirety, rather than making up your own prompt after skimming through the list of prompts.

      7) Please do not narrate your research experience in your paper. Rather than say “while researching the topic of ____” or “I found this article which explains ____”, just explain the idea and give the proper credit in a footnote.

      8) Do not begin a new paragraph with “Another…” The first sentence in your paragraph should be a bold statement, which is then substantiated through the rest of your paragraph. Try to avoid beginning with a statement that doesn’t really have a strong direct point.

      Rubric attached below

      One of the sources should come from one of the assigned readings, and I would like at least one other source to come from outside our course texts. There are some great resources out there to help you find appropriate peer reviewed source material. One place to find some good journal articles is JSTOR (www.jstor.org).

      you must use the Chicago Manual of Style (CMS or Chicago Style).

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      Introduction to Philosophy

      Discussion Board 1

      Respond to one of the following questions:

      1. Read the excerpt from Pericles’ famous speech. Are the qualities he praises characteristics of democracy? Do you see those characteristics in American democracy? Why or why not?
      2. Is rhetoric an art that seeks to teach people to be good and just, or is rhetoric simply a tool, in itself neither good nor bad, to use to persuade others to do what you want? Are tyrants like Adolf Hitler “good rhetoricians,” or are they misusing rhetoric? Explain your answer.
      3. What is the significance of the Myth of the Cave? Do you see examples in today’s society of people living in Plato’s metaphorical cave? Who are they, and why do you think they are like Plato’s cave dwellers?
      4. What do you think: Is it more important to be just or to appear just? Why?

      Note: This post should be substantial (containing at least 150-200 words).


      Reflection Paper 1

      Write a 1-page reflection of a minimum of 250 words (Times New Roman, font 12, double spaced).

      • Briefly state the differences between relativism and the dialectical method. Who do you think is correct, the sophists or Socrates and Plato? Both? Neither? Explain your answer.


      Discussion Board 2

      Respond to one of the following questions:

      1. In your view, does Aristotle’s logic do anything to undercut the relativism spawned by the sophists’ teaching of rhetoric? Explain your answer.
      2. Aristotle thinks that people have to be virtuous to be happy. Do you agree with him? Why or why not?
      3. Would Aristotle say that it is possible for an alcoholic to practice moderate alcohol use, or is virtue complete abstention in that example? Do you think moderation is an “all or nothing” proposition? Reference Aristotle’s thought when replying.
      4. We read that young people attracted to gang life are seeking “respect.” Write an Aristotelian critique of this motivation.

      Note: This post should be substantial (containing at least 150-200 words).


      Reflection Paper 2

      Write a 1-page reflection of a minimum of 250 words (Times New Roman, font 12, double spaced).

      • Assess Plato’s theory of the Forms from Aristotle’s standpoint. Is Aristotle correct? Give good reasons for your answer.


      Discussion Board 3

      Respond to one of the following questions:

      1. Does someone or something have to exist to be perfect? Why or why not?
      2. Why does Aquinas not accept Anselm’s ontological argument for God?
      3. A universal can be thought of as a definition of what makes something what it is. But what about particular examples that lack something included in the definition? Do universals exist? Explain and provide an example.
      4. Is the human will free? Why or why not?

      Note: This post should be substantial (containing at least 150-200 words).


      Reflection Paper 3

      Write a 1-page reflection of a minimum of 250 words (Times New Roman, font 12, double spaced).

      • Briefly summarize Aquinas’ argument from change, the first of his five ways. Apply one of d’Ailly’s objections to the argument. Do you agree with d’Ailly that human reason is limited regarding proofs of the existence of God? Explain your answer.


      Discussion Board 4

      Respond to ONE of the following questions:

      1. Aristotle argues that nature is teleological, in other words, that it has a purpose. However, the “new science” presented by Galileo, Newton, and Hobbes argues that nature is non-purposive. Which view of nature do you agree with and why?
      2. If you were in a state of nature, a primitive condition without civil government, would you help people or use your powers to fulfill your desires even if it meant not helping others? Do you think most people would help each other or act from self-interest?
      3. Hobbes thinks that the terms “good” and “evil” are relative to the individual. When we use those terms, we mean that good things bring us pleasure and evil things bring us pain. Do you agree with Hobbes that good and evil are relative terms, or do you think there is an objective standard to which the terms refer? Explain your answer with an example.
      4. Berkeley thinks that “to be is to be perceived.” But, if you leave the room you’re in and go to another one, do the things in the room you were in still exist? How does Berkeley answer this question, and do you agree with him? Explain.

      Note: This post should be substantial (containing at least 150-200 words).

      Reflection Paper 4

      Write a 1-page reflection of a minimum of 250 words (Times New Roman, font 12, double spaced).

      • Hobbes, Locke, and Berkeley each write about the human will. After researching those passages, briefly state whether each philosopher thinks the will is free or determined. In your opinion, who is correct? Explain your answer.


      Discussion Board 5

      Respond to one of the following questions:

      1. Using the quotation from Immanuel Kant as a cue, explain the notion of enlightenment. In your opinion, is the Enlightenment happening in present-day society? Are people today enlightened? Explain your answer by giving an example.
      2. Hume claims that if you don’t acquire an impression of something by the senses, you can’t have an idea of it. Imagine a unicorn. You could say you’ve never seen a unicorn but still have an idea of it. How would Hume reply? Do you agree with him? Why or why not?
      3. Do you agree with Hume that moral causation is illusory? Why do think as you do? Explain.
      4. Hume suggests that thinking about God, even that God must exist in order to be perfect, does not prove that God exists. According to Hume, only experiencing God proves that God exists. Have you ever seen or felt God in your life? What would Hume say if you told him you had? Explain.

      Note: This post should be substantial (containing at least 150-200 words).


      Reflection Paper 5

      Write a 1-page reflection of a minimum of 250 words (Times New Roman, font 12, double spaced).

      • Describe what Hume means when he says that reason is the slave of the passions. Do you agree with Hume that passion—in other words, sentiment—motivates people to act morally and that reason is enslaved to those passions? Explain your answer.


      Discussion Board 6

      Respond to one of the following questions:

      1. Kant thinks that human beings can know something, like mathematical truth, before experiencing it. Why does he think that? Give an example of what he means. Do you agree or disagree with him? Why?
      2. According to Kant, one knows something only as it appears to a human being, but the thing “in itself” lies beyond human consciousness. Is there something “behind” experience that we can’t know? Why or why not? If not, which alternative philosophical standpoint is preferable? Explain your answer.
      3. Kant states that only deeds done from duty apart from inclination have moral worth. The implication is that if one gives to charity because one feels sorry for the poor, one has not acted rationally—and therefore morally—from an understanding of one’s duty, but from inclination. Do you agree with Kant that moral deeds should not consider one’s feelings but only respect for the moral law? Why or why not? Explain your answer with an example.
      4. If you continually do your duty from respect from the moral law, you’ll be morally good. If you’re perfectly moral, you’ll be happy. But happiness won’t come in this lifetime because you won’t be perfectly moral in this lifetime. If striving for moral perfection isn’t to be in vain, it is rational to believe in God as the guarantor of happiness in a future life. Do you agree with this argument? Why or why not?

      Note: This post should be substantial (containing at least 150-200 words).


      Reflection Paper 6

      Write a 1-page reflection of a minimum of 250 words (Times New Roman, font 12, double spaced).

      • Kant thinks that everyone has a duty to act from respect for the moral law by obeying the supreme principle of morality. Kant thinks therefore that there is never a right to lie. If you agree with Kant, state why you think he is correct. If Kant is incorrect, give an example that shows that Kant’s position is absurd, in other words, that, in at least one instance, telling the truth would do more harm than good.


      Discussion Board 7

      Respond to one of the following questions:

      1. Have you ever desired something that you should not though you thought it would make you happy? If you answer yes, give an example of something you have desired that you should not have. What standards are you appealing to when you say you shouldn’t? If you answer no, do you think it’s okay to desire anything that makes you happy, or do you avoid things you shouldn’t desire? If the latter, what standards do you appeal to when refraining from such desires? Explain.
      2. Consider the following hypothetical statement: “If something makes me happy, then it should make everyone happy.” Do you think anything is wrong with the statement? Explain your answer.
      3. Imagine that you have the authority to execute an innocent man and that doing so will prevent many more deaths. Now imagine that you kill the innocent man, and most people are happy as a result. Is executing the man unjust according to the utilitarian? Do you think it’s unjust? Explain your answer.
      4. John Stuart Mill, though male, advocates for women’s rights. Do you think that someone who will never be able to experience the suffering of another person is qualified to speak up for that person? Would it be better for a woman instead of a man to speak about the struggles women face? Explain your answer.

      Note: This post should be substantial (containing at least 150-200 words). .


      Reflection Paper 7

      Write a 1-page reflection of a minimum of 250 words (Times New Roman, font 12, double spaced).

      • Think of present-day Western culture: films, music, advertisement. Do you see progress in the attempt to end what Wollstonecraft calls “sexual virtues”? Do you think instead that things are as bad or worse than what Wollstonecraft describes, or do you think that Wollstonecraft is wrong to claim the existence of “sexual virtues” to begin with? Give examples to explain your answer.


      Discussion Board 8

      Respond to one of the following questions:

      1. Nietzsche thinks that Greek tragedy helps us to understand our lives—even our setbacks, sufferings, and hardships—as works of art. Do you live your life as though it is a work of art? If you answer yes, give an example of how you do that. If no, what do you think Nietzsche would advise you to do to live your life as a work of art? Explain your answer.
      2. Apply Nietzsche’s ideas of the master morality and slave morality to present-day society. Who do you think is an example of the master morality? Of the slave morality? Explain your answer by referring to Nietzsche’s descriptions of the respective moralities.
      3. Nietzsche claims that “God is dead.” Do you agree or disagree with Nietzsche? Give evidence either that God is dead or that God is not dead. Alternatively, if you believe that God does not exist and therefore cannot have died, give reasons for why you think so.
      4. Reflect on the qualities Nietzsche praises in the overman: health, creativity, poesy, selfishness, and nobility of soul. Are there overmen in present-day society, or are the overmen to be found only in works of fiction? Give a living or fictive example, and defend your claim that that person or character is the overman.

      Note: This post should be substantial (containing at least 150-200 words)..


      Reflection Paper 8

      Write a 1-page reflection of a minimum of 250 words (Times New Roman, font 12, double spaced).

      • Decide on and write down a plan for how to justify your life by undertaking a meaningful project with others; support your plan by drawing from Simone de Beauvoir’s thought.

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      Compose an approximately 1,000 word Outline (i.e., approximately 4 pages of double-spaced 12-point font text). Address yourself to the overall Research Paper Assignment’s primary questions:

      • Identify the ethical dilemma, relationship, case, or issue/subject you are studying, and explain why it is significant, both to you and the U.S. national security community writ large.
      • Provide relevant background on your research topic. If any, what have been the prior decisions or ethical baggage that has affected the current reality of the relationship, dilemma, case etc.? What key constituencies, interests, or stakeholders are involved in your study and how do they weigh in on your subject?
      • How are ethical considerations present in your chosen topic, and which ethical principles are most at play in your chosen subject? You may shape the analysis of your topic through one or more relevant ethical viewpoints, including, eventually, your own.
      • Through your analysis, what problems or dilemmas in national security are you uncovering in your research, and how might the situation or condition be remedied? What possible solutions can you recommend to the national security community, or the broader public?
      • Finally, in your conclusion, how can what you have analyzed lead to improved practices, operations etc. in the relevant national security domain you investigated? Assume you are briefing someone senior, and lay out your assessments, conclusions and recommendations to the relevant national security community.

      Here is an acceptable format for this outline:

      • State your primary subject under investigation — a thesis research question, ethical dilemma(s), set of cases or claims, or animating question you are focused on, and why this topic is of relevance.
      • State your main points of background on the topic and those who are most interested in and affected by it.
      • State the ethical relevance of the subject — theories, principles, debates etc. at play in this work.
      • List out supporting examples, analyses, sources etc. you will use as evidence. In this supporting evidence area, you will identify at least 3 quality resources. For each one, you are to annotate or digest it and provide an APA citation for the work.
      • Identify relevant communities who might be interested in your analysis and any solutions or conclusions you have found so far regarding your subject. These can be tentative conclusions and recommendations to the national security community most applicable to your subject.

      Use phrases and complete sentences in the outline. The outline should include all the components that would be included in the paper and enough details for someone to understand what the paper will be about. If you have any questions, please let me know.

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      In this Outline assignment, flesh out the full research paper project in as much detail as possible, identifying the flow of topics, evidence and positions you plan to execute upon as well as fully annotating at least 3 original source materials within the outline. For each of these annotated entries, you are to cite the source in APA format and digest or annotate its content for use in a specific part of your outline (this means provide a brief summary of the work, identify how it relates to your topic and its location within your analysis, evaluate the quality of the source, and cite it properly in APA format).

      Compose an approximately 1,000 word Outline (i.e., approximately 4 pages of double-spaced 12-point font text). Address yourself to the overall Research Paper Assignment’s primary questions; these are here again for you to consider:

      • Identify the ethical dilemma, relationship, case, or issue/subject you are studying, and explain why it is significant, both to you and the U.S. national security community writ large.
      • Provide relevant background on your research topic. If any, what have been the prior decisions or ethical baggage that has affected the current reality of the relationship, dilemma, case etc.? What key constituencies, interests, or stakeholders are involved in your study and how do they weigh in on your subject?
      • How are ethical considerations present in your chosen topic, and which ethical principles are most at play in your chosen subject? You may shape the analysis of your topic through one or more relevant ethical viewpoints, including, eventually, your own.
      • Through your analysis, what problems or dilemmas in national security are you uncovering in your research, and how might the situation or condition be remedied? What possible solutions can you recommend to the national security community, or the broader public?
      • Finally, in your conclusion, how can what you have analyzed lead to improved practices, operations etc. in the relevant national security domain you investigated? Assume you are briefing someone senior, and lay out your assessments, conclusions and recommendations to the relevant national security community.

      Although it is a step often overlooked by students, outlining is a skill you should master in order to continue developing your writing skills and production of high-quality assignments. Outlines allow you to: look at the presentation of your material; find more research and fill in any gaps; check for appropriateness and consistency in positions you are taking, theories or principles of relevance used, and evidence you are mustering to support all; and, to get an overview of what you are trying to accomplish and for whom (i.e., the national security community). Your outline is a road map you will follow to write your draft of the whole paper due in module 6. If the map is not clear and accurate, you may find it difficult to get to the destination.

      Simply put, an outline is a hierarchical list of ideas, analyses and evidence you will use. It’s a tool for organizing your thoughts and a process of putting your points in order before you invest time in the full draft. A good outline can save hours of revision. Don’t worry too much about introductions and conclusions at this point; outline primarily the body of your research paper. Here is an acceptable format for this outline:

      • State your primary subject under investigation — a thesis research question, ethical dilemma(s), set of cases or claims, or animating question you are focused on, and why this topic is of relevance.
      • State your main points of background on the topic and those who are most interested in and affected by it.
      • State the ethical relevance of the subject — theories, principles, debates etc. at play in this work.
      • List out supporting examples, analyses, sources etc. you will use as evidence. In this supporting evidence area, you will identify at least 3 quality resources. For each one, you are to annotate or digest it and provide an APA citation for the work.
      • Identify relevant communities who might be interested in your analysis and any solutions or conclusions you have found so far regarding your subject. These can be tentative conclusions and recommendations to the national security community most applicable to your subject.

      The outline is a preview of your paper and should be approximately 4 pages in length. You can use phrases and complete sentences in the outline. The outline should include all the components that would be included in your paper and enough details for someone to understand what your paper will be about. If you have any questions, please let me know.

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      German philosopher Immanuel Kant is one of the greatest figures in the history of Western philosophy. Greatly influenced by Hume, Kant wondered why all previous attempts to articulate a convincing metaphysical theory had failed. He even suggested (p. 157) that those who had previously written about metaphysics had entered a “battleground peculiarly suited for those who desire to exercise themselves on mock combats…” In other words, past metaphysicians have been wasting their time!

      Kant is searching for a scientific way to speak of what he calls a priori knowledge, that is, knowledge that does not simply depend on empirical observations. He wants to have scientific knowledge about reality beyond what the senses tell us because, as Hume showed, what the senses actually tell us is very limited. How to get beyond that? Kant suggests what he calls the Copernican revolution in philosophy, which means we must completely change our reference point and our sense of the order of knowledge in a manner parallel to the way Copernicus changed our point of reference in cosmology. “We must therefore make trial to whether we may not have more success in the tasks of metaphysics, if we suppose that objects must conform to our knowledge.” (p. 157) What does this mean? It means that Kant believes that the mind is, so to speak, programmed to think in certain ways, which he calls categories. We do not see causality or time or space and many other categories of metaphysical reality, but the empirical objects we do perceive we consider according to these categories of a priori knowledge. An easy and obvious way to understand what Kant is suggesting is to think of your computer programs: they are pre-set so that the information you put into them will be organized in a certain way. The information does not go in randomly. Similarly with the human mind. So in this way, metaphysical knowledge (a priori knowledge) is possible. The mistake of the empiricists like Hume, according to Kant, is to think that the mind simply records al the sensory knowledge, somewhat passively. On the contrary, the mind actively shapes the input.

      You should read the first few sections of the Kant (pp.156-162) and try to make some sense of this. Kant is a notoriously difficult writer, but his work changed everything. Give some thoughts and answers to these questions:

      1. Explain what Kant means when he says: “But though all our knowledge begins with experience, it does not follow that it all arises out of experience.” (p. 159)

      2. How does Hume influence Kant? What does it mean to describe Kant’s work as a “Copernican revolution” in philosophy?

      focus on one point, make a clear developed discussion.


      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      A) choose Social justice issue to research which is : “RACIAL PROFILING”

      will attach link of article/ebook with a description about it below. https://nyupress.org/9781479894291/deadly-injustic…

      Description:
      The murder of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin and the subsequent trial and acquittal of his assailant, George Zimmerman, sparked a passionate national debate about race and criminal justice in America that involved everyone from bloggers to mayoral candidates to President Obama himself. With increased attention to these causes, from St. Louis to Los Angeles, intense outrage at New York City’s Stop and Frisk program and escalating anger over the effect of mass incarceration on the nation’s African American community, the Trayvon Martin case brought the racialized nature of the American justice system to the forefront of our national consciousness. Deadly Injustice uses the Martin/Zimmerman case as a springboard to examine race, crime, and justice in our current criminal justice system. Contributors explore how race and racism informs how Americans think about criminality, how crimes are investigated and prosecuted, and how the media interprets and reports on crime. At the center of their analysis sit examples of the Zimmerman trial and Florida’s controversial Stand Your Ground law, providing current and resonant examples for readers as they work through the bigger-picture problems plaguing the American justice system. This important volume demonstrates how highly publicized criminal cases go on to shape public views about offenders, the criminal process, and justice more generally, perpetuating the same unjust cycle for future generations. A timely, well-argued collection, Deadly Injustice is an illuminating, headline-driven text perfect for students and scholars of criminology and an important contribution to the discussion of race and crime in America.
      Description:
      In the United States, racial profiling affects thousands of Americans every day. Both individuals and institutions—such as law enforcement agencies, government bodies, and schools—routinely use race or ethnicity as grounds for suspecting someone of an offense. The high-profile deaths of unarmed people of color at the hands of police officers have brought renewed national attention to racial profiling and have inspired grassroots activism from groups such as Black Lives Matter. Combining rigorous research with powerful personal stories, this insightful title explores the history, the many manifestations, and the consequences of this form of social injustice.
      Behnke, Alison Marie, Racial Profling: Everyay Inequality. Twenty-First Century Books (2017)
      B) Your submitted proposal (Microsoft .docx) needs to contain the following:
      • Summarize the Social Justice Issue you plan to investigate.
      • Explain why this issue interests you. What personal experience do you have, if any, with this issue, and how does this personal experience shape your ethical views on this issue.
      • Explain your initial ethical views on this issue that you hope to argue in your essay. PLEASE NOTE: you are writing an argumentative essay, so you must argue for some ethical position (see guidelines below on your thesis statement)
      • What ethical theories and/or political philosopher that you learned in the course will you use in your final essay. For instance, Utilitarianism, Rights Theory, Distributive Justice. John Rawls. Why?

      RUBRIC criteria for proposal to be ACCEPTED:

      SOCIAL JUSTICE ISSUES AND ETHICAL QUESTION:

      Proposal clearly states social justice area and ethical question to consider. Issue can be addressed using the resources available in the class and library resources.

      STATEMENT OF INTEREST OR PERSONAL EXPERIENCE:

      Proposal includes a statement of interest or personal experience that explains why the student is writing about the issue.

      COURSE RESOURCES:

      Proposal includes a statement of the ethical theories and/or political philosophy, primary sources etc. learned in the course that the student expects to use in the essay

      SOURCES TO USE FOR REFERENCES TO BACK UP IDEAS.

      “What is Justice?: Crash Course Philosophy #40.” YouTube, uploaded by CrashCourse Dec. 19th, 2016. [10:14] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0CTHVCkm90&t=423s

      “Utilitarianism: Crash Course Philosophy #36,” YouTube, uploaded by CrashCourse Nov 21st, 2016. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a739VjqdSI&t=2s [10:00]

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      • PART I: short-answer questions (20 points)

      Choose TWO out of the following four passages. Identify the quotations and briefly discuss their significance for the larger works from which they have been taken.

      For each of your answers, indicate the Option Number of the passage you’ve picked. Please do not pick more than two passages: if you do, Khobaib will choose just two of your answers at random to grade.

      See the passages here (this will open a new tab)

      PART 2: Essay 1 (40 points)


      Choose ONE out of the following essay prompts to answer.

      Option 1A) The kallipolis, the plan for a perfectly just city presented in Plato’s Republic, has drawn numerous critical comparisons to contemporary forms of totalitarian politics. Is Plato a totalitarian and anti-democratic thinker at heart? How might Plato answer his critics?


      Option 1B) How does Aristotle understand nature, and what role does it play in his political thought?

      Remember to indicate the Option Number of the prompt you’ve chosen.

      Your essay should develop one coherent and persuasive argument. This means it should

      • have a clearly identifiable thesis statement: a sentence, customarily found in the introductory paragraph of an essay, that serves as a summary of the specific position you are taking on the question being asked
      • in fact make a case for the argument advertised in the thesis statement, drawing relevant evidence from the reading we’ve done so far for POL S 187 to support your claims
      • is well-organized and has a logical flow
      • have a conclusion

      Ideally, it should also

      • engage critically with the course material and essay topic, demonstrating nuanced and accurate analysis
      • lend some original insight into the question it seeks to address. It should answer the question, “So what?”

      PART 3: Essay 2 (40 points)


      Choose ONE out of the following essay prompts to answer.

      These prompts will give you the opportunity to discuss Plato and Aristotle together in the same essay. The two latter prompts will give you the option, if you wish, of discussing Plato and Aristotle in conjunction with another POL S 187 author, or of swapping out either Plato or Aristotle for another POL S 187 author.

      Option 2A) Compare Plato’s and Aristotle’s respective visions of the best constitution, paying special attention to Aristotle’s criticisms of his former teacher. What are their main points of disagreement, and where do their ideas converge?

      Option 2B) Is being a good citizen the same thing as being a good person? Discuss with reference to two or three authors we have encountered in POL S 187. If you answered Option 1A in the previous section, one of these authors must be Aristotle. If you answered Option 1B, one of these authors must be Plato.

      Option 2C) What is justice? Discuss with reference to two or three authors we have encountered in POL S 187. If you answered Option 1A in the previous section, one of these authors must be Aristotle. If you answered Option 1B, one of these authors must be Plato.

      Remember to indicate the Option Number of the prompt you’ve chosen.

      Your essay should develop one coherent and persuasive argument. This means it should

      • have a clearly identifiable thesis statement: a sentence, customarily found in the introductory paragraph of an essay, that serves as a summary of the specific position you are taking on the question being asked
      • in fact make a case for the argument advertised in the thesis statement, drawing relevant evidence from the reading we’ve done so far for POL S 187 to support your claims
      • is well-organized and has a logical flow
      • have a conclusion

      Ideally, it should also

      • engage critically with the course material and essay topic, demonstrating nuanced and accurate analysis
      • lend some original insight into the question it seeks to address. It should answer the question, “So what?”
      • NOTE: you must cover both Plato and Aristotle between your two essays.

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      Prompt

      Is standpoint theory the best remedy for one-dimensional thinking? (800-1,000 words)

      • Organize your ideas into paragraphs when appropriate
      • Please number your sections like the prompt outline below
      1. Thesis (defend/challenge/qualify): Standpoint theory is the best remedy for one-dimensional thinking.
      2. Using only the assigned readings, explain the main differences between the two versions of standpoint theory: dialectical materialism and postmodernism.
        • How do these views define truth and how do they determine what’s true?
        • Using only the assigned reading, analyze one short passage for each version of standpoint theory.
          • For example, analyze one passage from dialectical materialism (Mao or the CRC) and one passage from postmodernism (Beauvoir or Nietzsche).
          • Not citing from the assigned reading will result in a loss of points.
            • Do not cite from the links on the Metaphysics & Epistemology Handout.
      3. Is standpoint theory the best remedy for one-dimensional thinking?
        1. If yes, then explain your reasoning with specific, real-world examples.
          • You must explain the strongest argument from your opposition. Acknowledge a potential weakness in your view and respond to this objection.
          • Review the lectures, slides, and the Metaphysics & Epistemology Handout.
        2. If not, then explain which epistemology that we’ve studied is the better remedy.
          • Be sure to explain how this view defines truth and how it determines what’s true.
          • Use specific, real-world examples.
          • Review the lectures, slides, and the Metaphysics & Epistemology Handout.
      • Write your word count at the end.

      Guidelines & Formatting

      • This is NOT a research paper. No outside sources allowed. Please only consult the assigned reading.
        • Cite class reading using in-text citations (Author’s-Last-Name ##) You may cite the page number or the section number for the chapter. Many of our readings do not have page numbers, so writing the section number or title is acceptable.
          • Email me if you have questions about citing passages.
        • There is no need for a Works Cited page for this assignment.
        • Please do not cite from the lecture slides–cite from the assigned reading instead.
      • 12 point font, Times New Roman, 1-inch margins, double spaced

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      The papers should be 4-5 pages, with standard formatting (double spaced, 12 pt font, 1” margins, page numbers

      A quick note about the topics—the sub-questions are designed to help you think about possible ways to develop your ideas for the paper. You do not have to answer all of them, and certainly not in the order they are presented or to the same degree.They are merely a set of questions to fill out the topic—i.e., to get you started thinking about what the paper topic question is really about and how you might go about structuring your response.

      NO Outside sources from the internet can be used. Only what I provide to you

      • Hume and Smith, among others, locate our sympathetic tendencies at the center of morality and moral motivation.It is one of the main emotions that explains why we tend to feel a natural concern for the happiness and well-being of other human beings.Yet, on a daily basis, we see examples of human behavior that seems to exhibit a complete and utter disregard for the happiness and well-being of others—from pulling out a camera to film a violent hate crime rather than try to help, to instances of cancel culture and social media bullying, or (as I discussed in lecture), to merely passing a person by whose wheelchair was stuck in a poorly patched sidewalk.This has lead some to question just how stable and reliable our natural sympathetic tendencies are.Kant, in particular, argues that sympathy and other natural (empirical) altruistic emotions may be praiseworthy in many respects, but the variability that they exhibit show them to be unsuitable to serve as moral motives.Who do you agree with and why?In answering, be sure to explain what Smith thinks sympathy is and how it works.Then use Smith’s account to analyze the example of the person in the wheelchair (or a related example—one in which the majority failed to feel sympathy).What explains why I felt sympathy for the individual, why others failed to feel sympathy, and what difference that makes as to how important sympathy might be to morality (in general—i.e., in explaining why it is that we might be moved to help others when it is of no benefit to ourselves).For those of you who have a background in Kant’s Groundwork (or see the connection with the “material practical principles” in the second Critique), you may include some of Kant’s reasons for rejecting empirical emotions (our inclinations) from serving as moral motives.

      (Hint: the gist of this question is to get you i) to explore the complexity of sympathy—the object of the emotion, the subject of the emotion, the process of imaginative identification that it requires, the potential voluntariness of or control over the emotion, the purpose or benefit of feeling it—whether it is merely good to feel sympathy or is it also good because it helps us understand a situation better so that we can act appropriately, and so on, ii) to get you to consider its positive and negative aspects of the emotion, like what limits our ability to imaginatively identify with others, what prevents us from even trying (or wanting to try), can it be cultivated/trained, how might it contribute to our overcoming prejudices and biases and how might it serve to reinforce them, etc., and iii) to come to a decision of your own as to whether sympathy is the right sort of thing we should be looking to in order to explain our moral behavior.There is a lot to explore here—so say something substantive about Smith and his theory of sympathy, then explore what he has to say about it, make the discussion your own, develop the points that you think are most interesting, and of course,)

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      Context: At the end of Naming and Necessity, Kripke discusses the thesis that mental states and processes identical with, and so nothing more than, physical states and processes. One such supposed identity is (2), which he compares to (1).

      1. Heat is mean molecular kinetic energy.

      2. Pain is C-fiber stimulation.

      Here, we treat the nouns as designating kinds (rather than their instances), and ‘is’ as expressing identity. Both sentences are aposteriori, and so may appear contingent. Kripke argues that the seeming contingency of (1) is an illusion. He takes ‘heat’ and ‘mean molecular kinetic energy’ to be rigid designators, in which case (1) must be necessary, given that it is true. The illusion of contingency is attributed to the fact that we identify heat by the sensations it causes in us. Thus, he thinks, ‘heat’ is associated with “the reference-fixing-description,” ‘the cause of sensation S’. The illusion that (1) is contingent comes from confusing this description with a synonym for ‘heat’, and thereby confusing (1) with (1*).

      1*. The cause of sensation S = mean molecular kinetic energy.

      But ‘heat’ isn’t really synonymous with ‘the cause of sensation S’. Once the non-equivalence of (1) and (1*) is recognized, the contingency of (1*) no longer masks the necessity of (1).

      Kripke assumes that, like the terms in (1), those in (2) are rigid, and hence that (2) is necessary, if true. This time, however, he sees no way of dismissing the impression of contingency as an illusion. Unlike ‘heat’, which we use to designate the cause of a certain sensation, ‘pain’ is used to designate the very sensation we notice. We don’t say to ourselves: “What a horrible sensation! Let’s use ‘pain’ to designate whatever causes it.” Instead, ‘pain’ designates the sensation, which we identify directly, without appeal to properties that anything else could have. Because there is no descriptive reference-fixer to confuse with a synonym for ‘pain’, there is no contingent claim to confuse with (2). Since the intuition that (2) is contingent can’t be dismissed as an illusion, Kripke suggests that (2) isn’t necessary, and so isn’t true.

      Scott Soames criticized this argument in 2006. Nevertheless, he maintained that Kripke’s observation that being a pain is an essential property of anything that has it constitutes a plausible objection to leading versions of the mind-body identity theory, such as that of David Lewis.

      Question: In at least 2000 words, explain and evaluate the views of Kripke, Soames, and (very briefly) Lewis on these points.

      Readings to be used in the paper:

      S. Kripke, Lecture 3 of Naming and Necessity, pp. 148-155. http://people.exeter.ac.uk/sp344/naming_and_necess…

      Soames, “Kripke on Mind-Body Identity; https://dornsife.usc.edu/scottsoames/selected-publ…

      D. Lewis, “Mad Pain and Martian Pain,” Collected Papers, Volume 1. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5b714a23620..

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      Please read carefully, everything is mentioned in the question.

      Basically, I need to submit a proposal thesis paper by 4/30 11:59 pm based on the PST time zone.

      And draft version by May 21 and final thesis paper by May 28 however as it is mentioned to get 25 extra credit points I would appreciate that if you can deliver by May 21.

      Please request reasonable bids so I can work with many assignments like this afterward.

      Thank you.

      ————————-

      Thesis Paper Topics

      Choose one of the following topics to write for your thesis paper. Your assignment is to write 2 full pages (maximum of 3 pages), double-spaced, Times New Roman, font size 12, arguing in favor or against the philosopher’s thesis. Your paper must contain three arguments in favor or against the thesis in the body paragraphs. Your paper must have a proper introduction, thesis, and conclusion. With the exception of the texts used in our class, no outside research is necessary. Outside sources are optional and must be properly cited and referenced to avoid plagiarism. This assignment must be your original work and must adhere to the requirements of this assignment. It must not be recycled from a previous class assignment, however, you are allowed to integrate ideas you have learned from other philosophy courses to write your paper. Extra credit (25 points) will be assigned for submitting your paper one week before the official due date of your topic.

      1. Plato viewed human nature as being selfish, therefore, the majority is unfit to rule society. Do you agree or disagree with his thesis?

      2. Aristotle argued that happiness is objective (we need to fulfill the human function, have the external goods, and pursue the virtues), while the Dalai Lama and Eric Weiner argued that happiness is subjective. If you argue in favor of the subjective side, cite the case studies from the Dalai Lama’s book and form Eric Weiner’s book. Which side do you agree with and why?

      3. Kant’s theory is known as the categorial imperative, which consists of two parts. The first formulation is “act in such a way that your action can be made into a universal law.” The second formulation is “do not use people as a means to an end, always treat people as an end in themselves.” It also consists of perfect duties, which are: do not kill innocent people, do not lie, and do not break a promise. Do you agree with Kant’s moral theory?

      4. Mill’s moral theory known as utilitarianism, which states that “the right thing to do is to maximize happiness for the greatest number of people.” Do you agree with Mill’s moral theory?

      5. Carol Gilligan wrote about male biasness in psychological theories and presented the ethics of care as an alternative to previous moral theories, such as the categorical imperative and utilitarianism, which she deemed as being too strict, black and white, and not always practical. Discuss the ethics of care and state whether you agree or disagree with this moral theory.

      6. The God arguments are: cosmological argument, teleological argument, ontological argument, and Pascal’s Wager. Choose and discuss one of these arguments and explain whether it does an adequate job of proving God’s existence.

      7. The evil defenses to explain why there is evil and suffering while there is a God who is all-good, allknowing, and all-powerful are: ontological defense, knowledge defense, free-will defense, soulbuilding/ideal humanity building defense, and finite God defense. Choose and discuss one or more of these arguments and discuss whether the argument(s) provide an adequate explanation for the existence of evil in the presence of a God who is all-good, all-knowing, and all-powerful.

      8. Hobbes argued that the state of nature is a state of war and that everyone is against everyone else. For this reason, we must do whatever it takes to protect ourselves. The implication of this is a strong, centralized government to keep people under control and out of the state of nature. On the other hand, Rousseau argued that the state of nature is peaceful rather than war-like; people are compassionate beings by nature and are willing to help others in need in the state of nature. Who do you agree with and why?

      ———————-

      1st Step – Thesis Paper Proposal (DUE: April 30th by 11:59 pm)

      I have to upload a thesis paper proposal. In your proposal, state your thesis, for example, “I agree with Plato’s thesis that human beings are selfish by nature, therefore, democracy is not the ideal political system,” and provide a summary of the main arguments that you will cover in your paper to either support the philosopher’s thesis or negate the philosopher’s thesis. Also list a working bibliography (the books and/or journals that you intend on reading), if any. List each one in proper bibliography form. Outside resources are purely optional.

      2nd Step – Thesis Paper Rough Draft Submission (DUE: May 21 by 11:59 pm)

      Use this area to submit a rough draft of your term paper if you’d like me to review this, but do so no later than one week prior to the due date of the final draft.

      Final Step – Thesis Paper (DUE: May 28 by 11:59 pm)

      Upload your thesis paper here. Refer to the thesis paper assignment PDF for the due dates. If you turn in your paper one week prior to your scheduled due date, you will receive 25 extra credit points on this assignment.

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized

      Philosophy Question

      • View one or more pre-selected documentary films
      • Locate an important issue in environmental ethics [it will be up to you to identify the specific issue in question];
      • Take a stand on the issue (pro, con, or “middle-of-the road”) [this will be expressed in your thesis statement];
      • Support your position with reasons and evidence [this will be the main body of the paper where the “research” comes in];
      • Identify one or more opposing views and respond to/rebut them [this will be your “objections and replies” section, which also may require research].

      .

      Your assignment is to write a philosophy paper (approximately 1700 words minimum to 2100 words maximum) that incorporates what you have learned in the course with your own view on a particular issue within one of several broad areas of inquiry and research in environmental ethics. The areas, which correspond to topics covered in the course, are:

      • Use and Abuse of Natural Resource
      • Energy: Pollution and Renewables
      • Animal Rights and Moral Standing
      • Ecofeminism and Social Justice
      • Political Ecology
      • Climate Change

      This is a research paper, and part of your research will be to watch one or more documentary films on your topic of choice (within these areas). In the “Course Resources” tab in the left navigation menu, you will find a selection of over 40 documentary films on topics in each of these areas. It is recommended that you view several of these, in different areas, to determine which topic most interests, excites, agitates, or even provokes or angers you. You may count these documentary films as external sources in your paper. They are all recent (most are from 2013 and later), informative, well produced, and well worth viewing. They are housed in the National University Online Library in the “Films on Demand” resource. You should be able to view the film embedded in the Course Resource content item without having to navigate away from the course. When prompted by the NU Library site for ID and a password, enter your current National University 9-DIGIT ID number and your 6-DIGIT (MMDDYY) birth date.

      Your specific task here is to find an issue in environmental ethics that is addressed in the film and take an original stand on that issue. This will be the thesis of your paper. Some of these documentaries are mostly factual reporting, and while issues may be raised, the filmmaker(s) may not take a particular stand on any specific issue. In other cases, you will clearly detect a particular point of view and position taken on various issues. Some of these films feature philosophical debates, and these are the best examples of arguers taking stands on opposing sides of an issue. In any case, decide what the issue in question will be in your paper, and determine where you will stand on that issue: pro, con, or middle-of-the road, on that issue. Part of your grade on the paper will be based on the originality and significance of the issue you raise. Be sure to clearly state your thesis early in the paper (first or second paragraph).In the body of the paper, you will be supporting your thesis as well as responding to and rebutting opposing views.

      Once you have introduced the topic and stated your thesis in the introductory section of the paper, you will begin the work of constructing your argument(s) in support of your position as well as analyzing and evaluating the arguments of possible views in opposition to or in conflict with your view. You should be able to derive a great deal of evidence for your arguments and evaluations from the film(s) you watch, but you are of course welcome to do as much additional outside research as you need to do to establish grounds for your supporting arguments as well as your rebuttals of opposing views. The paper should integrate the philosophical concepts and ethical principles covered in the writings of at least three of the authors featured in the course Recommended Readings into the body of the argument or discussion of the thesis. In sum, the paper should refer to at least three sources taken from the Recommended Readings for the course and two additional external sources, one of which must be chosen from among the documentary films compiled for you here. You may choose a second documentary film for your second external source, or you may use a standard secondary source such as a book, article, reference text, or appropriately selected web page.Thus you should cite a minimum of five sources in the paper. There is no maximum limit, but do not include any works in your works-cited page that you do not actually mention or discuss in the body of your paper.

      Be sure to use proper documentation and citation formatting (MLA, APA, and CMS styles are all acceptable). Wikipedia may not be used as one of the five required sources, but a Wikipedia entry may be used as an additional source. (Note that Wikipedia can be an excellent guide to other sources.)

      Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount

      Posted in Uncategorized