Expert Answers

Description Justice and the Social Contract Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau all end up with a version of the Social Contract, but Hobbes starts with a very threatening “state of nature” in which all men are at war against other men. Here is an updated version of Hobbes theory:Imagine you washed up on a deserted island, and after a few hours of exploring, you realize the only food on the island is a somewhat limited supply of coconuts. After a few days, another person washes up on the beach. Since you were not sure that there were enough coconut trees on the island to feed you for the rest of your life if no ship came to save you, both you and the new person immediately start gathering up as many coconuts as you can find, and you both carry your coconuts to opposite ends of the island. Unbeknownst to each other, both of you also start gathering rocks so you can defend yourselves if the other person tries to sneak over to steal your coconuts. Neither of you can sleep, because you both are afraid that the other will attack in the middle of the night. After a few days of not sleeping, you guys meet on the beach and both agree that there will be no night attacks. But, even in your exhaustion, you suspect that the other guy is lying and will not keep his word, because you were fully aware that you were lying since you needed his coconuts to survive. Another week passes, and the two of you crawl out on the beach—too tired from lack of sleep to walk. Again, you both swear emphatically that you will not bash in the other person’s head in the middle of the night and steal the other person’s coconuts. But, both of you are still lying. At the first chance for either of you, rocks will slam down on the other person’s head, and coconuts will be stolen. A few days later, a third guy washes up on the beach. In is surveying of the island, he has found both of you guys and requests a meeting. Clearly, you and the other guy are too exhausted to even protect the coconuts you have, but what else can you do? So, the third guy (let’s call him the Leviathan) tells you and the second guy that he will stay up at night and protect you from each other while you are both sleeping. But, it would cost you both two coconuts a week for him to do this. And, he also wanted all of the rocks. By now, the two of you are so tired that you both agree to the offer and immediately sleep for five days straight. Now refreshed, you and the second guy sit down and start planning on how you can grow more coconut trees and increase the amount of food on the island. With the Leviathan keeping the peace for the price of a couple of coconuts each week, the two of you can cooperate and work together rather than constantly be at war. And, with the arrival of the Leviathan (a.k.a., the government), you have entered into a Social Contract in which there can be laws, justice, protected personal property, and restful sleep. Of course, you have to keep feeding the Leviathan—the monster. One significant difference between Hobbes and other Social Contract theorists is that Hobbes thought it was alright to overthrow an unjust government or even kill an unjust monarch. If the Leviathan is eating all of your coconuts but the people are getting no benefits from the arrangement, it might be prudent to kill the monster. Not surprisingly, the British monarchy was unhappy with Hobbes’ theory. Respond Developed a well-organized argumentative essay which addresses all of the following questions: What is your definition of justice? Pick one of the political approaches (Libertarianism, Liberalism, or Communitarianism) and demonstrate why you believe it would be the most unjust of the three approaches for a centralized government, Depending on your viewpoint, demonstrate which aspects of our current American society make it a just (or unjust) society? Some people believe that property ownership is an entitlement while others believe it is privilege but not a right. Explain what you believe is the best way to handle property ownership in a way to insure that equality can be guaranteed. Who do you think should rule in a truly just society? Please ensure that your essay addresses each component of the assigned questions and that your answer is well-organized, uses excellent, college-level prose, and makes judicious use of textual evidence. Your essay must follow APA formatting and should be 500-750 words long. If you quote, paraphrase, or summarize from the textbook or any other source, you must include in-text citations and a References page.

Description Please respond to the follow question.  Please illustrate your answers with specific examples drawn from our readings or other coursework. "Philosophy may be an interesting academic pursuit, but it has no relevance to my own life and so is of no value to me." Do you agree with this criticism? If so, why? If not, why not? Post must be 75 to 150 words, but may go longer depending on the topic.

Description  Week 2.pdf Week 2 Assignment Our series of seven formal writing assignments is a developmental exercise designed to improve your analytical reading, writing, and thinking skills. To complete the assignment, you must write an essay answering a question about an assigned reading that we do not discuss in depth in our class discussion. For your first essay, please write a two- to three-page (600-900 word) response to the following question: In "I'd Hammer Out Freedom: Technology as Politics and Culture" (pp. 75-  82), Richard Sclove argues that we should do more to acknowledge technoogy's 'polypotency.' What does this term mean, why does Sclove think that it is important to  acknowledge this characteristic of technology? Do you agree with Sclove that technology has this characteristic? Why or why not? If you agree that technology is polypotent, do you agree with Sclove that it is important that we address this fact as we  reflect on our relationships with technologies? Why or why not?   Please ensure that your essay addresses each component of the assigned question and that your answer is well-organized, uses excellent, college-level prose, and makes judicious use of textual evidence.

Description Please construct an extended academic discussion of the following questions. Please ensure that your discussion makes excellent use of textual evidence from our excerpt from Locke's Letter Concerning Toleration. What, according to Locke, is the proper relationship between religion and government? What are Locke's strongest reasons for defending that relationship? As you assess Locke's argument for religious toleration, what do you think is the strongest  objection to his perspective? How might Locke respond to that objection? Post must be between 75 to 150 words, but may go longer depending on the topic. Please cite any outside sources used.

Description Discuss the extremely challenging excerpt on pp. 198-202 from Kant's philosophical masterpiece, the Critique of Pure Reason. Please begin by exploring specific questions that you have about Kant's text and then discuss those questions to help you to gain the clarity and insight that is needed to answer the following questions: What, according to Kant, is the distinction between pure and empirical knowledge? Can you give an example of each type of knowledge? Must be between 75 to 150 words, but may go longer depending on the topic. Any outside sources must be cited.

Description 1.  Choose a moral issue that interests you and a moral theory that we have studied (Aristotelian virtue ethics, Kantian deontology, or consequentialism) to apply to that issue. For example, you might choose the controversy surrounding torture of terrorism suspects in order to acquire information about future targets and apply Kant’s moral theory to that controversy. 2.  In an essay of at least 1000 but not more than 1300 words, (a) explain in detail the nature of the moral issue you will discuss, (b) explain the moral theory you have chosen to apply to the issue in enough detail that its relevance to the moral issue will be clear, and (c) explain the judgment about the moral issue that we should draw on the basis of the moral theory you have chosen. Be sure to make reference to the text including appropriate and brief direct quotations. Use APA citation style.

Description Singer argues that there is no moral justification for denying moral consideration to animals. Can you think of a good moral reason why our moral consideration should include all humans, even those without the ability to reason yet denied to all non-human animals (some of whom have that ability)? What response might he have to your way of drawing the line between the types of beings that should get moral consideration and those that should not?

Description FINAL PROJECT ASSIGNMENT After exploring the videos and readings in this week's Lesson regarding applied ethics, consider where it is evidenced in your field of study here at the University. Write a 2-5 page paper discussing two scenarios where an ethical dilemma might present itself in your career field and how the problem should be solved according to at least two ethical theories you studied this term. Please use APA formatting and a minimum of 4 sources (you may include the videos and/or readings from this course).

Description The assignment should take no longer than 25-30 min to complete. I Will attach the exercise doc when I select a tutor. For this week, please do the following: From Part I of the exercises in 3.5, do the following numbers: 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, 12, 14, 15, 18, 20, 24, 26, and 30. Indicate which fallacy is being committed, and offer a brief explanation of why/how you think this is the case.

Description Please watch the following youtube video debate: "Is Good From God?" William Lane Craig vs. Sam Harris. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqaHXKLRKzg (Links to an external site.) Requirements and specifications attached