Category Archives: Philosophy

The Rise of Artificial Intelligence: Is It Helping or Hurting Our Jobs?

This Final Paper, an argumentative essay, will present research relating the critical thinker to the modern, globalized world.
In your paper,

    Identify the global societal problem within the introductory paragraph.
        Conclude with a thesis statement that states your proposed solutions to the problem.
    Describe background information on how that problem developed or came into existence.
        Show why this is a societal problem.
        Provide perspectives from multiple disciplines or populations so that you fully represent what different parts of society have to say about this issue.
    Construct an argument supporting your proposed solutions, considering multiple disciplines or populations so that your solution shows that multiple parts of society will benefit from this solution.
        Provide evidence from multiple scholarly sources as evidence that your proposed solution is viable.
    Interpret statistical data from at least three peer-reviewed scholarly sources within your argument.
        Discuss the validity, reliability, and any biases.
        Identify the strengths and weaknesses of these sources, pointing out limitations of current research and attempting to indicate areas for future research. (You may even use visual representations such as graphs or charts to explain statistics from sources.)
    Evaluate the ethical outcomes that result from your solution.
        Provide at least one positive ethical outcome as well as at least one negative ethical outcome that could result from your solution.
        Explain at least two ethical issues related to each of those outcomes. (It is important to consider all of society.)

    Develop a conclusion for the last paragraphs of the essay, starting with rephrasing your thesis statement and then presenting the major points of the topic and how they support your argument.
THERE ARE REFERENCES ALREADY ATTACHED FOR USE ALONG WITH SOME ALREADY WRITTEN MATERIAL.

Philosophy essay

Some people say, price, snob value, and value as relic have little to do with artistic merit. The first is to do with rarity, the fluctuations of collectors tastes, and the manipulations of the art dealers; the second is a matter of social rivalry; the third is psychological, to do with the way we treat objects.

Quiz4Do you agree with that? Why or why not?

Some people say, price, snob value, and value as relic have little to do with artistic merit. The first is to do with rarity, the fluctuations of collectors tastes, and the manipulations of the art dealers; the second is a matter of social rivalry; the t

Some people say, price, snob value, and value as relic have little to do with artistic merit. The first is to do with rarity, the fluctuations of collectors tastes, and the manipulations of the art dealers; the second is a matter of social rivalry; the third is psychological, to do with the way we treat objects.

Quiz4Do you agree with that? Why or why not?

Descartes and Hume Comparison essay

Does Matthew have a soul?
Of Descartes and Hume, which philosopher would agree with which sister and why?
(Hint: there is a right answer to this question. One will agree with one sister, and the other philosopher with the other.)

Present one paragraph succinctly paraphrasing the sisters’ situation, ending with a thesis statement answering the questions above. (This may be a rewrite of your first paragraph from your first paper.)

Present one page [500 words] answering the question from the perspective of Descartes.
Make sure to explain and apply all relevant arguments we have read this semester.
In doing so, answer the following questions: What is Descartess basic orientation and methodology? How does this lead him to prove that there is such a thing as the soul, as distinguished from the body, and in the process argue that we are capable of acquiring truth independently of bodily experience?
(This will be a rewrite of your Descartes Writing assignment)
Which of the sisters would be more likely to adopt Descartes’ arguments along this line?
How would she apply these arguments to Matthew’s situation?
How might the other sister criticize these arguments and their application?

Present a page [500 words] answering the question from Hume’s perspective. Make sure to explain and apply all relevant arguments we have read this semester. In doing so, answer the following questions:
What is Humes methodology and basic orientation, including his theory of mental activity? What does Hume mean by the following passage:
When we run over libraries, persuaded of these principles, what havoc must we make? If we take in our hand any volume; of divinity or school metaphysics, for instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Commit it then to the flames: for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion.
What does this passage imply for Matthews situation? How might the other sister respond to these arguments and their application?

Present a third page evaluating the comparative worth of the two answers presented so far. Does Matthew have a soul? Which do you most agree with, disagree with, why?

Present a fourth page answering the question for yourself. Should they pull the plug? What is your answer to the question, and why?

As far as having the other sister respond, you can go about in several ways:
(a) disagree with the philosopher directly (e.g., point out a weakness in his argument);
(b) disagree with the application of the philosopher to this situation;
(c) use another aspect of the philosophers theory that would support the other sisters conclusion.

Your essay MUST include a) a word count b) in-text citations and c) a works cited page. Entries which do not meet this requirement will not be accepted or will be heavily penalized, per Course Grading guideline instructions.

Quine on the indeterminacy of meaning

This is a philosophical essay on Quine.
The question is:
“Explain Quine’s argument for the indeterminacy of meaning. Give reasons for and against his argument. Do you agree with his argument?”

I’m uploading chapter 2 of his book “Word and Object” which should be discussed as the main reference. There’s no need to include other references, but the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy might help in general, and can be cited if needed.

social ethics

For this assignment, you will create a handbook for a child care facility you plan to open. The purpose of the handbook is to provide prospective families with information about the center.

You may use information from any of your previous assignments in this course to assist you in building the content of your handbook (incorporating any constructive feedback you may have received from your instructor).

Include information for each of the following:

conspiracy theory

Assignment: Compose a nine-page dialogue in which Socrates (or Confucius) applies critical thinking to someones conspiracy theory (which may be chosen by you for discussion; e.g., The CIA created the AIDS virus). Instructions are below. Upload to Moodle by July 1.

Socratic Dialogue Instructions: http://morec.com/socratic/socrates.pdf

Grading criteria: http://morec.com/socratic/

Dialogue sample and dialogue format: https://chinatxt.sitehost.iu.edu/Thought/Euthyphro.pdf

Example of a Socratic Dialogue: Platos Republic, Book I (see especially Discussion #3, pages 5-13): https://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/Philosophers/Plato/republic_book_one.pdf

Videos for learning more about Socrates: http://morec.com/socratic/

About propaganda, disinformation, and conspiracy theories: https://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2020/06/07/fake-news-disinformation-propoganda-truth-rhetoric-twitter-president-trump-ancient-greek-philosophers-socrates-plato-truth/ideas/essay/

Video about disinformation and conspiracy theories: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR_6dibpDfo&feature=youtu.be

Any topic (writer’s choice)

You must choose TWO of the topics below, and for each one that you choose you must write an essay. The two essays are equally weighted. Each essay should be approximately 1 2 single-spaced typewritten pages, font size 12. You must upload the exam, as assignment 3, to OWL no later than 72 hours after the exam begins. That is, the exam must be uploaded to OWL by 9 AM on Monday, June 29, Eastern Daylight-Saving Time. Remember that OWL incorporates the plagiarism checker Turnitin. Verbal similarities between your essays and the essays of any other student in the class will be caught by the plagiarism checker. If this happens, then you will be penalized, and disciplinary procedures will be initiated against you.

In writing this exam, you should display your knowledge of Chapters 1-8 of Onora ONeills Justice Across Boundaries: Whose Obligations? The individual questions below will direct you to files that could be found in the Resources section of the OWL site for this course. Each question will be graded out of 30.

1. (For this question, you should use the files called the good Samaritan and Scott Warren in the Resources section of the OWL site for this course.) How might the parable of the good Samaritan be used to justify the idea that wealthy states should give aid to poor states? Give an account of how we might interpret the story of the good Samaritan below in terms of Kants categorical imperative. Explain why this is relevant to ONeill. Is Scott Warden a good Samaritan? What do you think ONeill would say about governments that try to prosecute people like Scott Warden? Explain.

2. (For this question, you should rely on the file called sittlichkeit in the Resources section of the OWL site for this course.) Almost certainly, ONeill would maintain that in a relatively large country like Canada, more than one sittlichkeit can be found. Why should she think so? On the assumption that she is right, what problem does this raise for communitarianism in connection with figuring out what the obligations of Canadians are?

3. (For this question, you should rely on the files called gay-rights SCOTUS and conflict and gay-rights in the Resources section for the OWL site for this course.) The Supreme Court of the United States has recently decided that discrimination based on sexual orientation is included under discrimination based on sex, so that since in American law people have a right not to be discriminated against on the basis of sex, they also have a right not to be discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation. In American law, too, people have a right to practice their religion. To many people, these rights appear definitely to conflict. According to ONeill, when apparent conflicts of real rights occur, a delicate, fact-based accommodation must be worked out. In the file called conflict and gay-rights, to conservative authors propose an accommodation between the right not to be discriminated against on the basis of sexual orientation, and the right to religious freedom. Briefly summarize the proposal. Do you think that their proposal is satisfactory? Do you think that their proposal would satisfy ONeill? Give reasons for your answers.

4. (For this question you need to make use of the file called economic refugee in the Resources section for the OWL site for this course.) Currently, Canada, like most countries, does not grant refugee status to coming into the country and claiming truthfully that they are fleeing on the basis of their genuinely awful economic and possibly life-threatening economic prospects in their country of origin. Do you think that ONeill would say that Canadians have an obligation to grant such people refugee status in Canada, so that they could stand eventually become Canadian citizens? Give reasons for your answer. Do you yourself think that Canadians have an obligation to grant such people refugee status in Canada, so that they could stand eventually become Canadian citizens? Give reasons for your answer.

problem of evil

What is the problem of evil? Why do you think this problem appeared as a problem to be solved in Western philosophy? Why do you think evil exists? And is it logical to claim that an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God exists in light of the presence of what we have called horrendous evils? Provide reasons for your answers.

Homework question for philosophy class

Please read the attached file an introduction to philosophy pdf
Meta Ethics, pages 94-107 only and answer the following questions:
Only use the attached source to answer the question.
Review and Discussion Questions — Please answer, DISCUSS each question with at least a full paragraph worth of information. Your explanations should be thorough and complete.
1. What is the aim of normative ethical inquiry?
2. What is nihilism?
3. What is moral relativism?
4. Explain moral subjectivism as an individualized form of moral relativism.
5. What is Devine command theory?
6. What is moral realism?
7. How does metaethics differ from normative ethics?
8. Explain the challenge nihilism faces as a skeptical hypothesis.
9. How doe moral subjectivism and other varieties of moral relativism undermine reasoning about morality?
10.  Moral subjectivism makes each person infallible judges of morality relative to themselves. Why might we regard this as a problem?
11.  How does moral subjectivism along with other varieties of moral relativism undermine the idea of moral growth?