by admin | Dec 11, 2022 | Philosophy
this is the main question that needs to be answered.
1. Living without free will. Suppose that freedom and responsibility are mere illusions
(perhaps for the reasons Galen Strawson gives). How should we respond to this discovery? How should it affect our relationships with other people? How should it affect
our social practices, including the practice of criminal punishment? For discussion,
see Derk Pereboom, Living without Free Will (Cambridge University Press, 2001).
ive attached a pdf of my textbook and the derk perboom paper.
you cant use any sources outside of the two I sent you. thank you
by admin | Dec 11, 2022 | Philosophy
1.Name and define the five elements of a good argument.
2.What is a normative argument?
3.What is an abusive ad hominum?
4. Explain the difference between a necessary and sufficient condition by using an example. (Not the one given in the online reading)
5.Explain the Is-Ought Fallacy.
6.Write a short argumentative essay to respond to one of the two topics below:
1. Should children be given their meals at school or is it the responsibility of parents to provide them with healthy meals?
2. Why is it or is it not important for colleges to have affirmative action in place (re: admissions)?
by admin | Dec 11, 2022 | Philosophy
1.Name and define the five elements of a good argument.
2.What is a normative argument?
3.What is an abusive ad hominum?
4. Explain the difference between a necessary and sufficient condition by using an example. (Not the one given in the online reading)
5.Explain the Is-Ought Fallacy.
6.Write a short argumentative essay to respond to one of the two topics below:
1. Should children be given their meals at school or is it the responsibility of parents to provide them with healthy meals?
2. Why is it or is it not important for colleges to have affirmative action in place (re: admissions)?
by admin | Dec 11, 2022 | Philosophy
One of the ways philosophers share their knowledge is by collecting short essays about the most important ideas in their fields of study. For the final project for this class, each student will need to deeply consider and craft a final essay on one big idea within the hundreds of ideas in this course.
For the short reflective essays (~750 words), we will pause in our material (no new readings) after each major section of the course (Virtue Ethics, Universalist Ethics, or Utilitarianism) to make time to reflect further on the ideas that have been most important to you in the module. Your peers will read your work and respond to your ideas (not as editors, but in dialogue as thinkers.) You should help each other a lot in the process. This project is actually a lot of fun, because everyone in the class gets to choose their own focus and follow their passions.
Everyone will have the same final deadline for their expanded essay: You will need to compose both the reflection and expansion formally, and your final paper will be ~2000 words in length. If you would like feedback and the opportunity to revise, please turn in your paper via email. I am happy to give extra-credit for extra-work, and I am open to students adding sections to their papers if they meet the requirements below. There will be a late penalty of 10% for every 12-hours late, but I am happy to grant Incompletes or support you in other ways as needed.
Reflective Essay Instructions—->Analytic Revision
Some of you wrote longer reflection essays and may have already completed aspects of the outline. The ‘a’ points are for the reflection; the ‘b’ parts of the extension and revision instructions.
Outline for Reflective Essay (part a) and Outline for Final Essay (part b)
Part 1a: Define
Define the big idea, key concept, or terminology. Include important examples and counterexamples used by our authors. ONLY use references from our course materials. Parenthetical references are fine; no bib needed.
Part 1b: Refine with textual evidence
You will need to locate 3-4 quotes from our readings refining the definition of the big idea, and explain the idea in greater detail across 3-4 paragraphs. This is your chance to revise any misunderstanding from your reflection presentation, but also to specify more closely how the philosopher’s specific big idea is different from the common sense definition of the concept chosen (ex. Aristotle on friendship vs general usage of friendship.)
For the final paper, you will be graded for accuracy in your definition and the quality of your textual support.
Part 2a: Reflect on place in class
Discuss why you think this idea was assigned in any Ethics class and this class in particular.
Part 2b: Put into dialogue with another philosopher, author, or film from the class.
To demonstrate an analytic (not reflective or speculative) understanding of our materials, you will need to integrate the work of another text/film from the class. There are several options for developing your analytical writing: 1) show how another text extends or expands the idea you chose, 2) show how another text points to an oversight (missing) point that should be added to the big idea, OR 3) show how another text helps us in understanding an important ethical problem or question raised by the big idea. You will need to use at least 3-4 quotes or scenes from the other author/film as textual evidence to support your analysis. Again, you will be assessed according to the quality and accuracy of the connections you draw. It helps to almost role play a dialogue between the author of the big idea and another author from the class. What would they say to one another if they met in real life and had a conversation about the big idea?
Part 3a: Impact
Explain why you chose to focus on this idea and what is important about it to you. Write in the first person and as if you are trying to explain the impact of this idea. You may want to also raise questions or describe possibilities for applying this idea.
Part 3b: Impact as the class concludes.
This section should be written in the first-person and should discuss what the idea means to you now that we have finished the class. How will it stay with you after the end of the semester? This section is still reflective, but it is a summary reflection that draws together your understanding of the entire semester. This section should comprise no more than 250-500 words of your paper. Essentially, you need to follow the directions above and turn in polished college-level writing (not first draft prose) to do well on this assignment. Excellent work earns an A, very good work a B, etc. I expect you to incorporate insights from the discussion of your paper and suggestions from my feedback into your revised and expanded essay.
Below is the information on “King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail”; the topic that you wrote for my short reflective essay, and I’ll also be attaching my short reflective essay below.
BACKGROUND
King connects to Kant, because each shares a commitment to universal moral principles. Like Kant, King’s universalism rested in natural law and its belief in a higher law of justice that went beyond the laws of worldly nations. But this was not his only universalism. He also believed in the universal connectedness of humanity, he might call this brotherhood or simply beloved community grounded in love. Unlike Kant, this love did not have to be justified by reason and ignore emotion. Instead, universal love was worthy in and of itself as a moral ideal and a moral feeling. For King, you didn’t have to prove universal love, it was a gift available to all of humanity, despite our failures and despite hate. We just had to embrace it. This was glorious and joyful. It is the case that King was very motivated by his Christianity, but it is also the case that much of his philosophy of nonviolence arose from Gandhian principles and he believed in unity regardless of religion. Love and justice were his two guiding universal principles.
Like Kant, King is very preoccupied with the status of the law. In the reading for this week, he is responding to those who tell him that nonviolent civil disobedience is not moral, because 1) it involves breaking the law, and 2) it incites social unrest. As you read through King, mark out each point in which he responds to a criticism telling him that he is immoral. It is in those responses, he sketches a contrasting universal morality that is just, democratic, and committed to the love of humanity.
THE PLAN
First, watch This video should familiarize you with a more complex picture of King than is presented in the popular media. Watch twice if needed.
Read King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail [King, Jr.] (upenn.edu) Even if you have read this classic text before, be sure to read it again slowly as a model for deontological or universality ethics.
Read Handout on Kingian Nonviolence.(attached)
Respond to the prompt below.
PROMPT
One of King’s famous injunctions from the “Letter from Birmingham Jail” is that “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial ‘outside agitator’ idea.” This might sound like an appealing idea, but it has some huge implications. It is absolutely universalist in its commitment to justice globally.
The six principles of non-violence from our handout also are formulated in universalist terms.
I think you can use “Ida B.Wells and the Red record” for part 2b of the paper. This is the information on this topic:
Note: Be sure to read/listen to the materials in order, because I am providing background info which will allow deeper engagement. We are very lucky that a rich archive of resources has been created in connection to a 2021 PBS project remembering Wells, so the content this week includes very important archival materials. However, I also want to encourage you to use self-care in reviewing the materials and let me know if you are concerned about specific triggers related to the topic. I have provided alternative texts and options as needed in the past.
BACKGROUND and MATERIALS
Read this hand-out: Guide to Wells and King (attached)
Watch the 2021 WTTW film: Ida B. Wells: A Chicago Stories Special Documentary.
Follow up by reading ONE of the resources below.Read Exposing the “Thread-Bare Lie”: How Ida B. Wells Used Investigative Journalism to Uncover the Truth About Lynching | Ida B. Wells | Chicago Stories | WTTW Chicago. This includes primary materials of images and writing from Wells. Some of the images are graphic, but you have to click-through to view them.
Read Joy James’s “The Quartet in the Political Persona of Ida B. Wells.” James is a contemporary Black feminist philosopher who unfolds the importance of Wells as a political thinker in 4 parts.
Read Tommy J. Curry, “The Fortune of Wells.” Curry is also an influential contemporary philosopher; here he connects Wells to the intellectual tradition of militant resistance to racist violence. This reading also helps us expand our understanding of the power of friendship in moral development.
PROMPT
All of our readings have placed great emphasis on the importance of justice and the rule of law. These are seen as vital to the principles of humanity (Kant) and the defense of our mutual respect, dignity, and fundamental autonomy and freedom as persons. These are also seen as vital in our fostering of King’s beloved community, a vision of justice, but also of love and non-violence. He was despised for holding out hope for true integration, the protection of all, and a path of growth for every child not marred by hate. Finally, Wells was driven by principles of truth, fairness, justice before the law, self-determination, and self-defense. Wells allied with a great number of white antiracists and had deep, intimate friendships, but she first wanted Black Americans to speak dangerous truths, demand justice, and organize for their own protection and felt this was the precursor to meeting the white establishment as true equals and from a position of power.
Please write the whole paper in very simple language.
NO plagiarism should be found.
Read through all the instructions and materials given and write the paper accordingly.
Write the paper in first person.
Attached “Big Ideas Reflection.pdf” is my Reflective paper. This is what you are based on to change and expand.
Also, look at the comments of my professor and please make the necessary changes.
This paper should be 2000 words of length.
Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
by admin | Dec 11, 2022 | Philosophy
.Choose either Topic A or Topic B. To answer these topics completely, it takes a minimum of 2 pages – 8-10 paragraphs. A complete thoughtful answer is more important than word count.use this book as reference please Vaughn, Lewis. Philosophy Here And Now: Powerful Ideas In Everyday Life, Fourth Edition, Oxford University Press, 2021
Topic A:
What is Martin Gardner’s argument for the objectivist view of art? Do you agree? Why or why not?
Use Vaughn’s textbook to help you explain Gardner’s theory and its strengths and weaknesses. Choose an object, performance, or piece of writing as an example, and explain whether Gardner’s theory would classify the object as Art. Do you agree with objectivism about Art or do you find another theory more convincing? Defend your point of view.
Topic B:
Explain Locke’s view of human nature. Use details from the textbook to support your description. Explain Hobbes’s view of human nature, again using details from the textbook to support your description. How do Locke’s view of human nature and Hobbes’ view differ? Which do you think is more accurate? Explain, and defend your answer.
by admin | Dec 11, 2022 | Philosophy
Choose either Topic A or Topic B. To answer these topics completely, it takes a minimum of 2 pages – 8-10 paragraphs. please use this book as reference : Vaughn, Lewis. Philosophy Here And Now: Powerful Ideas In Everyday Life, Fourth Edition, Oxford University Press, 2021.
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:
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.268
“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.265)
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?
