Essay Questions Discuss the implications of acknowledging our limitations in knowledge for personal growth and intellectual development. How does the concept of "unknowing" relate to scientific progress and the evolution of knowledge? The author argues that acknowledging our limitations is the key to enlightenment. Explain and critically evaluate this claim. Analyze the relationship between the scientific and the mystical as presented in the text. Do you agree with the author's perspective? Why or why not? Explore the ethical and societal implications of accepting "unknowing" as a fundamental aspect of the human condition. Discuss the relationship between Littlewood's Law of Miracles and apophenia. How do these concepts inform our understanding of the interplay between randomness and meaning-making? Explore the implications of the "intentionality fallacy" in interpreting seemingly significant events. How can awareness of this fallacy help us develop a more critical and objective perspective? Analyze the author's argument against invoking quantum physics to explain coincidences. Do you agree with his assessment? Why or why not? Evaluate the author's use of personal anecdotes to illustrate his points. How effective are these anecdotes in conveying his argument about probability and coincidence? Consider the broader cultural implications of our tendency to seek meaning and patterns. How does this inclination shape our beliefs, behaviors, and interpretations of the world around us? Choose three of the essay questions listed above. Write 200 words or more for each chosen essay following MLA format (thus 600 words total).
Directions Remember to complete the assigned reading/watching from Week 3 and watch the recorded lectures. Follow the prompt and submit your discussion post Read the rubric to see what qualifies as a "substantive reply" Guidelines Read the rubric to understand how Discussion posts are graded: How do I view the rubric for my graded discussion?Links to an external site. This is not a research project, so outside sources are not allowed. Use of outside sources may result in a loss of points or a "0" grade. The goal is to demonstrate an understanding of the assigned reading by applying course concepts to real world issues. However, perhaps you could cite a small example from an outside source, but it should not be at the expense of addressing the prompt and demonstrating your understanding of the assigned reading. Check with me if you are ever unsure. Students must post before viewing the posts of their peers. To help promote independent work, you cannot revise or delete your posts. Some try to cheat the system by posting a blank post, reading what others have written, and then synthesizing a reply based on what others have written. Blank submissions will earn 0 points. No AI Policy Formatting: 12 point font, Times New Roman, 1 inch margins, number your responses to the prompt questions, and organize your writing into paragraphs when appropriate. Remember to number your responses. Citations: Use in-text citations when citing or explaining evidence from the assigned reading/watching. Be sure to explain any quotations in your own words. When citing evidence, use in-text citations: include the author's name and the page number (if applicable). For example, (author name 88). If citing evidence from a video, then cite the time-stamp. For example, "Quotation from the assigned video" (author name time stamp). Pro Tip: it's ok to shorten the passages. You can include [...] when you are omitting unnecessary text from the passage to shorten it. There is no need to sign your name at the end of your post (we can see your name next to your post) Treat this like a real conversation. There is no need to say things like "Great job on the post!" No one says these things in real life conversations. Discussion Prompt (The entire response must be within 300-500 words) The total word count should be at least 300 words and no more than 500 words. Aim to be clear and concise.There are no research projects in this course. The assigned reading and podcasts are the common ground for this discussion. Respond to all prompt questions below. Support your reasoning using only examples from the assigned reading this week. Be sure to explain any quotations in your own words. When citing evidence, use in-text citations: include the author's name and the page number. For example, "quotation from the assigned reading" (Marcuse page#). CONTEXT: Marcuse argues that technology in advanced industrial societies tends to be used for social control, maintaining the values and goals of the political and economic elites, resulting in a totalitarian society. Recall this key passage from the Marcuse reading about the difference between "terroristic" and "non-terroristic" forms of totalitarian social control: "By virtue of the way it has organized its technological base, contemporary industrial society tends to be totalitarian. For ‘‘totalitarian’’ is not only a terroristic political coordination of society, but also a non-terroristic economic-technical coordination which operates through the manipulation of needs by vested interests. It thus precludes the emergence of an effective opposition against the whole. Not only a specific form of government or party rule makes for totalitarianism, but also a specific system of production and distribution which may well be compatible with a ‘‘pluralism’’ of parties, newspapers, ‘‘countervailing powers,’’ et cetera" (35). [it is highly recommended to reread the first three pages of the Marcuse reading Download Marcuse reading] PROMPT: How might generative AI (e.g. ChatGPT or "deep fake" videos) be used for what Marcuse calls the "terroristic" and "non-terroristic" forms of totalitarian social control. (Be sure to explain one example for the "terroristic" variety and one example for the "non-terroristic" variety and be sure to explain why your examples are either the "terroristic" or "non-terroristic" forms of totalitarian social control). Provide clear and specific examples to support your reasoning. Demonstrate your understanding of the text through your application of Marcuse's ideas to this generative AI example. The application to real-world issues is the critical thinking step. Don't forget to write your word count at the end! Respond thoughtfully to two peers in the class discussion. Read the rubric to see what qualifies as a "substantive reply."
Explain how you would conduct a comparative, component and parametric analyses during data analysis. Provide an example of each one. instructions (two references please) Read each question—there may be more than one. Post your responses in the appropriate threads. Students are required to make their initial post by Thursday at 11:59 p.m. (Pacific Time). You should respond to two posts of your colleagues by 11:59 pm on Sunday night. Responses should be of sufficient length with proper grammar. You will not be able to view your classmates' responses until you post in the discussion. Respond to at least two of your classmates' postings with each question. Responses are due by Sunday at 11:59 p.m. (Pacific Time). You will lose marks if you do not satisfy the minimum number of posts. This feature will keep you engaged. Your response to your colleagues should be at least one full paragraph each (at least 4-5 sentences) for each post. Review your postings to see who has responded to you. Be sure to answer all questions. Include a bibliography using APA format. If you do not include a bibliography utilizing at least two different sources, you will lose marks. Document all your sources in the initial discussion post using APA format. Your initial post should look like a research paper where you document all your sources. For example, if you provide a definition of a principle, be sure to document your source in the sentence like this: "Cooper, Heron, Heward (2020) outline the definition of positive reinforcement as...."
Instructions: Main Post: Write a minimum of 200 words discussion about the case study below (Due date: Monday by 11:59 pm) (Part A of the assignment) (Worth 7.5 points) Peer Response: Read and respond to at least two other classmates (Minimum 75 words) (Due date: Monday by 11:59 pm) (Part B of the assignment) (Worth 7.5 points) Note: The peer response must contain relevant content as well. Avoid repeating (even in different words) what you wrote about in your main discussion as part of the response to the classmate. Whether you agree or disagree with your peer's discussion, add new content to your peer's post. While you may add comments such as "I agree with you" or "Interesting findings,” that is not enough to receive a grade for the peer response. Your reaction to a peer's discussion must contain relevant content taken from the material learned in class or external sources. Make sure to watch this video: Problem of Evil and look at the PPT slides regarding the problem of evil as well as the possible solutions. Case Study: God Imagine a scenario in which you are talking to your friend who is an atheist (someone who does not believe in God). The reason why your friend doesn't believe in God is because God's all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good qualities cannot all be true when there is clearly evil in the world. The traditional conception of a Western God demands all of these three qualities to be essential towards one's belief. However, when you look at your friend, you realize that they are deeply troubled by this problem and are asking you for some possible solution, so that they may believe in God once more. You recognize that your friend desperately wants to believe, so even though you may not believe yourself, you try your hand in trying to solve the problem. Questions: 1) Explain in your own words what is the "problem of evil." 2) Then offer a solution to that problem. You may appeal to your own solution, as long as it makes sense, or you may use one of the several solutions in the textbook/PPT slides. Make sure to explain your chosen solution and provide reasons why it is a preferable one. For your reference, they are: 1) Least of All Evils; 2) An Aesthetic Solution; 3) The Free Will solution; 4) The Afterlife solution; 5) Appeal to Irrational Faith; 6) Denial of one of these three essential qualities.
iew the following videos explaining Plato’s Allegory: Video: Plato’s Allegory of the Cave - Alex Gendler(new tab) Video: PLATO ON: The Allegory of the Cave(new tab) Access the discussion and in 150-200 words respond to the following: Explain the meaning of Plato’s Allegory of the Cave. Describe how the Allegory is relevant to the way people understand and interact with reality today. Submit the initial post by the fourth day of the workshop. Respond to at least two classmates’ initial posts by the end of the workshop. Your responses should further discussion of the topic.
When selecting a measurement method, consider the behavior change goals and expected direction of behavior change. What methods of measurement did you incorporate for this week of interventions to prepare for the Final? instructions (bibliography utilizing at least two different sources) Read each question—there may be more than one. Post your responses in the appropriate threads. Students are required to make their initial post by Thursday at 11:59 p.m. (Pacific Time). You should respond to two posts of your colleagues by 11:59 pm on Sunday night. Responses should be of sufficient length with proper grammar. You will not be able to view your classmates' responses until you post in the discussion. Respond to at least two of your classmates' postings with each question. Responses are due by Sunday at 11:59 p.m. (Pacific Time). You will lose marks if you do not satisfy the minimum number of posts. This feature will keep you engaged. Your response to your colleagues should be at least one full paragraph each (at least 4-5 sentences) for each post. Review your postings to see who has responded to you. Be sure to answer all questions. Include a bibliography using APA format. If you do not include a bibliography utilizing at least two different sources, you will lose marks. Document all your sources in the initial discussion post using APA format. Your initial post should look like a research paper where you document all your sources. For example, if you provide a definition of a principle, be sure to document your source in the sentence like this: "Cooper, Heron, Heward (2020) outline the definition of positive reinforcement as...."
Review the readings and videos These two videos review Plato’s metaphysics: PLATO ON: The Forms(new tab) and Plato's Theory of Forms(new tab). Aristotle's Understanding of Reality(new tab) explains Aristotle’s metaphysics. Kant on Metaphysics(new tab) summarizes Kant’s metaphysics. Berkeley’s Idealism(new tab) describes Berkley’s metaphysics. In 400-500 words, add to the journal you began in Assignment 1.4. Select the philosopher(s) that you think offer(s) the best answer to the question of reality. Explain your reasoning for your selection.
Instructions Learning Objectives: CO 1: Analyze the major ethical theories in the history of moral philosophy as put forward by philosophers in key ethical texts. CO2: Apply ethical theories to current issues and real-life scenarios. CO 3: Evaluate different frameworks for developing one’s own ethical and moral philosophy. CO 4: Critique the place of reason, emotion, and physical action in moral philosophy. Assignment Instructions Create an 8-10 slide PPT, or some other presentation, that accomplishes the following: Chose some ethical issue that has at least two clear sides you feel is important (banning books, using GMOs, illegal immigration, alternative energy, eating meat, artificial intelligence in school, anything that can be considered a moral matter – if you are unsure, be sure to clear with your instructor). The Britannica ProCon site has a great list of topics, but not all are "moral" issues. 1.Present research on the situation being sure to clearly discuss both sides, as much as possible. If there are no supporters for at least two sides, find a different topic. Just because you feel passionately about a topic does not mean it is appropriate for this assignment. 2.Reiterate the primary theories contained in your moral compass from week 3 and then explain the position on this issue your compass promotes. You do not need to use all of the previously shared theories and feel free to exchange your previous theories for new ones if you feel they better support your position. Just be sure to explain why you changed your theories. (Keep in mind your instructor can easily check what you used in week 3). You do NOT need to provide any moral justification for ANY other position than the one you support. 3.Include a proper citation on the slides or in the notes where the material was used and include a References/Works Cited slide (APA or MLA or other system recognized by your school). For example, say you want to address gender-neutral bathrooms in public buildings. First, present some research from sources promoting that they should exist and from sources promoting they should not. Then reiterate the components of your moral compass as stated in the week three paper. Note, your compass may have evolved and if so, work in the new components. Finally, state your position clearly (they should or should not exist) and how your compass justifies that position. Keep in mind these best practices, please: Proper PPTs have bullets on the slide that are explained in the notes section (see video on how to do this if you do not know how). If you intend to narrate the presentation, be sure to include the transcript in the notes section (see PPT on how to insert audio if you do not know and want to give that a shot). If, for any reason, you are unable to access the notes section, see the attached PPT or contact your instructor. Please use art or other graphics, just be mindful about aesthetic appeal and color schemes. Keep the viewer in mind (teacher). While you might work hard on a 20-minute presentation, few faculty members have the time to watch or listen to it. Just like papers, clear citations must appear on the slide or in the notes to justify listing a resource as a reference. Attachments Finding the Notes Section - PPT.mp4 (4.85 MB) Adding audio to your PPT.pptx (527.38 KB)
Based on your readings and the media program, post your response to the following: What do you now know about ethical practices with couples and families that you did not previously know? What surprised you? What intimidates you? What do you think will be challenging when working with couples and families? How will you incorporate ethics into your professional development? Do you think you would have handled some of the situations presented in the video differently? If so, what would you have done differently? Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources and identify current relevant literature to support your work. Read Zazzario, A.S., Shelton, D. & Haley, M. (2021). Legal, ethical, and professional issues. In D. Capuzzi & M. D. Stauffer (Eds.). Foundations of couples, marriage, and family counseling(2nd ed., pp. 84-99). Wiley & Sons. Bass, B. A., & Quimby, J. L. (2006). Addressing secrets in couples counseling: An alternative approach to informed consentLinks to an external site.. The Family Journal, 14(1), 77–80. doi:10.1177/1066480705282060 Walden University, LLC. (Producer). (2018). Assessing your instructor feedbackLinks to an external site.[Interactive]. Baltimore, MD: Author. Walden University, LLC. (Producer). (2018). Ethical challenges in professional practiceLinks to an external site.[Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author. Psychotherapy.net. (Producer). (n.d.). Family secrets: Implications for theory and therapy
follow the instruction Intro: “We Will Not Be Missed!” (no required reading) Jan 10 Anastasia Berg & Rachel Wiseman, What Are Children For? Chapter Four, “To Be Or…?” (pp. 169-190) Week 2 Jan 15 David Benatar, “Why It Is Better Never to Come into Existence” Jan 17 Seana Shiffrin, “Wrongful Life, Procreative Responsibility, and the Significance of Harm” Week 3 Jan 22 Philippa Foot, “The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect”; G. E. M. Anscombe “Who is Wronged? Philipps Foot on Double Effect: One Point”” Jan 24 Judith Jarvis Thomson, “A Defense of Abortion” Week 4 Jan 25 Don Marquis, “Why Abortion is Immoral" Jan 31 Alberto Giubilini, Francesca Minerva “After-Birth Abortion: Why Should the Baby Live?” Week 5 Feb 5 Ronald Dworkin, Thomas Nagel, Robert Nozick, John Rawls, Judith Jarvis Thomson, and T.M. Scanlon, “Assisted Suicide: The Philosophers’ Brief” Feb 7 David Velleman “A Right to Self Termination” those are readings
