philosophy

Write a 2-4 page essay (in Word or Rich Text Format, double spaced, size 12 font) on one of the following topics. (Cite all sources you use to avoid plagiarism). Use the text as your primary source and at least one academic secondary source. 1.) Explain Descartes’ Method of doubt; what does he hope to accomplish from this method; is Descartes a sceptic? 2.)What is the significance of Descartes’ Cogito argument? How does it relate to the “evil demon” and dreaming doubt arguments? 3.) Does Descartes believe in God? If so discuss his argument(s) for the existence of God. Are they convincing? Why or why not? If you don’t think that Descartes actually believes in God defend your position. 4.) Discuss the so-called “Cartesian Circle”; (a good source for this discussion are the articles on Descartes at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy; is Descartes guilty of begging the question or arguing in a circle in his discussion of God as the guarantor of clear and distinct ideas and his clear and distinct idea of God? 5.) Explain the relationship between satyagraha and swaraj for Gandhi. How does his concept of non-violent resistance relate to his beliefs about God and punishment? 6.)How widely and to what effect has Gandhi’s non-violent resistance been employed in political struggles? what are some of its advantages and disadvantages? 7.) Explain Gandhi’s contention that external independence (swaraj) depends upon internal swaraj. Do you think his reasoning is correct? why or why not? 8.) Compare and contrast Gandhi and Plato on the issue of appearance and reality. (Cite all sources you use to avoid plagiarism) Cite all sources with quotation marks for direct quotes and parenthetical references. Don’t place URLs in the body of your paper; cite online sources by author’s name or article title. Place urls at the end of the paper in the work cited page. Every student is encouraged to submit drafts of papers to Upswing under the tutoring tab for assistance with composition and proofreading.

1. In Descartes’ First Meditation, why does he set about doubting all of his knowledge? What is he hoping to achieve?  2. In the First Meditation, Descartes provides two skeptical arguments. What are they, and what kind of knowledge claims does each argument call into question? 3. In the Second Meditation, Descartes argues that we can be certain of one thing. What does he claim we can know with certainty, and what is the reason he gives? Do you agree that we can know this with certainty? 4. In the Second Meditation, Descartes introduces the wax analogy. Explain the significance of the wax example. What was the purpose in Descartes’ example? 5. In the Third Meditation, Descartes talks about three sources of ideas: innate, adventitious, and self-created. Explain what these ideas are. How does Descartes relate the idea of an idea’s source with the idea of God? Where does Descartes claim the idea of God comes from?

Over the course of the semester, we have studied, discussed, and reflected on a variety of ethical perspectives on what it means to be a good human being and live an ethical life. As Aristotle reminds us, however, knowing how to be a good person is only half the battle; we must translate what we know into action. So, for this assignment, your task is to choose one of the ethical theories we have learned about so far: utilitarianism (Ahmed Sara (2010) “utilitarianism and empire” in the promise of happiness, deontology, virtue ethics, or care ethics( held, the ethics of care) and live according to that ethic for two days. More specifically, during this two-day period, use your chosen ethical theory to guide your actions, decisions, and behaviors (within reason). After you complete this part of the assignment, write a 3 page, double-spaced reflection paper detailing your experience living like a utilitarian, deontologist, virtue ethicist, or care ethicist. In order to make your reflection paper as strong as possible, I suggest taking frequent notes during your two-day experiment to keep track of your thought process as you make decisions. Take note of how your chosen ethical approach might have led you to make different decisions than you would have originally made. Your reflection paper should clearly explain how you applied the ethical theory to your particular situation and the various considerations involved in your decision making. You might also consider questions such as: What was difficult about applying the ethical theory? What was easy about it? What did you learn about the practicality of your chosen ethical theory from this experiment? Have your views about the ethical theory changed because of the experiment?  Choose one that you want to write and i will upload resources later.

After you read the Warren, the power of the promise of ecological feminism,   Leopold, The Land Ethic” and Jamieson’s “The Frontiers of Ethics.”  listen to the first 25 minutes of this podcast (or the whole thing if you have time). Then, drawing on what you’ve learned from the texts (particularly the Land Ethic), post your responses to the following discussion questions to Blackboard Journal: http://www.wnycstudios.org/story/galapagos/ 1. The episode describes hundreds of thousands of goats being killed to help indigenous species and the natural environment recover from overgrazing. Do you think the tortoises are more valuable than the goats? Was it wrong to kill the goats? Why or why not? 2. Should economic development (e.g., tourism) or wildlife protection takes precedence in places like the Galapagos (places that are unique in terms of their biodiversity, beauty, etc.)? 3. Do humans have a responsibility to save endangered or extinct species? Do humans have a responsibility to save threatened places?

Reflect on your own beliefs and the positions presented in the course. Demonstrate knowledge of major arguments and problems in ethics. Apply ethical concepts and principles to address moral concerns. Develop a coherent argument supporting a particular moral theory. This exam is intended to assess your thoughtful reflection on course content. You may refer back to your written assignments and discussion forums. But please do not engage in outside research. However, you must demonstrate that you understand the key moral concepts and theories you refer to in the course. You must respond to BOTH questions below. The exam should be submitted as a single file attached to this page. The total amount of written work should be two-four (2-4), double-spaced pages. Each answer will require 300-500 words to answer adequately. Longer is not better, but you must demonstrate sufficient thought and support for your positions.   Essay Question #1 Which moral theory studied in this class appeals to you most? Describe the moral principles, evaluative criteria, and metaethical commitments of the moral theory. Consider at least one objection that may be raised either from the perspective of other moral theories or from the perspective of someone skeptical that this moral theory is right. Respond to the objection. And explain how this moral theory would apply to one difficult case. The case should be a well-known or easily described moral dilemma and the theory should provide guidance to assist in making the right sort of judgment in that case. Or, if your theory denies that there is one right judgment explain why that position best explains the nature of this moral dilemma.   Essay Question #2 How have you views on ethics changed over the course of this class? The goal of this question is for you to reflect on your own beliefs around ethics through the course of this class. There is no correct answer, but I will assess the degree to which you demonstrate that you have seriously engaged with the topics in the class. I will also assess the degree to which you demonstrate the ability to understand how the class has impacted you. The following questions are merely prompts for your own thinking. You should not attempt to answer all questions as I am looking for a series of short-answer responses. Assess where you started when you began the class and where you are now. What, if anything, has changed? If nothing has changed, why not? Even if your views have not basically changed, have they been strengthened with more evidence or better arguments? Have you come to appreciate some possible objections to your position? Has your outlook on moral disagreements changed? How to you view others who might disagree with you?

Write a three to four (3-4) page paper in which you: State your position on the topic you selected. Identify (3) three premises (reasons) from the Procon.org website that support your position and explain why you selected these specific reasons. Explain your answers to the “believing” questions about the three (3) premises opposing your position from the Procon.org website. Examine at least two (2) types of biases that you likely experienced as you evaluated the premises for and against your position. Discuss the effects of your own enculturation or group identification that may have influenced your biases. Discuss whether or not your thinking about the topic has changed after playing the “Believing Game,” even if your position on the issue has stayed the same. The paper should follow guidelines for clear and organized writing: Include an introductory paragraph and concluding paragraph. Address the main ideas in body paragraphs with a topic sentence and supporting sentences. Adhere to standard rules of English grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and spelling. Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements: This course requires the use of Strayer Writing Standards (SWS). The format is different than other Strayer University courses. Please take a moment to review the SWS documentation for details. Based on the guidelines in SWS, “A well-researched assignment has at least as many sources as pages.” Since this assignment requires you to write at least 3-4 pages, you should include at least 3-4 references. The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are: Identify the informal fallacies, assumptions, and biases involved in manipulative appeals and abuses of language. Create written work utilizing the concepts of critical thinking. Use technology and information resources to research issues in critical thinking skills and informal logic.

Three Parts to Include in Report: Part One: Intro to Philosopher 1. Name and time period of philosopher 2. What was the report (focus) of the philosopher in ethics? 3. Tell us about the basic BIO. of the philosopher? 4. Tell us a few things totally offbeat and unusual (and perhaps funny) about the philosopher. Part Two: Primary Readings/Summary 5. What is the name of the philosopher’s famous work in ethics (primary readings)? 6. How many pages did you read of it? Which sections?? 7. Give us a basic summary of what you read. (sections 7 and 8 are the most important parts of the report) 8. Analyze the material…compare/contrast/evaluate Part Three: Application 9. Apply the philosopher’s ideas to today / to yourself. 10. Would you recommend this philosopher to others? Overall, what do you think about this philosopher? Did the philosopher change your thinking in any way? Any final statements about this philosopher??

Proposition: Felons in the United States should regain the following rights immediately after being released from prison: the right to vote, the right to live in public housing, and the right to apply for all employees without discrimination (which would entail “banning the box For your debate project, each of you is to submit a minimum of 4 of the strongest pro arguments for your topic. Each of these arguments should be fully developed with multiple premises, written in your own words, and thoroughly supported by several separate pieces of documented evidence. In total, each argument should contain a minimum of 6 clear premise statements logically supporting a specific conclusion statement. Each of your 4 arguments should lead to a different, specific conclusion related to a particular aspect of your larger conclusion (your general proposition for the debate). (120 points) 4 of the strongest con arguments for your topic. Each of these arguments should be fully developed with multiple premises, written in your own words, and thoroughly supported by several separate pieces documented evidence. In total, each argument should contain a minimum of 6 clear premise statements logically supporting a specific conclusion statement. Each of your 4 arguments should lead to a different, specific conclusion related to a particular aspect of your larger conclusion (the negation of your general proposition for the debate). (120 points) 10 credible and relevant sources for your debate topic (these cannot include sources like procon.org, debate.org, thoughtco.com, debatewise.org, etc.). You need to include a minimum of 2 specific, relevant pieces of information from each of these sources somewhere in your arguments or moderator questions. (30 points) 10 good moderator questions, in your own words. Approximately half of your moderator questions should be aimed at the weaknesses of the pro argument and approximately half of your questions should be aimed at the weaknesses of the con side of the debate. (30 points) This assignment should be at least 4 – 6 pages, not including your works cited page. You need to submit your own work, in your own words. If your Turnitin score is above 25% you will not receive a passing grade for this assignment. If your work is plagiarized or “Rogeted,” in any way, you will receive a zero for the assignment. Remember to include your specific proposition at the top of your submission. I’m not concerned if the sources you provide are in MLA, APA, etc. format as long as you include adequate information so that I can easily find each source and verify that it’s a credible and relevant source.

Do women actually exhibit the different forms of ethical reasoning attributed to them? If they do, what is this a consequence of (nature, society, etc.)? Does it affect feminist ethical theories?

According to Kant, why is breaking a promise or lying (always) immoral? Do you agree with Kant? Why or why not?