In the course of your essay, you will want to talk about Plato’s ideas of the Divided Line, the

In the course of your essay, you will want to talk about Plato’s ideas of the Divided Line, the Allegory of the Cave, and the Simile of the Sun. You will want to compare these ideas with Aristotle’s ideas about the 10 Categories and the significance of substance as well as Aristotle’s ideas of the 4 Causes.

Fully Developed Introduction

· Introduce Philosophers

· Provide thesis

Develop Plato’s Theory of Knowledge

· Divided Line

· Allegory of the Cave

· Simile of the Sun

Aristotle’s Theory of Knowledge

· The 10 Categories

· The Significance of Substance

· The 4 Causes

Compare and Contrast How these philosophers

· Are alike

· Are different

Conclusion

· Summarizes the philosophers views

· Provides closure to the thesis

MLA or APA Formatting

· Title page

· Reference Page

· In-text citations

· Correct spacing and margins

· Proper punctuation and grammar

that death is not bad for the one who dies.

In his “Letter to Menoeceus,” Epicurus argues that death is not bad for the one who dies. (It may be bad for other people, but Epicurus is not here concerned with that case.) What is Epicurus’ argument for that conclusion? Give his specific reasons for thinking that death is not bad for the one who dies. Set these out as clearly as you can. Then, when you have done that, try to formulate a criticism of this argument: take up the position of someone who thinks that death can be bad for the one who dies, and try to figure out where (if anywhere) in his argument Epicurus went wrong.(Tip: Try to think of a case where being dead is bad for the one who dies, then explain how that shows Epicurus’ argument to be flawed, if indeed it is.)

METAPHYSICS Weekly Literature Discussion

Instructions provided by instructor-
Using the attached reading, please write a summary that discusses the following section of the reading:
A 200-250-word summary of the following part of the assigned reading “The Elements of Being”: from the last paragraph on p. 60 (the paragraph starts with “Turning now”) up to the end of the first paragraph on p. 62 (the paragraph ends with “less definite universal.)”).
Guidelines for summary:
– must only discuss the assigned section for the reading
– must show a good understanding of the reading – so you should read the whole paper (but only discuss the specified section in the summary)

A description of the fictional agency setting and types of services provided at this agency A

A description of the fictional agency setting and types of services provided at this agency

A description of the client system (depending on the client scenario you selected—micro, mezzo, or macro)

An explanation of the presenting concern

A description of the client session scene in which you implement the GIM step and practice skills you have selected for working with this client system

A description of the techniques you used to implement the GIM step and the practice skills you selected for the client interaction that occurs between you, as the social work intern, and the client(s)

A description of the visual cues or non-verbal communication that both the social worker and the client exhibited during the interaction that support the GIM step and practice skills you selected

An identification of specific practice techniques/skills demonstrated

Short answer essay. There are a total of four questions. Each question need 200 words. But the answer have

Short answer essay. There are a total of four questions. Each question need 200 words. But the answer have to be derived from the 4 articles that I have posted. So each question will be one article

For an example
: For each assigned reading you select, write a single paragraph of no more than 200 words that is responsive to (i) and (ii). An example paragraph that attempts to be responsive in this way is given below for Alt-Wellwood’s claim that the Earth is flat. That paragraph is an extreme example designed to illustrate the genre of response that we’re looking for. You need not strongly doubt the author’s claim in order to feel out possible objections or counter-examples, and you must be generous in characterizing the author’s claim that you criticize.

Specify, in your own words, one claim that the author makes. How do they defend it? Provide an example that the author’s claim is intended to cover and how.
Specify an objection or counter-example to the author’s claim. How might the author wish to respond? How problematic is it for the author’s claim?
Example paragraph (196 words): Alt-Wellwood claims that the Earth is flat. She says that, unless this were true, one could not explain why the Earth appears so. The author defends her claim by pointing out that none of her friends have been convinced by any of the purported evidence to the contrary, including photographs or videofeed of the Earth taken from space in which it appears round. However, it isn’t particularly difficult to explain why the Earth looks flat from its surface, by simple appeal to properties of the human visual system and the sheer size of the Earth. Other types of evidence go unaddressed. For just one example, the private company Starlink launches satellites that provide internet access to a global base of around 250,000 customers. If the Earth were not round, this industry would not be possible. The author could respond by saying that Starlink’s executives, employees, and customers are all in on a vast conspiracy designed to deceive humanity. However, this is implausible, given the number of people that would have to be in on it, and how widely entrenched, firmly established, and successful orbital science is. Correspondingly, there is little reason to believe Alt-Wellwood’s claim.

Part I Instructions and Prompt Suppose you are chatting with a friend who laments having been “forced” by a

Part I Instructions and Prompt
Suppose you are chatting with a friend who laments having been “forced” by a parent to learn to play the flute. This friend thinks time spent on flute lessons and practicing the flute could be better spent learning to play the violin, which, apparently, this friend finds much more interesting.

As you listen to this friend, you think about d’Holbach and James. Which one helps you best explain your friend’s situation and response to that situation? In other words, which thinker has, in your view, the best way to explain what’s happening? (Feel free to generate some further details about this friend to support your view.)

Be sure your post clearly and accurately explains one of the three thinker’s views, as it applies to your supposed friend’s situation. This includes introducing and explaining significant terminology and summarizing the basic argument. Here are some guidelines to that end:

Explain what it is that makes d’Holbach a determinist, as well as what are the implications of this view for your friend.
Explain how and why James argues for indeterminism, what that means, and how it applies to your friend.

Let us recall that in the Euthyphro, Socrates asks for an “account” of why something is holy, pious, or

Let us recall that in the Euthyphro, Socrates asks for an “account” of why something is holy, pious, or moral. He does not, and cannot accept, an explanation in terms of just “whatever the gods love”, or whatever God tells you to do. For, if at the end of the day, all that you have for morality is that “it’s what pleases God or the gods” then you have the problem of having always to depend upon someone else — presumably never yourself! — to “know” what to do, how to act, and in general how to live. Is this any way to live — always having to depend upon someone or something (like a holy text) else in order to know what to do, how to act and how to live? Socrates dares to want to know — for himself! — what makes something holy, pious, or morally right. If he can know that — the standard — then we doesn’t need anyone else to tell him what to do in order to be moral, holy, pious or good in the eyes of the gods, for with this knowledge, he can do it for himself! So, the first step, Socrates suggests, in being moral or holy is to acquire the knowledge of what holiness or morality really is. That knowledge leads to the prize — being a good, and perhaps also a happy, person.

In this text you’re reading, and in this “Preface” in particular, Kant talks about the need for a “pure moral philosophy” (see p. 2 of “Preface”). Do you think that this “pure moral philosophy” leads us to the kind of “independence” and freedom that I’m talking about above — something we see Socrates striving for?

What do you think about this independence — this call for becoming self-reliant, and self-dependent when it comes to knowledge, truth and, finally, morality itself?

Let us recall that in the Euthyphro, Socrates asks for an “account” of why something is holy, pious, or

Let us recall that in the Euthyphro, Socrates asks for an “account” of why something is holy, pious, or moral. He does not, and cannot accept, an explanation in terms of just “whatever the gods love”, or whatever God tells you to do. For, if at the end of the day, all that you have for morality is that “it’s what pleases God or the gods” then you have the problem of having always to depend upon someone else — presumably never yourself! — to “know” what to do, how to act, and in general how to live. Is this any way to live — always having to depend upon someone or something (like a holy text) else in order to know what to do, how to act and how to live? Socrates dares to want to know — for himself! — what makes something holy, pious, or morally right. If he can know that — the standard — then we doesn’t need anyone else to tell him what to do in order to be moral, holy, pious or good in the eyes of the gods, for with this knowledge, he can do it for himself! So, the first step, Socrates suggests, in being moral or holy is to acquire the knowledge of what holiness or morality really is. That knowledge leads to the prize — being a good, and perhaps also a happy, person. In this text you’re reading, and in this “Preface” in particular, Kant talks about the need for a “pure moral philosophy” (see p. 2 of “Preface”). Do you think that this “pure moral philosophy” leads us to the kind of “independence” and freedom that I’m talking about above — something we see Socrates striving for? What do you think about this independence — this call for becoming self-reliant, and self-dependent when it comes to knowledge, truth and, finally, morality itself?

Philosophy Question

Write a 1500-2000-word, thesis-driven essay on one of the following topics in the intersection of world literature and philosophy. Writing a good philosophy paper usually requires significant time and effort. This task is manageable if you write the paper in stages. I propose the following timetable.
Start working on an outline or a draft today or within the next few The sooner the better.
Finish your outline or draft by 11:59 PM on 10/13 and submit it on Canvas>Assignments>Paper One for a peer review. (At this stage, I will not be grading your draft or outline but will check that you have completed the draft and peer-review assignment.) Failure to participate in the peer-review session will result in a 5-point deduction. Also, note that I’d be happy to look at an outline or a précis of your paper during office hours, but I cannot read drafts if you’d like me to grade your paper blindly.
Revise your draft in light of your peer’s feedback and submit it by 11:59 PM on 10/23/22 and submit it on Canvas>Assignments>Paper One. You may use your one-day extension; no permission or notification is required. Canvas will automatically timestamp your submission, and I will track whether you’ve used your extension.
Your paper should be anonymized and typewritten using a legible font and font size. I strongly discourage you from consulting any external sources in crafting your paper, as this is not a research paper. If you must, be sure to explain precisely how you have used them. Your paper should be anonymized and typewritten using a legible font and font size. Any citation format (APA/MLA/Chicago, etc.) is acceptable as long as it is used consistently throughout. You need not give your paper a title; it suffices to indicate to which prompt you are responding.
Topics:
1. Knowledge and IgnoranceWe have it on the authority of Socrates that the unexamined life is not worth living (Apology 38a5–6). Yet, conventional wisdom would seem to recommend a different attitude; it tells us that ignorance is bliss. In Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex, the king of Thebes confronts a choice between these two alternatives. In your view, does knowledge have any intrinsic value, or do you agree with Tiresias that knowledge is dreadful when it brings no gain? Defend your answer by using ample textual evidence from Oedipus Rex and one or more philosophical theories studied in the course. In your response, please address the following considerations.
(i) Do you believe that Oedipus decides correctly in choosing to pursue the truth about his origin, even if such knowledge implies his doom?
(ii) Suppose that Oedipus is not the king of Thebes. Should his decision to inquire into his past remain unchanged, or is it permissible for Oedipus, the commoner, to believe in his innocence without sufficient evidence?
(iii) Consider at least one objection to your position and reply to the objection.
2. Moral Luck Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex presents us with an exemplary demonstration of the phenomenon philosophers dub moral luck. In your view, can Oedipus be held responsible for his vile deeds and tragic end, especially since he appears to be a victim of moral luck on several dimensions? Defend your answer by using ample textual evidence from Oedipus Rex and one or more philosophical theories studied in the course. In your response, please address the following considerations.
i. Explain moral luck and why it is problematic for moral assessment.
ii. Clarify how, exactly, moral luck is operative in Oedipus Rex.
iii. Consider at least one objection to your position and reply to the objection.
3. Death and Immortality
The Epic of Gilgamesh contains many valuable insights into the human condition. Perhaps most prominent among these is the human struggle against death and aspiration for immortality. In your view, are Gilgamesh’s fear of death and longing for immortality justified? Defend your answer by using ample textual evidence from The Epic of Gilgamesh and one or more philosophical theories studied in the course. In your response, please address the following considerations.
i. Analyze the cause of Gilgamesh’s fear of death.
ii. Assess the significance of the epic’s conclusion in light of Gilgamesh’s inevitable failure to obtain immortality.
iii. Consider at least one objection to your position and reply to the objection.

Philosophy Question

Write a 1500-2000-word, thesis-driven essay on one of the following topics in the intersection of world literature and philosophy. Writing a good philosophy paper usually requires significant time and effort. This task is manageable if you write the paper in stages. I propose the following timetable.
Start working on an outline or a draft today or within the next few The sooner the better.
Finish your outline or draft by 11:59 PM on 10/13 and submit it on Canvas>Assignments>Paper One for a peer review. (At this stage, I will not be grading your draft or outline but will check that you have completed the draft and peer-review assignment.) Failure to participate in the peer-review session will result in a 5-point deduction. Also, note that I’d be happy to look at an outline or a précis of your paper during office hours, but I cannot read drafts if you’d like me to grade your paper blindly.
Revise your draft in light of your peer’s feedback and submit it by 11:59 PM on 10/23/22 and submit it on Canvas>Assignments>Paper One. You may use your one-day extension; no permission or notification is required. Canvas will automatically timestamp your submission, and I will track whether you’ve used your extension.
Your paper should be anonymized and typewritten using a legible font and font size. I strongly discourage you from consulting any external sources in crafting your paper, as this is not a research paper. If you must, be sure to explain precisely how you have used them. Your paper should be anonymized and typewritten using a legible font and font size. Any citation format (APA/MLA/Chicago, etc.) is acceptable as long as it is used consistently throughout. You need not give your paper a title; it suffices to indicate to which prompt you are responding.
Topics:
1. Knowledge and IgnoranceWe have it on the authority of Socrates that the unexamined life is not worth living (Apology 38a5–6). Yet, conventional wisdom would seem to recommend a different attitude; it tells us that ignorance is bliss. In Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex, the king of Thebes confronts a choice between these two alternatives. In your view, does knowledge have any intrinsic value, or do you agree with Tiresias that knowledge is dreadful when it brings no gain? Defend your answer by using ample textual evidence from Oedipus Rex and one or more philosophical theories studied in the course. In your response, please address the following considerations.
(i) Do you believe that Oedipus decides correctly in choosing to pursue the truth about his origin, even if such knowledge implies his doom?
(ii) Suppose that Oedipus is not the king of Thebes. Should his decision to inquire into his past remain unchanged, or is it permissible for Oedipus, the commoner, to believe in his innocence without sufficient evidence?
(iii) Consider at least one objection to your position and reply to the objection.
2. Moral Luck Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex presents us with an exemplary demonstration of the phenomenon philosophers dub moral luck. In your view, can Oedipus be held responsible for his vile deeds and tragic end, especially since he appears to be a victim of moral luck on several dimensions? Defend your answer by using ample textual evidence from Oedipus Rex and one or more philosophical theories studied in the course. In your response, please address the following considerations.
i. Explain moral luck and why it is problematic for moral assessment.
ii. Clarify how, exactly, moral luck is operative in Oedipus Rex.
iii. Consider at least one objection to your position and reply to the objection.
3. Death and Immortality
The Epic of Gilgamesh contains many valuable insights into the human condition. Perhaps most prominent among these is the human struggle against death and aspiration for immortality. In your view, are Gilgamesh’s fear of death and longing for immortality justified? Defend your answer by using ample textual evidence from The Epic of Gilgamesh and one or more philosophical theories studied in the course. In your response, please address the following considerations.
i. Analyze the cause of Gilgamesh’s fear of death.
ii. Assess the significance of the epic’s conclusion in light of Gilgamesh’s inevitable failure to obtain immortality.
iii. Consider at least one objection to your position and reply to the objection.

Article Questions

Answer the following questions with the following criteria in mind: a) how closely you respond to what the question requires, b) evidence of knowledge of the material, and c) coherence.
Q1: What is Hume’ problem of causation? How does the problem of induction follow from this? Support your answer with either a familiar or unfamiliar example (of a case where something is inferred from a present fact and supposed to stand in a cause-effect relationship).
Q2: What is Hume’s bundle theory of the self? Describe this view briefly in your own words.
Q3: What does Kant’s “Copernican revolution” consist of, i.e., how is it a revolution over previous rationalist and empiricist approaches in philosophy?
Q4: Kant’s famous phrase goes: “Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind”. Explain this statement briefly.

Week 3 – Build a Moral Compass Instructions Instructions: Using the material on moral compasses from weeks 1 and

Week 3 – Build a Moral Compass
Instructions
Instructions:

Using the material on moral compasses from weeks 1 and 2, write a paper of no less than 500 words that accomplishes the following:
In a section titled “Theories” identify the 1-4 moral theories you will use to build your compass (deontological, utilitarian, common good, virtue, etc.) along with a short documented definition for each theory. [“documented” in the sense of citing and referencing your source.]
In a section titled “Explanation” explain for each theory how it would help you make what you feel would be the right decision and in what situations (ex. Using deontology at work to ensure the company’s policies are kept and its reputation is upheld; Using care ethics at home as a way to be equitable with the kids, etc.).
In a third section titled “Compass Applied” chose one topic from the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics {https://www.scu.edu/ethics/}(under “Ethics Spotlight” –> “vaccination ethics”) or another pressing ethical situation you or others you know are facing at the moment and use ether Framework for Ethical Decision Making (Markkula or Brown), walk through the steps to make an ethical decision and justify what you decide is the moral action to take in this situation.
Be sure to be clear on which of the two frameworks you are using. Be sure you are clear on what you are doing. See the attached templates for the best way to address this assignment. You are not compelled to use them, but you should look at them to be sure you are on the right track. The content is the same, just the formatting on each is different.

https://press.rebus.community/intro-to-phil-ethics/chapter/arent-right-and-wrong-just-matters-of-opinion-on-moral-relativism-and-subjectivism/

https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/a-framework-for-ethical-decision-making/

https://www.brown.edu/academics/science-and-technology-studies/framework-making-ethical-decisions

https://press.rebus.community/intro-to-phil-ethics/chapter/can-we-have-ethics-without-religion-on-divine-command-theory-and-natural-law-theory/

Let us recall that in the Euthyphro, Socrates asks for an “account” of why something is holy, pious, or

Let us recall that in the Euthyphro, Socrates asks for an “account” of why something is holy, pious, or moral. He does not, and cannot accept, an explanation in terms of just “whatever the gods love”, or whatever God tells you to do. For, if at the end of the day, all that you have for morality is that “it’s what pleases God or the gods” then you have the problem of having always to depend upon someone else — presumably never yourself! — to “know” what to do, how to act, and in general how to live. Is this any way to live — always having to depend upon someone or something (like a holy text) else in order to know what to do, how to act and how to live? Socrates dares to want to know — for himself! — what makes something holy, pious, or morally right. If he can know that — the standard — then we doesn’t need anyone else to tell him what to do in order to be moral, holy, pious or good in the eyes of the gods, for with this knowledge, he can do it for himself! So, the first step, Socrates suggests, in being moral or holy is to acquire the knowledge of what holiness or morality really is. That knowledge leads to the prize — being a good, and perhaps also a happy, person.

In this text you’re reading, and in this “Preface” in particular, Kant talks about the need for a “pure moral philosophy” (see p. 2 of “Preface”). Do you think that this “pure moral philosophy” leads us to the kind of “independence” and freedom that I’m talking about above — something we see Socrates striving for?

What do you think about this independence — this call for becoming self-reliant, and self-dependent when it comes to knowledge, truth and, finally, morality itself?

1. Your WIT, What Do I Think, is short, reflective work  Each WIT is to exhibit your critical analysis skills,

1. Your WIT, What Do I Think, is short, reflective work  Each WIT is to exhibit your critical analysis skills, your organizational skills for writing,  and your creative thinking skills.  You will write a 2-3 page reflection for each WIT.  Please put your WIT in MLA format, double space, and use a 12-point font size. You must cite the text or any source you draw upon as you complete the WIT assignment.  It is best to meet your WIT after engagement with the text material for each chapter.

WIT 1: Introduce yourself to Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave”.  Book VII of his Republic, it speaks deeply to the ignorance of human beings.  Here’s an animated version that concisely and vividly brings the allegory to life: watch the video and answer the questions above.
                 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2afuTvUzBQ

2 Now that you’ve acquainted yourself with Plato’s allegory, think about its meaning.  What’s it an allegory for?  What lessons are we to take away from the allegory’s rich symbolism?  Here’s an excellent lecture that expounds upon and explains some of the lessons to be learned in Plato’s allegory
 

If you need additional videos or written analysis, YouTube and many other sources provide many options for further review.

After giving this profound piece some time and thought, compose a WIT expressing your understanding of the Cave and its implications for your own critical thinking and wisdom in life.

Specifically, tell about a cave you have been in by answering these questions:

What was your metaphorical cave?

Who put you there  (you or someone else)?

What specifically happened that forced you to leave the cave?

How did you feel as you were being “freed” from the cave, at that moment?

What truth did you discover after being forced out?

Have you tried to rescue others from their caves (Yes/No. Why or why not?)?

Watch the video and answer the questions above
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBPd7getIcM

Philosophy Question

iew the video “Killing Animals for food,” in the Pages tab. The video doesn’t actually present an argument directly. Instead, it asks a question and implies that one side of the issue has no good answer to that question. Your job is to explain the implied argument in the video and to say whether Steven Luper, in Chapter 7, provides a reasonable reply/counterargument to the video.
Please use paragraph breaks in your writing. Two line breaks will do it.your essay should be in the 600-700 word range. If you go a little over, that’s okay, but don’t go crazy. And of course, whenever you cite or paraphrase, you should indicate that you are doing so. It’s important.
Here is the link for the video
9:15
Now playing
Watch later
Watch later
Add to queue
Add to queue

The Task: All assignments are only accepted in Word. All assignments are automatically run through Turnitin. In 3 –

The Task:

All assignments are only accepted in Word. All assignments are automatically run through Turnitin. In 3 – 4 full pages of text (not going over 5 pages), this does not include your title page if used or your resource page, in academic formatting you will:

Throughout the term, you have been introduced to a variety of philosophers and philosophies that still shape culture and understanding. Based upon the information you have obtained through your studies in our course you are to:
Identify a film that, through a plot line, a scene, a section of dialogue, effectively illustrates a key philosophical notion of your choice of topic. For example, your film might illustrate existentialism, critical theory, Marxism, Phenomenology- virtually any philosophical school of thought, or philosophical idea discussed in the course. Once you’ve identified your film you should
Give a synopsis of the movie (no longer than two full paragraphs).
Indicate clearly the notion you’re exploring and how the film supports that idea/belief of your topic choice. Be sure the reader can see how the film supports some aspect of the chosen philosophy, even if he or she has not seen the movie.
The Details
The paper is to be 3 – 4 full pages of text (does not include title page if used or the resource page), not exceeding 5 pages.
You should support your discussion by engaging reliable scholarly sources. Use A minimum of three reliable resources in addition to the film you’ve selected.
Your paper is to be completed using your degree path formatting style. This includes in-text citations and a resource page.
A Few Examples
To get you started, here are a few movies to consider:
“Examined Life”
“Bladerunner” (either one)
“Being In The World”
“Groundhog Day”
Here is a link to more movie ideas if you are seeking more choices. Keep in mind all may not be related to our course topics. Select here to access the link.

Before you submit, please thoroughly edit your writing to ensure it is professional and academic.

The paper is clearly written, addresses all objectives, and mastery of the subject.
The paper has a clear thesis, introduction, and a conclusion. Well developed paragraphs and smooth transitions. Keep in mind that a proper expository thesis is a sentence or two stating exactly what will be covered in the paper and in what order.
That all paraphrases, summaries and quotations are properly cited with accompanying references. Keep in mind that citations are NOT just for quotations.
The paper contains well built and varied sentences, no spelling errors, and correct punctuation and grammar. Appropriate vocabulary without colloquialism or slang. Concise but vivid language.
Resources:

Word is available free for students. If you need assistance contact
Tutor.com – free to students and information is in the syllabus.
Our Library

The movie Momento : We have to try and piece together what is going on in the same way Leonard does, and our knowledge is based on limited empirical evidence such as Polaroids, tattoos and notes-to-self. The film works as a platform for viewers to look at and consider aspects of the branches of philosophy known as the philosophy of mind, and personal identity.

Class,

Epistemology is the study of knowledge. It is a method that seeks to discover what is known and how it is known. This method helps evaluate the world around us and explains why a human mind relates to reality and how a person distinguishes what is valid and invalid. Knowledge and reality are correlated through philosophical reasoning, although derived from two differing essential properties: the mind and body. Early eras of philosophy heavily relied on knowledge (mind), as opposed to the utilization of sensory experiences (body) to formulate realism, also known as the rationalism era. As sciences progressed, philosophers restructured the concept that all knowledge was derived from other means, human senses, and experiences. This was known as the empiricism era.

Lenny, the movie’s main character, relies heavily on the “facts” to rationalize what is “true or valid.” He had suffered from a mental injury and decided it was best to conduct his fact-collecting method by relying on Polaroids, tattoos, and notes, serving as a kind of surrogate memory. Although rationalizing facts are the foundation of knowledge, the experience can be considered a more reliable source to enhance one’s ability to reason and search for truth. Maintaining an epistemic position when recollecting a memory is crucial because it allows the mind to conceptualize knowledge and reality. His notes and strategies don’t work because although photos and notes can be foundational to show a depiction of recollection, it is still imperative to know the personal experience that supports that depiction. Memories help you remember the feelings you had when recalling moments in life. This is proven when Lenny writes that Teddy cannot be trusted on a polaroid. Lenny then believes Teddy is his wife’s killer. He made the assumption based on the fact that Teddy could not be trusted. Without his memory or ability to reexperience the moment of writing it down, he fails to provide the “why” intent of mistrust. We later learn that Lenny was the real cause of his wife’s death, and he intentionally manipulated his “facts” so Teddy would always be a target to escape guilt. At least, this is one way to interpret it.

This concept brings similarities to texting. Texting can provide the groundwork for what one person is factually saying. Still, without the ability to conceptualize (experience) how that text is being sent or the sender’s intent, many interpretations can be made from this “factual-based” text. This supports the idea that facts can be manipulated even though the character felt memories were more susceptible to distortion.

-Monique

You read the reading and then there is a question I answer My teacher’s question prompt: Hume argues that

You read the reading and then there is a question I answer My teacher’s question prompt: Hume argues that morality must be based on emotion and not on reason.
According to Hume, morality derives from emotion (sentiments) and not from reason. Reason plays a secondary, if still important, role in moral experience. Why is emotion the basis of morality and not reason?

The guidelines are this:

1. No quotations

2. Summarize and explain in your own words.

3. Do not paraphrase or describe what the author says, except in so far as it is directly relevant to answering the prompt.

4. Correct grammar.

5. Follow prompt for each week exactly.

6. Create a word document and upload for the assignment in question.

7. Length: 3 full paragraphs (5 complete sentences per paragraph).

FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES FOR THIS TYPE OF ASSIGNMENT: Hume argues that morality must be based on emotion and not

FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES FOR THIS TYPE OF ASSIGNMENT:

Hume argues that morality must be based on emotion and not on reason.

According to Hume, morality derives from emotion (sentiments) and not from reason. Reason plays a secondary, if still important, role in moral experience. Why is emotion the basis of morality and not reason?

1. No quotations

2. Summarize and explain in your own words.

3. Do not paraphrase or describe what the author says, except in so far as it is directly relevant to answering the prompt.

4. Correct grammar.

5. Follow prompt for each week exactly.

6. Create a word document and upload for the assignment in question.

7. Length: 3 full paragraphs (5 complete sentences per paragraph).

Write a rough draft of a 3-4 page argumentative paper in which you address one of the three prompts

Write a rough draft of a 3-4 page argumentative paper in which you address one of the three prompts below. The exercise is intended to test how well you have understood and engage with the readings, as well as provide you with practice developing an argument and engaging with opposing points of view. You should submit your rough draft on Canvas by Wednesday Oct. 12 11:59pm and come to class the next day to discuss your work with peers. The final draft will be due on Canvas on Th. Oct. by 11:59pm

Prompt #1: Which metaphysical account of race do you find most persuasive–Racial Anti-Realsim/Skepticism, Political Constructivism, Cultural Constructivism, Basic Realism or some other theory not discussed in class (e.g. Quayshawn Spencer’s biological account of race)? In addition to defending a specific theory of race, be sure to address at least two opposing perspectives.

Prompt #2: What is “passing” and why does Benn-Michaels see as a problem for social constructionists of race like Haslanger and Jeffers? Can the social constructivist provide an adequate account of passing?

Format Specifications Miscellaneous Remarks
You final drafts should be 3-4 pages long, double spaced, font size 11-12, font Time New Roman or Arial, with standard 1-inch margins and must include a title. Whenever you quote or paraphrase someone else’s work, you most provide in-text citation by citing the author and page number in parentheses. Failure to cite counts as plagiarism and may earn you a 0 depending on the severity of the case. If you cite sources I did not assign, then you must include a works cited page; otherwise, you don’t have to. I do not encourage you to use outside sources, but I also do not prohibit their use as long as you cite them. I encourage you use sub-section titles throughout your paper, but doing so is not required. You are strongly encouraged to write in the first person.

Writers Choice Essay

⁞ Instructions:

After reading all of Chapter 10, please select ONE of the following primary source readings:
“Active and Passive Euthanasia” by James Rachels (starting on page 292)
-or-
“Voluntary Active Euthanasia” by Dan. W. Brock (starting on page 295)
-or-
“Killing and Allowing to Die” by Daniel Callahan (starting on page 304)
-or-
“Euthanasia for Disabled People?” by Liz Carr (starting on page 306)
-or-
“Why Doctors Must Not Kill” by Leon R. Kass (starting on page 308)

Write a short, objective summary of 250-500 words which summarizes the main ideas being put forward by the author in this selection.

quote/cite your sources. All quotes, references, and ideas lifted from any source – including internet sources MUST be properly cited in MLA/APA format.

Title: Doing Ethics
Edition: 6th
Author: Lewis Vaughn
Publisher: W. W. Norton