Expert Answers

ASSIGNMENT: The Touchstone Task in this course will help you prepare for Touchstone 1.1, which you will submit after you have completed the Challenges. A Touchstone is a project that demonstrates your comprehension of the course material. It will help you refine skills and demonstrate the application of knowledge. For your reference, there is more information about Touchstones in the student guide. In this Touchstone Task, you will engage with the course material to thoughtfully answer the reflection questions. The effort you put into this Touchstone Task will be beneficial when you start to write Touchstone 1.1 and Touchstone 1.2 later in this Unit, so think carefully as you answer each question. While you will not receive a grade or feedback on this Touchstone Task submission, doing the required work now will better prepare you for success on the graded Touchstones later in the course. Completing the exercise at this point in the course ensures that you are ready to move on. In order to foster learning and growth, all work you submit must be newly written specifically for this course. For guidance on the use of generative AI technology, review Ethical Standards and Appropriate Use of AI. A. Directions Step 1: Review Final Touchstone Review Touchstones 1.1 and 1.2 to determine how this Touchstone Task will be used to learn more about the overall assignment and to see how you will be graded. Return to this page to continue your Touchstone Task. Step 2: Answer Reflection Questions Use this Touchstone Task to begin practicing philosophical inquiry. Remember that philosophy is a unique field of study that requires critical thinking and open dialogue. The journey in answering philosophical questions is as important as the conclusions. Download the Touchstone Task 1 Worksheet and answer the following reflection questions: Question 1: What philosophy question resonates most deeply with you from Challenge 1.1? Question 2: What are the most significant differences between philosophy and other academic disciplines? Question 3: What are the differences between an 'opinion' and a 'philosophical argument?' Question 4: Have you taken time to understand each Ancient Greek philosopher’s ideas presented in the course material, and can you write a brief and accurate summary of their ideas? Take a few minutes to consider each question before answering. Your writing does not have to be formal for this Touchstone Task; it can be spontaneous and flow without concern for structure or grammar. The point here is to think and be expressive. The more structured philosophical arguments will come in the graded Touchstone assignments. Make sure your information and citations come from the Sophia tutorials to support your response. When citing material from a tutorial, please include the name of the lesson and use the following format for in-text citations: EXAMPLE (Aristotle’s Highest Good, n.d.) EXAMPLE (The Footnotes to Plato, n.d.) Please note these are examples only. You will have to adjust the citation based on the specific part of the tutorial you are referencing. Step 3: Review Checklist Refer to the checklist below throughout the writing process. Do not submit your Touchstone Task until it meets these guidelines. 1. Review Touchstone 1.1 and 1.2 ? Did you review Touchstones 1.1 and 1.2 to determine how this Touchstone Task will be used? ? Did you review Touchstones 1.1 and 1.2 to learn more about the overall assignments? ? Did you review Touchstones 1.1 and 1.2 to see how you will be graded? 2. Reflection Questions ? Have you answered the four reflection questions? ? Have you given yourself the space for authentic reflection? B. Requirements While this assignment is ungraded, we recommend you practice the following conventions, which are required for graded Touchstones: Composition must be 1 page (approximately 200-300 words), double-spaced, with one-inch margins. Use a readable 12-point font. Composition must be original and written for this assignment, and all writing must be appropriate for an academic context. Plagiarism of any kind is strictly prohibited. In-text citations should use this style: (Aristotle’s Highest Good, n.d.) Submission must include your name, the name of the course, the date, and the title of your composition. Include all of the assignment components in a single .doc or .docx file.

A 2-page response (double-spaced) to the reading questions—including relevant quotes from the text. The reading: In Foucault, Michel, History of Sexuality, Vol. 1: An Introduction (The Will to Know), trans. Robert Hurley, New York: Vintage, 1990. I will send the reading pdf and the reflection questions before starting the work. Please also send me a similarity and AI report of the paper. It's just a reflection paper that accounts for class participation, so you do not have to use too advanced languages.(this work is not an essay, just to show the professor that you've done reading and reflection on it.)

In order to gain a deeper insight into the nature of Philosophy, you are asked to study the life of at least one major philosopher. The goal is to gain an understanding of the historical, social, and relational context of that philosopher’s philosophy. You should focus your attention on the roots and circumstances of that philosopher’s philosophy. This means that you are expected to write a paper detailing, as much as possible, the life and times of that philosopher. Answers to questions such as ‘What are the names of his parents…Where was he born…What did he study in school…Was he ever married…What are the dates and titles of his major works…and What controversies surrounded his philosophy’…are the primary objective of this paper. Papers that attempt to focus primarily on the philosophy of the philosopher will receive lower marks because this assignments objective are not fulfilled. This paper assignment is an attempt to understand some of the historical context in which Philosophy arose. Assignment: Write a biography on the life of one of these philosophers. David Hume Socrates Plato Aristotle Immanuel Kant John Stuart Mill Rene Descartes Pythagoras John Locke George Berkeley Preapproved Philosopher {Must have instructor approval before writing.} Extra Credit This assignment is worth up to 12% extra credit on any exam grade(s). Format The Biography is an 800 word essay. Most likely it will be longer, say between 900 and 1200 words. Papers require their references to be submitted as part of the paper. Each essay should use at least three sources but no more than five. Books, encyclopedias are all good sources of information for this assignment. Internet sources maybe used but must be properly referenced in the works sited/consulted page. All papers must use the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy as one of their sources. {You do not need to quote from it.} Recommended font: use “Times” with a font size of 12. Do not use all cursive, all italic, or all bold as the general format of the paper. Documentation of sources within the Paper should be accomplished using MLA. Provide a unique introduction for your philosopher. Make it personal, historical, or even dramatic. Just make it unique to the way that you are approaching your philosopher. Any and all of the following may be part of your Biography. Time and Place of birth and death Members of family, upbringing, and family’s social status Education Accomplishments Publications--dates; titles; specific theory discussed in that publication; historical impact; your personal reaction or view to each publication Relation with contemporary philosophers or members of the intellectual community of his time The historical impact of that philosopher's work on the field of philosophy or society

Analysis 4 (SUN 2/9) Directions Please complete the Week 5 reading and watch the lectures Follow the prompt below and submit your digestion by Sunday at 11:59pm. FINAL DEADLINE: This course ends on Thursday, February 13th at 11:59pm. This is the last day that I will accept the Week 5 assignments. I will not accept these assignments after 2/13--no exceptions will be made. Please plan accordingly. No AI Policy One-Week Extension Policy Guidelines Read the rubric to understand how assignments are graded (scroll down the page) 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. 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 (long blocks of text are confusing and hard to read). File Type: Only .doc or .docx files are accepted in this course. 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. Analysis Questions (The entire response must be within 600-800 words) Number and respond to all prompt questions below. Support your reasoning using only examples from the relevant Week 5 materials. Be sure to explain any quotations in your own words. When citing evidence, use in-text citations: When citing from the readings, include the author's name and the page number. For example, "quotation from the assigned reading" (Selinger ###). When citing from a video, cite the time stamp. For example, "information from the video" (0:05:10). Be sure to watch the lectures for a fuller understanding of the reading. Don't forget to write your total word count at the end! PROMPTS: Explain the three experiments that Collins presents in Part 1 of the reading to support his minimal embodiment thesis. Why does Collins think that these examples disprove Dreyfus' social embodiment thesis? What is Selinger's critique of Collins' argument from Part 1 of the reading? In Part 2, Collins claims that "[t]he embodiment thesis pretty well is the minimal embodiment thesis" (736). How does Collins justify this claim? In Part 4, Collins argues that interactional expertise can be acquired from conversations. Why do Collins and Dreyfus still disagree on this point? View Rubric Analysis Rubric W25 Analysis Rubric W25 Criteria Ratings Points Course Context 10 pts Meets Standards Demonstrates deep understanding of the context from the assigned texts and the “podcasts.” 8.5 pts Approaching Standards Shows a good understanding of the text’s context but may lack depth or overlook important nuances that were discussed in the “podcasts.” 7 pts Below Standards Significantly flawed or incomplete understanding of the text’s context. The context is not informed by the information from the “podcasts.” This doesn’t fully address the prompt questions or the assigned texts. / 10 pts Citing Evidence 15 pts Meets Standards Textual evidence is clearly integrated, relevant, and effectively supports the claims made in the analysis. Direct quotations are short (if any), and when present, they don't constitute more than 10% of the submission. All evidence is cited using in-text citations. 12.75 pts Approaching Standards The submission includes some textual evidence, but it may lack relevance to the prompt questions, or they may only partially support your claims. It might rely too much on direct quotations instead of your own analysis for how the evidence supports your claims. 10.5 pts Below Standards Little to no textual evidence is cited, or evidence is irrelevant or too vague to support the claims in the argument. In some cases, there may be excessive reliance on direct quotations without sufficient context and analysis for how these ideas support your reasoning. / 15 pts Critical Analysis 20 pts Meets Standards This is a deeply engaged analysis that demonstrates a clear understanding of the material and its practical implications. The submission displays strong logical reasoning. There are no significant interpretive errors. 15 pts Approaching Standards This displays partial understanding of the ideas and arguments from the assigned reading and “podcasts.” The analysis requires greater depth and closer attention to the focus of the prompt questions. There may be some interpretive errors or logical fallacies. It may show some original thought but may include too much summary and description. 10 pts Below Standards There is only superficial or minimal engagement with the ideas and arguments from the assigned reading and “podcasts.” This submission requires a deeper and clearer understanding of the material. There may be significant interpretive errors, too much summary in the style of a book report, or vague explanations of course concepts as opposed to critical analysis. / 20 pts Original Writing Style 15 pts Meets Standards Demonstrates originality, a strong human writing voice, and there is no evidence of AI use. 11.25 pts Approaching Standards Mostly original-sounding work but may have a few sections that appear formulaic or unoriginal. There is no overt use of AI, but it’s possible that AI was consulted in the writing process. 7.5 pts Below Standards (half credit) The analysis is weakened by a generic and formulaic style. The writing style resembles the quality of AI generated text and likely includes many of the commonly used terms that AI is known to employ. The style may also appear to have been revised from an AI generated response. / 15 pts Language Mechanics & Formatting 5 pts Meets Standards Excellent mechanics and formatting. All responses to the prompt questions are numbered and the text is organized in paragraph form (no long blocks of text). The total word count is written at the end. 4.25 pts Approaching Standards A couple significant errors with spelling, mechanics, and formatting; the submission might not be organized into paragraphs; the responses might not be numbered; or the total word count might be missing. 3.5 pts Below Standards Lots of errors that negatively affect clarity and comprehension. / 5 pts Word Count 5 pts Meets Standards The total word count is within the range specified in the prompt. 3 pts Approaching Standards The total word count is over or under the range specified in the prompt by 1-50 words. 0 pts Below Standards The total word count is over or under the range specified in the prompt by more than 50 words. / 5 pts Plagiarism Detected 0 pts AI Plagiarism Significantly AI-generated text that does not reflect the student’s own thinking. There is likely information cited in the submission that does not exist in the assigned reading/watching (i.e. AI hallucinations). 0 pts Non-AI Plagiarism Plagiarism from online sources, submissions from former students, or a purchased assignment.

Directions Remember to complete the assigned reading/watching from Week 5 and watch the recorded lectures. Follow the prompt and submit your discussion No AI Policy 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-last-name page#). 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. PROMPT: Please organize your submission into paragraphs for stronger organization and readability. Do you agree with Collins in Part 4 where he argues that machines can develop interactional expertise from conversations (without having the lived experience of "being a contributing expert practitioner" like Dreyfus argues)? If so, explain why Collins' arguments are convincing to you. If not, explain why either Selinger or Dreyfus' arguments about interactional expertise are more convincing to you. Be sure to use specific examples from the reading to support your reasoning. 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."

Main Post: Write a minimum of 200 words discussion about the topics 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. Case Study: Personal identity Consider the famous psychological case of Phineas Gage. Gage was a 25 year old railroad worker who reportedly had a gentle, discipline, and kind personality. One day while working to destroy some rock impeding the way, the gunpowder that was used exploded and sent a meter-long bar (3.2 cm in diameter) through his skull, damaging several parts of his face and brain. A couple of months later he recovered, but he developed a different personality. He became rude, disobedient, and extremely irritable. He was fired from his job and decided to move to a different country. Eventually after four years with his chaotic personality, he started to slowly revert back to his old personality, but let's say for the purposes of this thought-experiment that he never returned back to his old personality and he completely lost his memory. Answer the following questions with this information: 1) What do you consider as the core aspect of what consitutes the self? Do you think the self is most defined by a consistent memory, desires, or passions? Do you think you have one, many, or no unifed self? Do you think the self is intact and seperate from the body like a "soul" or do you think the self is merely the product of brain chemical and neurons? 2) Do you think that this version of Gage completely lost his self with his noticable personality traits, goals, memory, and relationship changes? Or do you think his core self was retained thoughout the entire sequence of events. Use aspects of question one as support for your answer. For instance, if you think the self is defined by key relationships with other crucial individuals, then Gage clearly became a different person; but if you think the core self is similar to a soul-like entity, then perhaps Gage did not become a different person. 3) Now imagine that Gage before the incident owed 200,000 dollars to a couple of old friends, and they want their money back several years after the incident. The new version of Gage argues that his old self has died, and thus he does not owe anything anymore because he is not the same person. Do you think that Gage's arugment has any weight at all considering the tragic accident that completely changed who he is? Support your answer with a couple of reasons.

Instructions Detail the different types of ABC data collection methods you have utilized before, and which specific forms or methods have been most effective. Then, explain how ABC data collection can be ineffective, giving an example if you have one. Lastly, compare the process you've taken before in collecting ABC data with the process of collecting ABC data in this module. Conduct assessments of relevant skill strengths and deficits, interpret graphed data, and communicate relevant qualitative relations. Please answer each question entirely. Your initial post should be a minimum of 200 words in length, and your responses to two peers should be roughly100 words each. Cite sources you reference in-text and under a “References” section in APA format. Grading This discussion is worth 5 points, and the initial post will be due by Thursday. Reply posts are due by Sunday. Refer to the rubric for more specific details on how this will be graded. Criteria Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Criterion Score Demonstration o f Knowledge 2 points 1.8 points 1.6 points 1.5 points Score of Demonstration o f Knowledge, / 2 Contribution to the Conversation 2 points 1.8 points 1.6 points 1.5 points Score of Contribution to the Conversation, / 2 Collaboration 1 point 0.9 points 0.8 points 0.75 points Score of Collaboration, / 1 TotalScore of Discussion Rubric 5 points, / 5 Overall Score LEVEL 4 4.5 points minimum LEVEL 3 4 points minimum LEVEL 2 3.75 points minimum LEVEL 1 0 points minimum

1. For this Bonus problem, do BOOL Level 1 #15Links to an external site.. You'll then take a screenshot and upload the photo here. 2. For this Bonus problem, do FOL Level 2 #1Links to an external site.. You'll then take a screenshot and upload the photo here. Translate each of these sentences into English and give a few sentences explaining how/why you made the choices you did for 3. the translation. Here's a quickLinks to an external site. video explaining some aspects of multiple quantification. 4% AxEyLikes(x,y) AxEyLikes(y,x) EyAxLikes(x,y) EyAxLikes(y,x)

Instructions Watch the video: Functional Analysis of Problem Behavior – WMU Autism Center of Excellence (wmuace.com) Step 1: Watch the video detailing Dr. Brian Iwata describing functional behavior analysis procedures and how to utilize these procedures effectively. Then, refer to the handout for the video – Michigan Autism Training Videos Presentation. Step 2: Download the Functional Analysis Protocol document. The format is an example to give a starting point for guide creation of an FA. Step 3: Looking at your data from previous modules, along with Dr. Iwata’s procedures in the video for Functional Analyses (FA), create a step-by-step guide for administering a FA. The format is completely up to you. Consider the following ideas for your format: Written document, like our example Presentation slides Video format Step 4: Submit your completed guide, one that hopefully will be useful to you and those you provide services to for years to come! Length: Complete the 6-page Functional Analysis Protocol template or create 5-7 slides with Presenter's notes or create a 3-minute video with a script. Sources: 3 credible resources. Criteria Distinguished Proficient In Progress Criterion Score Video Analysis 2 points Evidence of reviewing Dr. Iwata’s video is clear throughout formatted step-by-step guide (three or more areas) of formatted step-by-step guide. 1 point Evidence of reviewing Dr. Iwata’s video is clear in two or more areas in the formatted step-by-step guide. 0.5 points Dr. Iwata’s video is referenced; however, no clear evidence is locatable. Score of Video Analysis, / 2 Organized Format 1 point The guide is arranged in a clear and organized fashion. The format leads the experimenter, and all involved in the FA process in a sequential organized process from start to finish. 0.75 points The guide is arranged in a clear and organized fashion. The format is purposed or aims to be sequential. 0.5 points The guide attempts for clarity and organization, however, the reader is left wondering what step(s) to take throughout the process. Score of Organized Format, / 1 Technological Guidelines 1 point The language in the guide is clear, concise, and understandable to all key stakeholders. 0.75 points The language in the guide is clear, concise, and understandable to the experimenter and professionals conducting the FA. 0.5 points The language in the guide aims for clarity and conciseness. Score of Technological Guidelines, / 1 Environmental Components 1 point All the relevant demographic information, along with setting, date(s), and experimenters are thoroughly defined and addressed. 0.75 points All the relevant demographic information is defined and addressed. 0.5 points Most relevant information is noted and addressed. Score of Environmental Components, / 1 Target Behaviors 1 point No more than three target behaviors are presented in the guide. All target behaviors are operationally defined with non-exemplar’s defined as well, to ensure the technological dimension is fully addressed. 0.75 points No more than three target behaviors are presented and operationally defined. 0.5 points Target behaviors are operationally defined. Score of Target Behaviors, / 1 Conditions 1 point Each condition in the guide (ex., Play, Demand, Reinforcement, Automatic or Alone), are listed and defined in terms of how the condition is intended to be utilized in the FA. The control condition is highlighted by its definition, so all involved understand it is the “control” condition. 0.75 points Each condition in the guide (ex., Play, Demand, Reinforcement, Automatic or Alone), are listed and defined in terms of how the condition is intended to be utilized in the FA. 0.5 points Conditions are listed in the guide, and definitions are attempted. Score of Conditions, / 1 Data Collection 1 point There is given data-collection methodology that matches the format of the guide and process of conducting the FA. Visual Data collection format is added to the format. 0.75 points There is given data-collection methodology that matches the format of the guide and process of conducting the FA. 0.5 points There is stated data-collection measure(s). Score of Data Collection, / 1 Overall Plan 1 point Chosen conditions make applied sense within the format of the guide. There is a schedule contained within the guide that explains how the process, timing, and any misc. the author feels is significant to add. *Process = What condition to implement when. *Timing = The amount of time allocated to each process. 0.75 points There is a schedule contained within the guide that explains how the process, timing, and any misc. the author feels is significant to add. 0.5 points A schedule is attempted to show what conditions will be followed. Score of Overall Plan, / 1 APA Format & References 1 point Guide is formatted throughout in the current APA 7th Edition Format. 0.75 points References in the guide are formatted in the current APA 7th Edition Format. 0.5 points APA format is attempted; however, significant errors are evident. Score of APA Format & References, / 1 TotalScore of Module 6 Assignment: Analyze a Video Rubric This is the link for the video

PHI 1010: Intro to Philosophy Final Keystone Project Instructions Choose only one of the three following prompts to build your essay around. Each prompt will be associated with one of the chapters we have studied. Make sure to address every aspect of the prompt to receive a high grade. Your essay must be at least 600 words! 1) [Chapter 5: Epistemology/The Search for Truth]: Take a stance on the Rationalism vs Empiricism argument. Explain what these two theories mean in relation to truth and knowledge. What are the prime differences between the two? After providing some details on both, state which one is more appealing to you. Center your position on a given topic or example by appealing to the method taken for your selected theory. If you choose rationalism, then explain why a priori (independent of experience) reasoning is more suited to explain your chosen example. If you choose empiricism, then explain why certain a posteriori (empirical, dependent on experience) reasoning is more suited to explain your chosen example. You may lean on examples from the textbook/PPT notes for some inspiration or you may come up with one yourself. Some areas to think about [Mathematics, Religion, Causality, Descartes’ cogito, science, biology, human nature, sociology/social norms, technology, language etc.] Aspects to look for: 1) Introduction: You introduce the two positions just enough to set up your thesis statement in which you clearly state your position as well as your examples used to support your position. 2) Body Paragraphs: You provide enough details to adequately explain both positions. You then bring in your chosen topic/example to center your analysis on. You not only provide enough details on the example, so your readers can understand it, but you also apply the methods of your selected theory onto the example. 3) Each paragraph is well organized and relates back to your thesis 4) You have two sources evident in your essay (your textbook can be one) 5) You provide a conclusion to wrap up the gist of the work 2) [Chapter 6: Self]: The mind-body problem is one of the most fascinating issues in both scientific and philosophical domains. Yet despite hundreds of years of research, it is still quite a mystery. In this essay you will try to explain the mind-body problem in your own words. What is this problem that has plagued intellectuals for this long. Give examples and define the terms you use to help demonstrate your comprehension. Then, state your position on the matter. You don’t have to be 100% certain of your position, simply choose the one that makes the most sense to you. Explain your solution, and you may choose among the one available to you in the textbook/PPT notes (Descartes’ view, Leibniz’s view, materialist solution, idealist solution, Spinoza’s solution, behaviorism, identity theory, functionalism, embodied consciousness, or choose your own). In trying to appeal to your selected solution, give reasons or examples as to why your solution is preferable. Below is an example of how you might go about your essay, since this prompt could be a bit more confusing than the others: [For example: Descartes’ view is that which both mental and physical events are equally real in the sense that they do not come from each other. The mental does not produce the physical and the physical does not produce the mental; hence they are completely distinct things/processes. To put this in perspective, thoughts and ideas cannot be reduced to neurons signaling each other through electric signals. On the same vein matter, which is made up of a congregate of organized atoms that take up physical space, does not owe its existence to conscious activity. The proof for this lies in the continuation of matter when no one is looking. Matter continues to exist regardless of if it is being spectated by an onlooker or not. The reason why Descartes’ dualistic solution is preferable is because it fits in alignment with our intuitive experience of reality. According to Descartes these two substances constantly interact with each other. When I hit my head with my own hand, my mental processes are immediately impacted. I can no longer think clearly, as my conscious control center has been evidently impaired. Furthermore, expressions of pain rise up throughout my body. Pain isn’t just some physical expression located in the world, rather it is an expression of my impaired consciousness informing me that something is wrong.... You should get the point on how to tackle this question by now, but something along these lines!] Aspect to look for: 1) Introduction: You raise the relevance of the mind-body problem. You introduce it just enough to intrigue your readers. You also provide a clear thesis statement with your position 2) Body Paragraphs PT I: You adequately explain the mind-body problem in your own words. You use examples and define your terms so that your readers can have a decent grasp as to what you are saying 3) Body Paragraphs PT II: You offer a solution, while explaining what it is and why it is a preferable solution. You use clear examples to express your position and provide compelling reasons as support 4)You have two sources (your textbook can be one) evident throughout your work 5)You have a conclusion that wraps up the gist of your essay 3) [Chapter 7: Freedom]: Free will has been a very divisive topic in numerous philosophical circles. Some parties hold onto this conception of freedom dearly, calling it the root of our humanity, that which makes us who we are. Consider the Judeo-Christian and Islamic religious for instance. Others cry foul, advocating for its impossibility by breaching our logical and scientific understanding of reality. Take a stance on this position. First explain the free will dilemma while also raising its relevance. Why does this issue matter so deeply to us and how does it affect our lives? Then explain your chosen position [determinism, compatibilism, libertarianism]. Offer reasons why your position is preferable in contrast to the other positions. I also want you to “attack” the opposing positions by providing reasons against their validity. You may need to provide concrete examples to demonstrate your argument. Aspects to look for: 1) Introduction: You raise the relevance of the free will dilemma. You introduce it just enough to intrigue your readers. You also provide a clear thesis statement with your position 2) Body Paragraphs PT I: You adequately explain the free will dilemma in your own words. Your explanation is clear and full of enough details that demonstrates your comprehension. 3) Body Paragraphs PT II: You have a clear stance on your selected position. You first explain what your selected position means and then you offer reasons why it is the superior solution in comparison to the others. You provide enough of an explanation, maybe an example is needed, that makes it both convincing and compelling. 4) You have two sources evident in your essay (your textbook can be one) 5) You provide a conclusion to wrap up the gist of the work