Expert Answers

Description Your task will be to break down the author's argument, discuss how they support their views, explain whether or not you agree with them, and present your counter-argument to their ideas. Here's how:  1. Select one article that particularly resonates with you or sparks your interest. Clearly explain, in your own words, what argument you believe the author is trying to make. What are they trying to convince you of?  2. Once you've identified their main argument, find at least two reasons the author uses to back up their point of view. These are statements or pieces of evidence they're using to convince you to agree with their former argument. 3. After understanding their argument and how they support it, think about where you stand. Do you agree with the author's conclusion? Why, or why not? Dive deeper into your own beliefs and values to sufficiently explain your response. 4. Finally, challenge the author's argument. What is one strong argument that could be made against what they're saying? This doesn't have to come from another paper, but simply an idea or point you think effectively challenges the author’s reasoning. Consider holes within the author's argument that they may not have addressed, or bring up a different perspective that directly opposes the author's viewpoint. It's important that you lay out and explain your thinking in each of these steps. This shouldn't be just a summary of the article, but a critical analysis where you delve deeper into understanding the author's arguments and form your perspective in response. This is not a formal essay. Do not waste time writing an introduction and conclusion. Simply write the paper as if you were answering each number above in order.

Description For our first discussion, read all of On Majors, Life, and Studying Philosophy Download On Majors, Life, and Studying Philosophy. Based on your reading (not what Google or ChatGPT says), what is philosophy? What can philosophy do? How can studying philosophy be of benefit to you and to society as a whole? Assess the ideas and assumptions you have about the subject now and contrast them with what you think about it after having completed the reading. Share your ideas! Use at least three (3) quotations in your main post. When you use a quotation, you must follow it up with an in-text citation. This means, "This is your quote." (Chatman 1) In this example, what I put in parentheses there is the in-text citation, and the "1" represents the page number. Then, at the end of what you write in your main post, you should cite your source. For the purposes of this assignment, simply write this: Chatman, Timothy. "On Majors, Life, and Studying Philosophy."

Description This is the discussion prompt.  Do you agree with Rand that the "moral purpose of a man's life is the achievement of his own happiness?" Why or why not? Then you provide me with the answer to the first part I will send you one of my peer's responses for you to answer this prompt to. Second, pick another student's response and argue against their response.  Try to argue from both points of view.  For example, if you argue in your original post that it is the moral purpose of a man's life is the achievement of his own happiness, then in your response to another student, argue for the opposite point of view that the moral purpose of a man's life is not the achievement of his own happiness.

Description 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.

Description 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. 

Description Part 1: Introduction, Case Study, Ethical Question In this section, present an introduction to the general topic, explain the case study, identify the central moral controversy at stake, and articulate an ethical question that describes the central moral controversy at stake. This section must include one quote from one of the resources provided with the case study. To complete this section, Choose a case study from the selection provided by your instructor in the Week 3 announcement titled “Week 3 Case Studies.” Present a brief introduction to the case study. Discuss background information. Identify the central moral controversy at stake in the case study. Articulate an ethical question based on the central moral controversy. This section should be around 300 words. Part 2: Reading Philosophy Reflection In this section, choose one of the philosophical texts associated with your chosen ethical theory listed in the Philosophical Texts Download Philosophical Textsdocument. Copy and paste the text into this section of the paper. After applying the reading philosophy steps from the Week 1 discussion, Explain the key ideas in the text. Discuss how your understanding of the text evolved after multiple reads. This section should be around 150 words (excluding the philosophical text). Part 3: Explanation of Utilitarianism or Deontology In this section, describe the ethical theory of utilitarianism or deontology and explain its core principles. This section must include one quote from the provided resources on the ethical theory. To complete this section, Discuss the historical background of the ethical theory and the philosopher(s) associated with it. Explain the core moral principle of the theory, or if there is more than one, the principle that you will focus on in applying that theory to your question. Demonstrate how the theory and its core moral principle(s) apply to an ethical question that is different than the topic of your case study. For example, what would deontologists say about the morality of lying, and what principle would support their statement; what would utilitarians say about the morality of using animals in medical research, and what principle would support their statement? This section should be around 350 words. Part 4: Application of Ethical Theory In this section, apply the core principle(s) you articulated above to the central moral controversy in the case study. Explain how the core principle(s) of the ethical theory apply to the case study. This might include considering which facts or features of the case study lend themselves to analysis by the ethical theory. Apply the core principles of the theory to the central moral controversy in the case study by showing how someone using the theory would answer the ethical question addressed by your case study. This section should be around 350 words. The Case Study: Applying an Ethical Theory paper Must be four to five double-spaced pages in length (not including title and references pages) and formatted according to APA StyleLinks to an external site. as outlined in the Writing Center’s APA Formatting for Microsoft WordLinks to an external site. resources. Must include a separate title page with the following in title case: title of paper in bold font Space should appear between the title and the rest of the information on the title page. student’s name name of institution (The University of Arizona Global Campus) course name and number instructor’s name due date Must utilize academic voice. See the Academic VoiceLinks to an external site. resource for additional guidance. Must include an introduction and conclusion paragraph. Your introduction paragraph needs to end with a clear thesis statement that indicates the purpose of your paper. For assistance on writing Introductions & ConclusionsLinks to an external site. and Writing a Thesis StatementLinks to an external site., refer to the Writing Center resources. Must use at least two scholarly sources and one article, video, blog, or other source related to the case study. The Scholarly, Peer-Reviewed, and Other Credible SourcesLinks to an external site. table offers additional guidance on appropriate source types. If you have questions about whether a specific source is appropriate for this assignment, please contact your instructor. Your instructor has the final say about the appropriateness of a specific source. To assist you in completing the research required for this assignment, view this Quick and Easy Library ResearchLinks to an external site. tutorial, which introduces the University of Arizona Global Campus Library and the research process, and provides some library search tips.

Description Select one example of Art, Poetry, Music or Philosophy between the periods of the Enlightenment through the Modern era and describe it through examples of one of the other academic mediums learned in this course. That is, within the historic times of the Enlightenment through the Modern eras, select one example that strongly represents that era. Then, select one of the following general topic parings to analyze your subject through:  Art as visual illustration of Philosophy, Literature, or Music Literature as Poetic account of Philosophy, Art, or Music Music as auditory representation of Philosophy, Art, or Literature Philosophy as description of Art, Poetry, or Music

Description Contrasting Normative Arguments in Standard Form Scenario: In this assignment, you will make two contrasting normative arguments about what one ought to do. Both arguments will be about the same topic; thus, at least one of the arguments will contradict your personal opinion. You will compose the arguments in standard form, as a series of statements that end with your conclusion.

Description Final exam (essay) Due date and length of essay: Your final exam is an essay assignment.  It should be approximately 1000 words.  Essay topics: This final exam assignment is an essay, and not a long research paper.  You must submit the essay here on Blackboard.  You must write your essay on one of the following topics - as you can see below, there are three topic options to choose from. Option 1: We have explored the basic elements of Plato's philosophy, through his theory of morality and the state.  In many ways, Plato's philosophy is based upon his theory of the 'objects of knowledge.'  For example, the keyboard I am writing at is clearly an 'object.'  In a certain sense; according to Plato, there are also 'objects of knowledge.'  Write an essay which discusses and clarifies how Plato sees the relation between objects - like keyboards, cars, etc. - and 'objects of knowledge.'  Make sure your essay includes content on why this relation is important to Plato in the first place.  Also, organize your essay so that it incorporates one of the relevant Platonic arguments (epistemological, metaphysical, or semantic) that the text treats.  The best essays usually incorporate just one of these arguments rather than trying to handle more than one of them; for the purposes of this essay, a solid interpretation of one of these arguments is quite sufficient.  Finally, conclude your essay by discussing the extent to which you agree or disagree with Plato on the objects/objects of knowledge issue (and explain why!) Option 2: Read p. 455 - 458 in the textbook (p. 410 - 414 in the 7th edition).  These pages deal with Hume's position on the issue of God.  In your own words, discuss the argument from design, and then summarize any two of Hume’s critiques against this argument.  In the concluding part of your essay, discuss whether you accept the argument from design, or Hume’s critiques (there is room for a qualified position here).  As you write your essay, you should be able to gain some insight into how Hume’s position sees the relationships among science, religion, and philosophy.  Also, many modern and contemporary philosophers have been influenced by Hume's basic empiricist position.  A good essay would make a solid attempt at discussing these relationships, and you might want to think about this especially in the concluding part of your essay.  Be sure to give reasons for your position! Option 3:  How and why does Descartes develop the ‘cogito’ in Meds. 1 and 2?  As we know, this also leads to Descartes’s mind-body dualism, as we have seen it developed in the Meditations.  How convincing is this Cartesian mind-body dualism, and how does this dualism relate to the mechanistic conception of the universe?  Or in other words, where does this dualism 'fit in,' with respect to the mechanistic conception of the universe (the closing few pages of the Descartes chapter should help you with this). Citations/referencing: Research which extends beyond course content is not required for this essay.  As you write your essay, I would strongly suggest that you keep your references under control by limiting yourself to the readings we have covered in this course.  Always be careful about reaching out to other primary and secondary sources that we have not used in the course, because to do this in a way that improves the quality and final grade of your essay is harder than it looks, especially as this is an introductory course. In any case, if you do make citations or references, then please do so in simple fashion: in-text parenthetical citation (last name of author, page number, such as 'Melchert, 409').  If you do use other sources, then in addition to the in-text parenthetical citation, put a list of the other sources cited at the end of the essay.  You can make this list according to any style you wish, as long as it has the usual bibliographic information and is formatted consistently. 

Description Instructions Review all materials up to and including the Week 3 - Essay 1 course module. Assignment objective: Apply both ethical theories and ethical situationism to the issue of misinformation (or fake news) in media. Purpose: This assignment will help you integrate theoretical knowledge with a real-world ethical problem. Task: Introduction (about 1 page): Define misinformation and its significance in contemporary media. Explain why it's an ethical issue. Ethical Theories (about 1 page): Briefly describe two ethical theories and how they view the problem of misinformation (use Utilitarianism and Kantianism ) Ethical Situationism (about 1 page): Define ethical situationism. Discuss how situational factors can influence the spread or acceptance of misinformation. (Be sure to rely on the course materials here, especially the paper 'Situationism and Agency' in the Week 3 - Topic 2 module.) If you rely on Internet searches, you may land on information about 'situation ethics' which is NOT the same as ethical situationism. There is also a political-economic view called 'situationism' which is also NOT what you need for this assignment.) Case Study Analysis (about 1.5 pages): Select a real-world example of misinformation. Analyze it using the ethical theories and the concept of ethical situationism. Proposed Solutions (about 1 page): Suggest strategies for combating misinformation, guided by your theoretical understanding. Discuss who bears responsibility and how situational factors might be leveraged. Conclusion (about .1 pages): Summarize your findings and their broader implications. Skills: This assignment will help you develop skills in ethical analysis and critical thinking. Criteria for Success: Successful papers will demonstrate a clear understanding of the chosen ethical theories and ethical situationism, provide a cogent account and analysis of misinformation in media, and propose well-reasoned solutions. Learning Goals: By completing this assignment, you should be able to apply ethical theories to real-world issues and understand the influence of situational factors on ethical decisions. Format & Length: Maximum 6 pages double-spaced, not counting title page and bibliography. Be sure to review the statement on the use of AI tools in the “Getting Started” module under Content. Be sure to include a bibliography listing the sources you use in your essay (this is standard academic practice)