philosophy

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?

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.

Remember that you have to think critically, which means leaving feelings and religious beliefs aside. We are dealing with the concrete, social problems and must find a practical, specific solution. Read the articles in your textbook but above all refer to class discussions and lectures.  The textbook is the one I uploaded.

You need to address the subjectivism vs. objectivism debate in ethics.  Which do you find the most convincing?  What arguments do you find the most compelling to support your position? In other words, you need to choose either ethical objectivism or ethical relativism, explain which arguments help you choose your position, and explain why other arguments are NOT convincing.  You will find details of this debate in our William Lawhead “Philosophical Journey” book (pages 431-453) Next, you need to present the various theories of ethical relativism found in our Lawhead book and give the strengths and weaknesses of each theory. Then you will need to decide which theory you find most convincing, and support your decision with arguments. Subjectivism pp. 433-435; Conventionalism pp.  435-443 Finally, you need to present the various theories of ethical objectivism found in our Lawhead book.  You will need to give strengths and weaknesses of each theory, explain which is the most convincing, and support your decision with arguments. Ethical egoism pp. 453-469; Utilitarianism pp. 470-487; Kantian ethics pp. 488-505; Virtue ethics pp. 506-525

2. Explain why doing something that you do not want to do is not necessarily a restriction of your autonomy.              3. Explain why identifying how some action harms someone is not sufficient to apply the principle of Justice.   4. Why does Weston think we should seek to integrate values?   Answer the questions below about this scenario:   Martha Johnson works for Antenna Engineering, which has designed the antennas and a thousand-foot tall tower for a local TV station.  The tower has been put in place, except for the last section containing the antenna baskets.  Because the baskets are attached to the top section, it cannot be lifted in the same way as the other sections.  To hold this last section away from the tower as it is hoisted so that the antenna baskets will not be damaged, the construction workers, who work for a different firm than Johnson and are not engineers, plan to bolt some lifting arms to the section.  These arms, which would extend beyond the edge of the tower section, would allow the section to be held far enough away from the tower to prevent damage to the antenna baskets.  Not being confident that this method of lifting the final section is sound from an engineering standpoint, the construction workers call Johnson, asking, “Can you look at our proposal for lifting the last section to be sure it is safe?”             Johnson calls her boss, Bill Mason, the president of Antenna Engineering, to relay the request.  His response is emphatic:   No way!  If we are involved in construction in any way and there is an accident, we are liable.  Our contract was only to design the tower and the baskets.  We have no responsibility for construction.  We tried to be nice guys once before and ended up being sued for $250,000.  We are a small company and cannot afford to lose our insurance.   Johnson knows enough about the construction contractor’s proposed way of lifting the last section to suspect that it is indeed unsafe and that there is the real possibility that the last section could fall, killing the workers who will be riding the section to the top of the tower.  Unfortunately, she also knows that her boss’s fears for the welfare of the company are legitimate and that she will probably lose her job if she gives the contractors any advice.    5. Which moral principles apply?  For those that do apply, what course of action to they support or oppose?  [4]   6. Identify the values at stake in this situation, and then devise an integrative (‘win-win’) approach to the problem.  [4]

Write a short, objective summary of 250-500 words which summarizes the main ideas being put forward by the author in this selection.

Which argument on the existence/none existence of God you think is the most convincing in chapter 6 (Doing Philosophy and introduction Throught thought experiments Fifth edition.Theodore Schick,Jr and Lewis Vaughn)Pick one movie to discuss this argument. Analyze one specific scene in the movie where spectators can clearly see this argument on the existence/none existence of God.

Please provide your responses to Ayn Rand’s Objectivist Philosophy, which informs much of the modern libertarian movement. Consider, in particular, the decisive break with the collectivist ethics of earlier periods (particularly socialism, communism, and trade unionism), the role of government, the responsibility of the individual, the place of philanthropy in society, etc. Reading attached here: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ayn-rand/

There are 10 Q&A questions in total and pick 4 of them to answer. The answer should be 400 – 500 words(regard 500 as a maximum), so it should be about 2000 words in total. Each question has an associated reading.