Expert Answers

Description One of the leading Sophists, Protagoras, claimed that "Of all things the measure is Man, of the things that are, that they are, and of the things that are not, that they are not." What is Protagoras saying here? What would Socrates say in response to Protagoras? What do you think about Protagoras' provocative claim? Please present arguments, evidence, and/or examples that support the answers you give 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. 

Description 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)?

Description Rubric for final paper: Philosophy of Recreation This paper should demonstrate your ability to think critically about theoretical leisure and recreation concepts, and how they influence your views of recreation and its purpose both personally and professionally. Philosophy: the study of the theoretical basis of a particular branch of knowledge or experience. Paper should include: Title Page, page numbers  Introduction  Headings/Subheadings throughout main content  Conclusion References Page properly formatted (at least 2 credible reference sources)  Content of paper:  Philosophy of Recreation and Leisure -Personal Philosophy  --Find parallels between your recreational experiences and philosophical concepts discussed in class and explain how they relate (philosophical concepts: leisure as connection, recreation and mental health, recreation serving a community, leisure and mental health, the value recreation adds to one’s life, tourism and hospitality utilizing leisure, outdoor adventure, value recreation adds to special populations, challenges and risks in recreation, etc.). Personally, what are your feelings on the field of recreation and the value it adds to ones life? What are your views on recreation from a micro stand point…how it impacts individual lives and how it has impacted your life.  --Example: Discuss how the idea of recreation serving a community and meeting needs that no one else meets was impactful for you growing up as this was true of your community.  --Example: Discuss how you have seen personally the positive mental health or physical health impacts of recreation. --Example: Discuss the special population that you or your family are part of and how recreation served a specific benefit for that population.  -Professional Philosophy  --Discuss what you think the roles of recreation and leisure services play for individuals, groups,communities, and society as a whole. You are to do this from the perspective of a professional working in the rec industry, looking at the vocational field of recreation as a whole. Identify the benefits of recreation and leisure for individuals, groups, communities, and society. Be sure to include some of the special populations discussed in class. Look for parallels between social needs and leisure benefits and explain how they relate. For example, your social issue could be obesity, or mental health, then identify the benefit rec/leisure can have on this social issue (i.e., exercise improves mood, joining a community center offers options for physical movement, which decreases obesity, etc.). Who’s job or responsibility is it to meet these needs and provide these services? Where does the funding come from? What kind of training does someone need to provide these services? Is the government responsible? Private companies? Etc.? What value does it add to society? Vocationally, how would you describe the role of recreation in society? What is your philosophy of recreation from a macro standpoint, thinking bigger picture. What impact can it have on larger communities or society as a whole. Who should be funding and administering programs? Who should have access? Is recreation worth investing in? Should programs be non-profit or for profit? --Example: Discuss the benefit of recreation to communities, and who you feel is responsible for funding these programs.  --Example: Discuss what social needs the field of recreation meets for people, and why this an important field for our country and world as a whole.  --Example: Provide evidence that there should be government funding for non-profits providing rec services…OR…provide evidence that it should all be privatized and for profit.

Description 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?

Description In The Republic, Plato claims that the just society mirrors the state of the soul in a just person. Explain Plato’s position. How does this position lead him to conclude that a kind of meritocracy (rather than democracy) is the ideal form of government? How does Plato’s theory of the forms (and of our knowledge of the forms) influence his theory of the just society?Is Plato correct that meritocracy is ideal form of government? How might someone who disagrees with Plato critique his position? Please present arguments, evidence, and/or examples that support the answers you give. Include direct quotations with accompanying page numbers when citing the text. There is a whole chapter of Platos but I chose the two sections "The Soul" and "The World and the Forms" to send to you because I believe that is where you'll be able to find the answers. If you want me to send over more pictures of pages from Platos chapter like section "Knowledge and Opinion", "The Love of Wisdom", "The State" or "Problems with the Forms" please let me know and I will send them over.  Book is The Great Conversation a historical introduction to philosophy ninth edition. Chapter 8 Plato. 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.

Description Make points and a few details about the attached file and the attached Academic journal article. Notice how they're defining SWB and whether it's the same as in the course readings. This is basically a very specific study that you can then relate to the more general themes from the things we read for class. Please try to focus on Clarity (Does your presentation enable the class to understand what the source was saying?) ??Accuracy of interpretation ??Connections made between the source and the course content

Description The text is Beauvoir's The Second Sex. The second philosopher can be choose form the following three: Uranga, Fanon or Murdoch. Let me know your choice and I will upload their text later.

Description 1. What is *the heterogeneity argument’against hedonism? Shouldwe accept it? If so, why? If not, why not? Answer with reference tcthe main reading by Roger Crisp 2. What is internalism'about well-being? What is its bestformulation and why? Answer with reference to the main readingby Connie Rosati. 3. What is Aristotle's *function argument’ for the view that the lifeof activity according to virtue is the highest human good? Shouldwe accept the argument? Answer with reference to the relevantpassages in Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics. 4.What is the Confucian thesis of well-being familism'? Shouldwe accept it? Answer with reference to the main reading by RichardKim. 5. What is the 'shape of a life hypothesis’? Should we accept it? Ifso. what is its best explanation? If not why not? Answer withreference to the main reading by David Velleman. 6. Does the 'mere difference' view of disability imply that it ispermissible to cause disability? If so, why? If not, why not? Answerwith reference to the main reading bv Elizabeth Barnes 7. Should well-being policy adopt a particular view of well-being?If so, which view and why? If not, why not? Answer with referenceto the main reading by Daniel Haybron and Valerie Tiberius 8.What is the 'rational care theory'of well-being? Should weaccept it? Answer with reference to the main reading by StephenDarwall. 9.What is 'contextualism'about well-being? Should we accept itAnswer with reference to the main reading by Anna Alexandrova

Description Select any issue that has been the subject of protest or propaganda at any time between the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, The Romantic, or Modern eras. Then write a paper detailing the issues of the protest/propaganda, putting the issues in the context of some sort of text or object. The text/object can be a literary or musical work; a sculpture or painting; a building; a symbolic act; or a historical moment. The overarching questions to address in the paper are: What historical forces -- technological, political, cultural -- brought this protested issue or point of propaganda to a critical point at the moment you are looking at? What are the specific arguments being raised in the protest or propaganda? How does your object/text embody these historical forces and detailed arguments?

Description research paper about racial discrimination happening in world  Separate Research Paper Bibliography Separate Research Paper Thesis Statement Please only use creditable sources and attach it to work cited