Categories
Philosophy

Discussions Response please treat each Discussio

Discussions Response
please treat each Discussions Response separately
Daniel M
Nozick believed in a minimal interference of government, which is in contrast to Rawls who believed the government should exist to ensure everyone is treated equally and should take concrete steps to reach that goal. Nozick firmly believed the government does not have the right to interfere with people without the direct request from the people. This applied to taxes and property as well. Justice in Acquisition is Nozick’s belief that if someone fairly obtained their property, meaning they did not illegally steal it from someone else, and was fair in the amount they took so as to not deprive other people, then it was a fair acquisition. At this point, the government has no authority to come in and attempt to redistribute that property, as it was acquired fairly. Nozick also believed that if the property included resources such as water from a river, being used by others previously, then it is imperative the person who acquired the property ensure the others can continue to utilize the resource, or water. He does note however that it is entirely up to the new property owner who acquired the property owner as to the amount and methods of obtaining and using that resource, since they are now the owner. Put simply, this means whoever obtained a property first has rights to it, but they can’t be so unfair the strip the ability of others surrounding it to utilize natural resources on it, and they cannot take more property than is fair so as to deprive others of the chance to own any.
Chauncie H
The “veil of ignorance” is a moral reasoning device designed to promote impartial decision making by denying decision makers access to potentially biasing information. Rawls thought experiment on this was that we should imagine we sit behind a veil of ignorance that keeps us from knowing who we are and identifying with our personal circumstances. By being ignorant of our circumstances we can more objectively consider how societies operate. He also stated that decision-makers are assumed to be purely self-interested but their decisions are constrained by the absence of information that they could use to select principles favorable to their personal circumstances. Now, what I think he means by that is thinking back to slavery on people thought it was a good idea to have slaves and the view of ignorance would have given them a right to refuse slaveries, and it would only affect the slave owners, because of what they were doing to the slaves. I definitely agree with this. I think the veil of ignorance gives us a way to sort of create a way for fairness, and it’s something that we definitely need to work on even in this time, I think a lot of people see it as they don’t have to be favorite anything because it’s theirs and that’s what we have to normalize, something may be yours, but the same time it’s nothing wrong with being fair, telling someone something or even sharing a little bit of information with them.
https://www.pnas.org/action/oidcCallback?idpCode=connect&error=login_required&error_descriiption=Login+required&state=2_nk-vDIpU9kPph5oTgFHjCiMKSknNGbQmhWGL0QnxMLinks to an external site.

Categories
Philosophy

Write a 500-750 word (2-3 pages) essay in which you (a) explain a single argumen

Write a 500-750 word (2-3 pages) essay in which you (a) explain a single
argument, view, or objection and then (b) raise a single objection to that argument,
view, or objection. Roughly, the first half of the essay should be exposition, and the
second half evaluation.
The first line of your essay should begin: “In this essay I argue that…” followed
by a descriiption of your thesis statement. Please do not include an introduction or
conclusion. The point of the assignment is to develop your skills constructing the
substance of philosophical argumentative essay.
Some Tips:
• The whole point of the essay is to convince the reader of a particular claim. Make
that main claim extremely clear and explicit. This is your thesis statement. Your
thesis statement should make a philosophical, and not merely descriiptive, claim
(e.g. “Direct manipulation of brain is permissible,” and not “Levy believes that
2
direct manipulation of the brain is permissible.”). Take a clear stand on a
neuroethical issue.
• How do you choose a thesis statement? As we go through the material be on the
lookout for an argument or point that you disagree with. Then your thesis
statement would be that that argument or point is wrong.
• Your thesis statement should be of the form: “In this essay, I argue that…” Note
that the ‘that’ is crucial. The following is non-grammatical and non-sensical: “In
this essay I argue the extended mind hypothesis.” You need to argue that
something is true or false (or, alternatively: for a particular claim, or against a
particular claim, or in defense of a particular claim). For example, “In this essay I
argue that the extended mind hypothesis is false.”
• Ideally, your thesis statement should attempt to advance the dialectic. This
means that it should attempt to contribute something novel or original to a debate
that we’ve discussed in the course. For example, a thesis statement of the form “In
this essay, I argue that Levy’s view is correct” does not do this, it simply registers
agreement. So what do you do if you find that you want to write on a topic in
which you agree with the argument? In that case, try to come to the defense of the
argument against a new threat. Try to articulate what you think is the strongest
objection to the argument that you want to defend, and offer a counter response.
• If you have the space, try to add another layer of depth by anticipating and
responding to an objection to your position: “One might object to the argument of
this essay by claiming that…In response, notice that…”
• Fully explain all points. Imagine that the reader is someone with no prior
knowledge of the material. Strive to write so that such a reader can follow what
you are saying. To do this, you should be using the following phrases frequently:
“That is,…”, “In other words,…”, “For example,…”, and “To illustrate,…”. You
can test whether you’ve achieved this level of clear explanation by having a friend
or family member read your paper.
• This one should be obvious, but you should read your paper before submitting
it. If you can’t make sense of it, the TA and I surely won’t be able to. Good, clear
papers are easy to read.
Sample Structures:
Example 1. Raise an objection to the extended mind hypothesis. In that case you are simply raising an objection to an argument, so that your essay structure will be as follows:
(i) Thesis statement: “In this essay, I raise an objection to the argument for the
extended mind hypothesis”
(ii) Exposition: Explain what the extended mind hypothesis is. Explain the
argument for the extended mind hypothesis. [Note that in the exposition your goal
is to simply explain the target view or argument so that it is on the table for
discussion. Do not include any evaluation at this stage.]
(iii) Your objection. [Notice that you will not be in a position to raise your
objection until you’ve first explained the view.]
3
(iv) Space allowing, consider how your interlocutor (i.e. the person you are
debating) might respond to your point and offer a preemptive counter-response.
See these EXTREMELY good guides on philosophical writing:
• http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/guidelines/writing.html (provides a good
overview)
• https://www.public.asu.edu/~dportmor/tips.pdf (by ASU philosopher Doug
Portmore; more in depth)
My favorite piece of advice from the above Pryor article is to write while imagining that
your reader is lazy, stupid, and mean: “He’s lazy in that he doesn’t want to figure out what
your convoluted sentences are supposed to mean, and he doesn’t want to figure out what
your argument is, if it’s not already obvious. He’s stupid, so you have to explain
everything you say to him in simple, bite-sized pieces. And he’s mean, so he’s not going
to read your paper charitably. (For example, if something you say admits of more than
one interpretation, he’s going to assume you meant the less plausible thing.)”
Now, of course, those reading your paper will be none of these things! But if you
write with this idea in mind, it will help you achieve a high level of clarity and precision,
which is highly valued in philosophical writing. I still try to keep these things in mind
whenever I write.
Philosophical argumentative writing is a unique form of persuasive writing in which one
attempts to convince the reader, by way of rational argumentation, of the truth of a
particular claim (i.e. the thesis statement). If you have never written a philosophical
argumentative paper before:
4
• Read the guides by Pryor and Portmore.
• Consider running your thesis statement by your TA.
• Consider sending your TA a detailed outline (by the Wednesday prior to the
Sunday due date) for feedback.
• Consider making an appointment at the SHPRS Writing Studio:
https://shprs.asu.edu/writingstudio

Categories
Philosophy

Must we change? Can we change? Will we change? The answer to these three questio

Must we change?
Can we change?
Will we change?
The answer to these three questions can be a personal opinion and not necessarily from any readings or research. We will revisit these questions toward the end of our time together.

Categories
Philosophy

Must we change? Can we change? Will we change? The answer to these three questio

Must we change?
Can we change?
Will we change?
The answer to these three questions can be a personal opinion and not necessarily from any readings or research. We will revisit these questions toward the end of our time together.

Categories
Philosophy

Your assignment for this unit involves two parts. In the first part, you will be

Your assignment for this unit involves two parts. In the first part, you will be identifying rhetorical devices used to persuade an audience. In the second part, you will identify premises used to build a logical argument devoid of rhetoric.
Using the Unit VII Assignment Template , review the political speech regarding the construction of the proposed factory. Identify the rhetorical devices, ethos, and pathos in the template. Next, review the additional relevant information that was omitted from the speech. Using this information, identify premises for a logical argument based on relevant information in the template.
View the Unit VII Sample Assignment for an example of how your completed assignment should look. APA Style is not required for this assignment, and no outside resources are required.

Categories
Philosophy

Please no plagiarism or paraphrasing without source. For this journal assignment

Please no plagiarism or paraphrasing without source.
For this journal assignment, briefly answer each of the following prompts:
Critical Thinking
After reading the required resources for this week and participating in the discussion, how do you define critical thinking? You will want to carry this definition with you, so keep it brief – perhaps 4 to 6 lines. You will find many definitions online – don’t be tempted to just quickly copy one; try to form your own so that it is meaningful to you.
Heart of the Matter
Considering just what you read in Chapter 2.3 “Looking Ahead” why do you think the authors see Chapters 12, 13, and 14 as the “heart of the matter”?
What do you think they mean by that?
What two concepts do the authors say these chapters emphasize?
How do you define these concepts?
Why do you think the authors find these concepts important to critical thinking?
Challenges & Insights
What do you see as your greatest challenge for this session in general? For this class in particular?
How do you think you can use the concepts in these first three chapters to help you meet these challenges as well as challenges in your personal life as a member of your family and your community?
If you include references to outside sources (beyond the textbook), make sure you cite them properly.
Writing Requirements (APA format)
Length: 1 -2 pages (not including prompts, title page or references page)
1-inch margins
Double spaced
12-point Times New Roman font
Title page
References page (as needed)
I’ve attached the book. This is the assignment that is due

Categories
Philosophy

Please no plagiarism or paraphrasing without source. For this journal assignment

Please no plagiarism or paraphrasing without source.
For this journal assignment, briefly answer each of the following prompts:
Critical Thinking
After reading the required resources for this week and participating in the discussion, how do you define critical thinking? You will want to carry this definition with you, so keep it brief – perhaps 4 to 6 lines. You will find many definitions online – don’t be tempted to just quickly copy one; try to form your own so that it is meaningful to you.
Heart of the Matter
Considering just what you read in Chapter 2.3 “Looking Ahead” why do you think the authors see Chapters 12, 13, and 14 as the “heart of the matter”?
What do you think they mean by that?
What two concepts do the authors say these chapters emphasize?
How do you define these concepts?
Why do you think the authors find these concepts important to critical thinking?
Challenges & Insights
What do you see as your greatest challenge for this session in general? For this class in particular?
How do you think you can use the concepts in these first three chapters to help you meet these challenges as well as challenges in your personal life as a member of your family and your community?
If you include references to outside sources (beyond the textbook), make sure you cite them properly.
Writing Requirements (APA format)
Length: 1 -2 pages (not including prompts, title page or references page)
1-inch margins
Double spaced
12-point Times New Roman font
Title page
References page (as needed)
I’ve attached the book. This is the assignment that is due

Categories
Philosophy

1) A clear and identifiable thesis 2) One or two reasons for holding your

1) A clear and identifiable thesis
2) One or two reasons for holding your thesis
3) Be clear on the passages that you are using
4) Use one example to explain or as an objection
5) Integrate at least one additional passage from one of our readings and cite it
6) Consider a counter-argument to your view and respond to it
7) You may use forum discussions in the essay, but please cite your source
8) Include a bibliography even though you are using the textbook for our class
Audience:
Think of your peers in the class as your audience. They are familiar with the material. You do not need to explain to them who these philosophers are or when they lived. You have a limited amount of space so focus on your thesis and argument quickly. However, do take a few sentences in the introduction to motivate your thesis.

Categories
Philosophy

Write a paper that compares Sebastian Maniscalco with Aristophanes (clouds) usin

Write a paper that compares Sebastian Maniscalco with Aristophanes (clouds) using the theories from the previous weeks. Your hypothesis is either way “Comedy (did not) change”… Do not use wikipedia.

Categories
Philosophy

Summarize the following passage, paying particular attention to Aristotle’s reas

Summarize the following passage, paying particular attention to Aristotle’s reasoning:
Presumably, however, to say that happiness is the chief good seems a platitude and a clearer account of what is still desired. This might perhaps be given if we could first ascertain the function of man. For just as for a flute-player, a sculptor, or an artist, and, in general, for all things that have a function or activity, the good and the ‘well’ is thought to reside in the function, so would it seem to be for man, if he has a function. Have the carpenter, then, and the tanner certain functions or activities, and has man none? Is he born without a function? Or as eye, hand, foot, and in general each of the parts evidently has a function, may one lay it down that man similarly has a function apart from all these? What then can this be? Life seems to be common even to plants, but we are seeking what is peculiar to man. Let us exclude, therefore, the life of nutrition and growth. Next, there would be a life of perception, but it also seems to be common even to the horse, the ox, and every animal. There remains, then, active life of the element that has a rational principle; of this, one part has such a principle in the sense of being obedient to one, the other in the sense of possessing one and exercising thought. And, as ‘life of the rational element’ also has two meanings, we must state that life in the sense of activity is what we mean; for this seems to be the more proper sense of the term. Now if the function of man is an activity of soul which follows or implies a rational principle, and if we say ‘so-and-so-and ‘a good so-and-so’ have a function which is the same in kind, e.g. a lyre, and a good lyre-player, and so without qualification in all cases, eminence in respect of goodness being added to the name of the function (for the function of a lyre-player is to play the lyre, and that of a good lyre-player is to do so well): if this is the case, and we state the function of man to be a certain kind of life, and this to be an activity or actions of the soul implying a rational principle, and the function of a good man to be the good and noble performance of these, and if any action is well performed when it is performed in accordance with the appropriate excellence: if this is the case, human good turns out to be an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue, and if there are more than one virtue, in accordance with the best and most complete. ( NE Bk. 1, Ch 7)