Expert Answers

Discussion 4 Remember the argument from conceivability that Kagen reconstructs in Chap.4 of Death. In PowerPoint #7 we found reasons to be suspicious of premises (1) and (2). We then turned to premise (3) and asked if it is true. A3 (1) I can conceive or imagine that my mind exists without my body existing. (premise) (2) If I can imagine that my mind exists without my body existing, then it is logically possible that my mind exists without my body existing. (premise) (3) If it is logically possible for my mind to exist without my body existing, then my mind and body must, in fact, be distinct items. (premise) (4) My mind and body are, in fact, distinct items. (conclusion from (1) - (3)). Premise (3) ultimately derives from a more general assumption called "GA." GA: If it is logically possible for an item O1 to exist without item O2 existing, then O1 cannot equal O2. For your discussion assignment, please do the following: 1. Relying on lecture notes and your own reflections and perhaps some of Kagen's suggestions in Chap. 4 of his book Death, try as best you can to justify the reasoning behind this general principle GA. 2. Then, say whether or not you take this justification to be adequate. That is, do you take GA to be reasonable to accept on the basis of this reasoning? Why or why not? 3. Then say whether or not (1), (2), and (3), even if all true, would put you in a position to assert the truth of (4). To this end, it might be easier for you to think about premise (3) of another argument with exactly the same logical structure as (A3), i.e., A4 (1) I can imagine a world where Samuel Clemens existed, but Mark Twain didn’t. (premise) (2) If something can be imagined, then it is logically possible. (premise) (3) If it is logically possible for one thing to exist without another, then even in the actual world those two things must indeed be different things. (premise) (4) Mark Twain and Samuel Clemens must be different things (even in the actual world). (conclusion from 1-3) Suppose that the situation in which this case arises is very much like the one in which Kagen’s “evening star/morning star” example arises: I am contemplating the argument in a state of ignorance regarding the complete properties of Samuel Clemens. Suppose that all I know about Samuel Clemens is that he grew up in Hannibal, Missouri, apprenticed with a printer, worked as a typesetter and eventually became a master riverboat pilot on the Mississippi. On the other hand, suppose that all that I know about Mark Twain is that he was the author of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn. This is a tough assignment, so I want to you think about it and speculate about it, but not to fret over it. We are doing this for purposes of discussion, not testing. d Discussion 5 Consider the following thought experiment To begin the thought experiment, imagine that you are the subject of some mental event--perhaps you are experiencing an intense pain. Now imagine that one of your neurons is replaced by a silicon chip prosthesis that has the exact same input/output profile as the neuron it replaces. Now imagine that, one by one, the rest of your neurons are swapped for silicon prostheses. Thus, at the end of the procedure the organ in your head, which was previously made of lipid and protein neurons, is now entirely composed of silicon neuronoids. Now, consider three possible outcome of this procedure. I. Your consciousness shrinks to nothing, but your behavior remains completely unchanged. II. Your consciousness remains completely unaffected, but you lose the ability to engage in any behavior at all. III. Both your consciousness and behavior remain completely unaffected. Now, consider each of the tree preceding possible outcomes in turn and answer the following questions: Q1: What, if anything, would this outcome tell you about the truth (in turn) of 1) behaviorism 2) identity theory 3) functionalism Q2: Now ask yourself the following question. Would you ever allow such a procedure to be performed on you (suppose that a silicone brain would be more resistant to degradation over time than your organic brain)? Why or why not? Discussion 6 Go to the philosophical thought experiment “You’re Being Tortured in the Morning” at http://www.philosophy experiments.com/bodyswap/Default.aspx and follow the menu directions. The setup for the thought experiment is a little convoluted, so make sure you understand the parameters before diving in. The exercise poses a series of four questions concerning one scenario and one question relating to a second scenario, where both scenarios are designed to gauge your intuitions concerning the role that thoughts and memories play in preserving personal identity across time. When you have done the exercise, answer the following: 1. How did you answer each question posed in the exercise? 2. Did the automatic feedback responses built into the exercise accurately characterize the consistency or inconsistency of the intuitions you expressed in answering these questions? 3. Did the exercise affect your views about memory's role in preserving personal identity over time? If so, how?

Instructions and Advice This essay question is adapted from your recent discussion forum work. Now that you've had a bit of practice engaging with the text and your classmates in a discussion forum environment, I've got some ideas for how you can start to think more formally about your written work. This should be especially useful to you as you prepare your essay. Leverage what you’ve written already, consult your classmates’ posts and replies, and bear in mind my comments on your discussion work. When constructing your essay, think of your reader as someone who needs your help; you are your thinker’s representative. Your essay will serve as a tutorial: Be sure your essay is fully formed, i.e., introductory remarks, summaries, and analyses. When formulating your position, be sure to make your argument clear. Organize your thoughts so they are expressed on paper as a coherent whole. Given the constraints of the exam format, you’ll probably write a minimum of four, and a maximum of six paragraphs. These should ‘hang together’ in a way that’s easy to follow; there is a clear progression of ideas. Write intelligibly: sentences must be grammatical and cohesive. Choose your words carefully. Remember, you’re constructing ideas for your reader. Orient your essay around a single point you want to make, using your thinker(s) concepts and argument(s) as evidence. Be sure to present, describe, and explain significant concepts and their relations: Describe important concepts and lines of reasoning, e.g., ‘He says this, he argues that.’ Explain important concepts and lines of reasoning, e.g., ‘This is what he means by this and that.’ Connect important concepts and lines of reasoning to your thesis, e.g., ‘So, this is why…’ In addition, do not use material from any outside (i.e., secondary) sources, and do not use quotes from the primary source material longer than several words; I want to read what you have to say about the text. When you do quote the text, however, be sure to enlist the appropriate punctuation. As a reminder, be sure to construct grammatical sentences that: introduce and describe important terms or concepts; summarize the central (or relevant) argument; explain the important terms or concepts; explain the central (or relevant) argument Please save your work as a Word document or similar program, so that you have a copy of your work for your records. You can then "paste" your completed essay in the text field. Your completed essay should run between (no fewer than) 1000 and (approximately) 1200 words. I have provided a scoring rubric that, in addition to the information above, may help you orient your thinking. Essay 3 Prompt Choices Choose ONE, and only one(!) of the following essay choices. Please be sure to identify your choice when you enter your essay in the submission field: What does freedom (or the lack thereof) have to do with a meaningful life? Choose one (and only one) thinker (d'Holbach or James) to discuss in connection with one (and only one)thinker (Schopenhauer, Sartre, Nagel, or Wolf). What does personal identity have to do with a meaningful life? Consider the thinkers we read in Week 12: Yao (on behalf of Confucianism) or Perry, hooks, or Ladau. What is one important conceptual point of contact between one (and only of) of them in connection with one (and only one) thinker we read in connection with the question of life's meaning (Schopenhauer, Sartre, Nagel, or Wolf)?

Please answer all five questions. You may answer with however many words you see fit. Most students prefer to write one to two paragraphs per question, but it is up to you, so long as you feel you have provided a complete response. 1) Philosophy of God David Hume says, “There is no being whose nonexistence implies a contradiction.” State as clearly as you can why Anselm and Descartes disagree. (Hint: Anselm and Descartes each have their own unique “proofs” for God’s existence, each of which relies on this existence as a logical necessity.) Consider the debate between the two sides (Hume versus Anselm and Descartes). On which side do you fall? Or are you unsure? Explain. Despite Darwin’s and Hume’s criticisms of teleological (purpose-driven) accounts of nature, it is in fact difficult to look at certain natural phenomena (such as the keen eyesight of an osprey) without assuming that such phenomena are structured purposefully; that is, created for a natural purpose or goal (to spot fish from high up in the air). Is this intuition enough to support the teleological proof of God’s existence in your judgment? Explain. 2) Philosophy of Freedom What does Sartre mean by “monstrous freedom”? Explain his concept of the “vertigo of possibility.” What are the “guardrails against anguish” that we construct in order to protect us from our own freedom? Does Sartre think that our freedom is infinite, or limited? Does he think our freedom is comforting to us, or anxiety-inducing? Explain. According to “soft determinists,” or as they are sometimes referred to, “compatibilists,” the reality of determinism does not prevent the existence of freedom. These two concepts—determinism and freedom—would appear to be mutually exclusive, but compatibilists argue that they can coexist. Explain how this is possible, according to compatibilist theory. 3) Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil What does Nietzsche mean when he refers to the “Platonic inheritance”? Is this inheritance a good or bad thing? Does it have anything to do with “faith in opposite values”? If so, how? Why does Nietzsche believe that Plato was actually writing out of instinct as opposed to pure reason? (Hint: In the Allegory of the Cave, the goal is to escape the cave so that you may understand “real things.” But humans have an instinctual fear of the dark…) Nietzsche believes that the relentless pursuit of Absolute Truth is anti-human, because it is impossible for a human being to know truth “absolutely.” Since we are not an omniscient God, we know truth only in pieces. Nietzsche offers a new form of truth for us to befriend, and he calls this new form of truth “un-truth.” What is the nature of un-truth? How does it differ from Absolute Truth? Is un-truth synonymous with falsehood, or is it different from falsehood? 4) Philosophy of Art Wittgenstein’s notion of “open concepts” tends to be pretty polarizing. Some philosophers find it liberating, while others find it misguided. Do you think Wittgenstein was onto something, or do you think he was incorrect? Moreover, since Wittgenstein first utilized the term “open concepts” in philosophy of language (as opposed to philosophy of art), some have argued that it is a mistake to try and apply the theory of open concepts to art. What is your opinion? Is art truly “radically open, radically indefinable,” or is this an erroneous way of thinking? Are there things that shouldn’t count as art? Why or why not? 5) Heidegger, What is Metaphysics? What is “the fundamental question of Metaphysics,” according to Heidegger? (Hint: The answer is formatted the following way: Why is there ______ instead of _______?) Heidegger believes that dread (or as I believe it’s translated in your copy of the text, “anxiety”) is a very important feeling. Describe the character of dread/anxiety. (Hint: This is in the section where Heidegger uses the phrase “a peculiar kind of calm”.) What is it like to experience dread/anxiety? What makes it different from fear? And most importantly, what does dread/anxiety reveal to us? Throughout the lecture, Heidegger repeatedly asks, “How is it with The Nothing?” He gives some examples of what The Nothing is not. He emphatically insists that The Nothing is not negation. What are his reasons for saying this?

Informed Reflection: Citing, at least, THREE (3) of the sources from this module (my lectures must be one of your sources, and you should include one reading if provided), explain one theory of what makes a life meaningful, why many philosophers think happiness is a necessary part of the good life, one problem for hedonism, and how happiness can be confused with wealth and consumerism. Make sure you discuss this in your own words. Don't just summarize three sources; use the sources as evidence for your own ideas. Explain how engagement with the material altered and/or confirmed your initial thoughts on the topic. 

Canvas Discussion question- (((This is one of the most important (and most interesting) works of philosophy in the Western canon. Reading it all the way through is an accomplishment. In your post this week, identify and explain what, in your opinion, is the most interesting or persuasive idea or argument you found in Descartes' Meditations. Then, identify what, in your opinion, is the most surprising or confusing idea you encountered. ))) Please present arguments, evidence, and/or examples that support the answers you give. Include direct quotations with accompanying page numbers when citing the text. Should be 350 words teacher says shouldn’t be too far past 350 or too short below 350 so preferably keep it around 400 please he is not very strict about it. It is for a discussion post pretty much a pass or fail assignment Book is The Great Conversation a historical introduction to philosophy ninth edition. Chapter 17 Rene Descartes. A post that receives a grade of “high pass” will be given all ten points. To receive a high pass, your post must demonstrate exceptional understanding of the material, include strong, well-supported arguments, contain original examples/insights, and be written in transparently clear prose. It will contain few (if any) errors of comprehension, unsupported assertions, or hackneyed examples. post that contains more than ten spelling or grammatical errors will automatically receive a failing grade.

Doesn't need to be long answers. refer to my notes as they have the main topics. (1) Briefly discuss 'Ash'ari view on the following concepts: (a) The nature of good/evil; (b) The Theory of Kasb; (c) The state of the grave sinner; (d) Their response to the "problem" of evil; (e) Metaphysical and temporal atomism. (2) Discuss Ghazali's view on the following questions: (a) What is the nature of moral obligation? Explain it. (b) Is God subject to moral obligation. Explain it.

This week we'll finish Chapter 5 and start Chapter 6. The last part of Ch. 5 touches on some interesting questions concerning the goals of science, while Ch. 6 shows how invariance relation can be used to handle many puzzles in contemporary causal theories, especially Lewis's popular account of causation.  In your discussions, please address the following questions:  Woodward makes a very interesting point that sciences don't just aim at truth -- but rather they aim at a particular kind of truth. What is it? Do you agree with him? In Chapter 6, Woodward reviewed Lewis's counterfactual theory again and claimed that many puzzles to Lewis's theory can be explained by the features (strength) of invariance relation. Lewis's notion of sensitivity is interpreted as a violation of background invariance, and his puzzles (such as the rec-letter example) can be readily explained in terms of background invariance (or violation of it). Please explain a bit more on what Woodward tried to accomplish here, maybe with some of your favorite examples (not limited to the one mentioned above); Do you agree with his analyses and interpretations? 

Assignment: What Prisoners Endure Real & Experimental-; Designing A Prison Experiment  (THIS ASSIGNMENT WILL COUNT AS FINAL EXAM) Instructions: 1) Review for clarity Zimbardo's Prison Experiment 2) Web link: The Stanford Prison Experiment Was One of the Most Disturbing Studies Ever - Bing videoLinks to an external site. After review,  consider the Zimbardo Prison Experiment,  make changes to the dynamics of the experiment using your knowledge of penal, imprisonment and social roles. 3. Create Your Own Prison Experiment, With Study Objectives, Assigned Roles, Mock Prison, Study Limits and Ethical Changes you would make.

In this module you are expected to complete the following: Read the Module Post and Reply to the Discussion Post to the Theory & Research MLO#4.1 - Identify human development during infancy (CLO#1) MLO#4.2 - Identify physical growth and development in infants and toddlers (CLO#1) MLO#4.3 - Identify cognitive development in infants and toddlers (CLO#1) MLO#4.4 - Identify emotional and social development during infancy (CLO#1) Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs): CLO#1. Define major psychological concepts and theories of lifespan development. CLO#2. Apply theory to explain development; compare/contrast theoretical approaches in lifespan development. CLO#3. Define research methods and analyze research studies for method, conclusion and contribution to the field of lifespan development. CLO#4. Explain how biological, psychological and socio-cultural factors influence development through the lifespan.

Create a PowerPoint presentation (minimum 12 slides) that analyzes a simulated case study and demonstrates the use of professional guidelines and tools to work out a strategy for dealing with an ethical dilemma related to a cultural conflict as well as analyze the usefulness of those guidelines and tools. Ethics and multiculturalism are intimately related. Whatever your specialization or career goals, in order to behavior ethically, one must be multiculturally sensitive and maintain multicultural competence as part of lifelong learning. Who we are as individuals influences who we are as professionals. To practice with multicultural competence, we must be aware of our own life experiences, personal beliefs and attitudes, cultural values, social identity, privileges, biases, and prejudices and their influence on how we work. It is ethically imperative for practitioners to confront their own values and belief systems, as therapeutic relationships can be adversely affected by practitioners' explicit or implicit negative attitudes. When practitioners are unaware of their values and attitudes, the effectiveness of interactions can be compromised by bias, and ethical dilemmas and violations can occur. As stated by Corey, Corey, and Callanan, "Part of multicultural competence entails recognizing our limitations and is manifested in our willingness to (a) seek consultation, (b) participate in continuing education, and (c) when appropriate, make referrals to a professional who is competent to work with a particular client population" (2011, p. 146). Ethical dilemmas often have a cultural nuance that adds another layer to an already difficult situation. Multicultural issues can certainly impact ethical decision making and reasoning and vice versa. A multiculturally competent practitioner should be aware of the issues faced by a variety of specific cultural populations and the ethical dilemmas involved with addressing these concerns. As Carter has written, "Ethics and multicultural competence are sisters in the practice of psychology. They were birthed from the same psychological principles of beneficence and respect" (2013, para. 5). In other words, often multicultural issues in psychology have ethical implications and vice versa. To deepen your understanding, you are encouraged to consider the questions below and discuss them with a fellow learner, a work associate, an interested friend, or a member of your professional community. In your intended career, what kinds of multicultural issues do you expect to encounter? What ethical standards address multicultural issues? What is the interactive relationship between ethics and multiculturalism? How will you approach diversity and multicultural issues? Which resources will you use to assist you? What education, training, or other experiences could you plan to further develop your multicultural competence (your knowledge, awareness, and skills)? References Carter L. K. (2013). Multicultural competence: The Cinderella of psychology. SOJ Psychology. COREY, G., COREY, M. S., & CALLANAN, P. (2011). ISSUES AND ETHICS IN THE HELPING PROFESSIONS (8TH ED.). BROOKS/COLE, CENGAGE LEARNING. Preparation Note: The assessments in this course build upon each other, so you are strongly encouraged to complete them in sequence. Use the Combined Case Study Template [PPTX]to complete the Combined Case Study assessment. Do not submit a paper for this assessment. Papers will not be graded. Create a case involving an ethical dilemma and cultural conflict(s) that could occur in your psychology specialization. It is recommended that you base the case study for this assessment on the one you developed in Assessment 2, with revisions in response to the feedback you received from faculty. However, you may create an entirely new case study that meets the criteria for this assessment. Again, while your case will be fictional, it must be entirely believable and realistic based on your psychology specialization. Download and use the Combined Case Study Template PowerPoint linked above. You will complete this assessment by replacing all language that is enclosed with brackets […] in the PowerPoint with your own words. As in the previous assessments, you may enhance the design of the presentation to make it more effective. Again, links to tips for using PowerPoint and designing effective presentations are provided in the PowerPoint Resources activity in this assessment. The Presentation Title slide: On the first slide of the PowerPoint: Enter a descriptive title of approximately 5–15 words that concisely communicates the heart of the case study. It should stir interest while maintaining professional decorum. Enter your name, and a job title and organization that would fit with your case study. Case Study Overview slides: Provide the briefest possible narrative description of the professional conflict in the case. Additional supporting details and references can be added on the notes section of the slide. The overview should include: The professional setting of the case, based on your psychology specialization. The relationship that exists between you and the other individual(s), agency/business, or institution involved. Some possible examples may be: Professor—Student. Therapist—Patient. Colleague—Colleague. Consultant—Business. Clinical Supervisor—Student intern. Administrative Supervisor—Employee. A very brief summation of an ethical dilemma involving cultural conflicts. Cultural Differences slides: On the table provided, list side by side the main cultural identities from the Hays model, relevant to the conflict in the case, of yourself and another individual, agency/business, or institution in the case. If more than one individual, agency/business, or institution is involved in the case, make a copy of this slide for each one, to compare yourself to all others involved. In the notes section: Identify common concerns with each cultural identity. Be careful to avoid using stereotypes. Analyze how cultural differences contributed to the conflict in this case. Relevant Biases: Identify two relevant biases you have or had, and at least one strategy for improving your cultural competency around each of those biases. Note: This slide may be reused from Assessment 2, but if you received suggestions for improving it, be sure to revise it. Ethical Concerns slides: Bullet point the three or more ethical concerns in the case and apply one or more ethical standard to each concern. Additional supporting details and references can be added in the notes section. Comparison of Ethical Theories slides: In the first row of the table provided, enter the names of two ethical theories that you think would be the most appropriate for the situations in the case. In the following rows, enter comparisons of relevant features of the two theories. In the notes section, evaluate which theory provides a more functional framework for your case and explain why. (Note that ethical theories and ethical decision-making models are two different things. Please make sure that you are applying, comparing, and contrasting two ethical theories). Ethical Decision-Making Model slides: Identify each step in the model. Under each step of the model, apply it to your case. Incorporate multicultural issues presented in the case study within the selected ethical decision-making model. Add copies of this slide as needed, and combine steps on the slides as necessary or appropriate. In the notes section, write out supporting narrative details for your bullet points. (Note that ethical theories and ethical decision-making models are two different things. Please make sure that are applying the steps of the ethical decision-making model to your case). Best Practices When Working With [Cultural Identity] slide: Identify a best practice for working with a cultural identity in this case and cite the source below. Citation requirements: You must cite best practices from at least three scholarly research articles. You may cite reputable sources from websites, books, textbooks, and suggested resources as well, but these will not count toward the three required scholarly research references. Analyze, briefly, how the best practice could help you navigate this particular relationship and conflict. Describe, in the notes section, the best practice in more detail, and elaborate as needed on your analysis of how the best practice could help you navigate the relationship and conflict. Note: This slide may be reused from Assessment 2, but if you received suggestions for improving it, be sure to revise it. Proposed Resolution slide: Use bullet points to summarize your proposed resolution to the ethical dilemmas in the case. In the notes section, write out supporting narrative details for your bullet points.