philosophy

Topic 4 Contact Tracing and Privacy One measure at mitigating the spread of COVID-19 is contact tracing. The idea behind this measure is to first randomly test segments of the population for the disease before they show symptoms. Then, when someone tests positive, use their cell phone data to determine who they may have come in contact with, so that those individuals can be notified and tested as well. The idea here is to snuff out outbreaks before people get extremely sick. Does it infringe on one’s right to privacy to track their cell-phone data in this way? What sort of right to privacy allows contact tracing? Prompt: Explain why some think contact tracing violates rights to privacy. Use the following sources to inform your paper. A satisfactory explanation is unbiased, presents the author in his or her strongest light, clearly extracts the ethical issue, explains the authors reasons for his or her position, and includes only relevant information. Paper 1 Requirements: • 700 Words Maximum (display word count somewhere) Only .docx or .pdf file format • Normal formatting (Times New Roman, 12-point font, double-spaced, 1” margins)

Write a three to four page (750 -1000 words) essay. Pick an article from the list at Essay Resources on the course menu. Find a scholarly article that has been written by one of the philosophers being studied throughout this course. You may use the Internet to download articles. If you cannot find an article that you want to write about, ask your instructor for permission to choose another topic. Choosing a quote page is not acceptable. (A quote page is a list of quotes from a particular philosopher.) Some of these articles are quite lengthy. You may read first approximately 700 to a 1000 words of your chosen article and write about the portion you read. Summarize what you read and then write your own reflections. Consider the following: What have you learned in this class? Have your perspectives or ways of thinking changed or clarified? How do you feel about the article you read? How does it pertain to your life? Be sure to cite your source. Essay Resources and Topics This list of resources is intended for use and guidance for the essay you will write in Lesson 2 of this class. See the lesson 2 folder for more directions on the essay assignment. These names and articles listed are included for research purposes. Articles can be reviewed or downloaded from Wikipedia (http://www.wikipedia.org) and other public domain sources. Articles not designated as from Wikipedia can be found at Gutenberg Project (http://www.gutenberg.org/), a source for e-books of historical and cultural significance. Aquinas, Thomas http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Aquinas Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Summa Theologica, Part I (Prima Pars) From the Complete American Edition Aristotle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle Atomism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomism Descartes, Rene http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descartes Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting the Reason, and Seeking Truth in the Sciences http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext93/dcart10.txt Epictetus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epictetus Golden Sayings of Epictetus (main page) http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/e#a452 Selected Discourses of Epcitetus (main page) http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/e#a452 Heidegger, Martin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Heidegger Hume, David http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hume A Treatise of Human Nature James, William Lectures of (A Pluralistic Universe) Kant, Immanuel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals (main page) http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/k#a1426 Kierkegaard, Soren http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soren_Kierkegaard Locke, John http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Locke An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding, Volume 1 MDCXC, Based on the 2nd Edition, Books 1 and 2 http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/l#a2447 An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding, Volume 2 MDCXC, Based on the 2nd Edition, Books 3 and 4 http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/l#a2447 Second Treatise of Government http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/l#a2447 Marcus Aurelius http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Aurelius Marcus Aurelius’s The Meditations http://classics.mit.edu//Antoninus/meditations.mb.txt Marx, Karl http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx Communist Manifesto The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte Mill, John Stuart http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill The Subjugation of Women (About on wikipedia) The Contest in America http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/m#a1705 Nietzsche, Friedrich http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nietzsche Plato: Biography, Works, Metaphysics’s, Epistemology, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato Plato’s Seventh Letter http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/seventh_letter.1b.txt Protagoras (Plato) Discussion of the work at Wikipedia Sophist (Plato) Discussion of the work at Wikipedia Theaetus (Plato) Discussion of the work at Wikipedia Pre-socatic Philosophy Socrates Wittgenstein, Ludwig: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Wittgenstein Additional information: http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Greek-Philosophy-Philosophers.htm

Descartes tells us that, in order to see what is real, we must first doubt all we know with our senses. Our senses can deceive us. Are we dreaming? Are we being manipulated by an evil genius? Are we living in The Matrix where we are waiting for Keanu Reaves to rescue us? (I suppose that would be the most disturbing option!)In this case, we want to get at this notion of doubt. We will be reading from Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy.It is recommended that students read the first six meditations of Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy. The FULL TEXT can be found here:Descartes, R. (n.d.). Meditations On First Philosophy. Retrieved December 29, 2015, from http://selfpace.uconn.edu/class/percep/DescartesMeditations.pdfIs Descartes’ argument against trusting the senses a good one? What appeals to you most, and what do you find odd?

Find a moral problem in your place of employment. Tell me about it. What really bothers you and why? It need not be actually happening. The moral problem could be a potential problem, no matter how likely. Be creative. If you can’t think of a real problem you will likely face, make one up.Tell me what your position on the problem is, and what the relevant utilitarian and deontological considerations are. Who is being, or will be, hurt? Who is being, or will be, benefited? Why, overall, do you think your position on the issue is for the greatest good over the long haul? Whose rights are involved? Who has special duties?Here are some possible topics:

Phil 134 Final Exam Essay: Case Analysis–10 points Write a 1 to 1.5 page essay dealing with the case Robot Druggie In your answer, you should follow this short outline here: WARNING, this case is not simple! It is not about punishing robots. 1. In a sentence, state what is the important ethical problem in this case. 2. In a few sentences, state a solution or a way to reach a solution to this problem. 3. State which one ethical theory you think best fits this ethical problem & its possible solution. (there are 7 ethical theories to choose from, pick one). 4. Explain why you think this ethical theory fits best (-argument) Don’t define the ethical theory in your answer: Don’t summarize the case details before giving your argument. Only include details to explain how the theory fits. The argument should be about a page, single spaced, longer is okay, shorter & you lose points.

The Wrongfulness Of EuthanasiaEuthanasia is the termination of life, which to most is morally wrong, as it is an act against the interests of human beings or animals. Additionally, it is feared that if the approach is legalized, it will expose susceptible individuals to the pressure of wanting to die. However, from a practical perspective, the approach allows individuals to undergo dignified death at a chosen time, making them peaceful. Most terminally ill patients undergo a lot of pain, as well as the loss of dignity and the anticipation of a slow and painful death. The Goodness Of EuthanasiaAlthough death is a private issue that does not require government interference, assisting the death per se is not permissible in most nations. However, death may be a good thing for some individuals due to their state of health. Additionally, it may prove beneficial for relatives, the sick individual, and other guardians as well (Ash). Mostly, patients that qualify for euthanasia have undergone coma for long durations, those with terminal ailments, or even infants with severe mutations. Although it may sound cruel to want to end the life of an individual, it is essential to consider the burden under which guardians go through. To prolong the life of an individual who is terminally ill might sometimes present costly burdens that may result in suicide of guardian due to stress.

Research and discuss a problem related to your research topic. Identify the problem and generate two alternatives. What are the advantages and disadvantages for each alternative? What do you think the solution should be? What impact would this solution have if it was put into place? The paper should follow the paper guidelines and be 500-750 words.

Assignment: Compose a nine-page dialogue in which Socrates (or Confucius) applies critical thinking to someone’s 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: Plato’s 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?time_continue=4&v=tR_6dibpDfo&feature=emb_title

The questions are: Theories of Reality: Which metaphysical viewpoint – Materialism, Idealism, and Dualism – do you most agree with and why? What is ultimately “real,” the stuff we can see and touch (matter), or ideas/spirits/forms (idealism)? Or, is it some combination of the two (dualism)? Free Will – Are we free in a metaphysical sense? Or are we determined to act as we do? How do you know? Do the laws of nature apply to humans, too? And if so, how can we be free? If we’re not free, what do you make of the intuitive sense we all share that our choices are real? Theories of Knowledge – Can we ever really “know” anything for sure? How would you respond to the skeptic who says that real knowledge is impossible? Is certainty possible? If so, which of the various epistemologies (rationalism, empiricism, Kant’s approach, or any of the alternative epistemologies) seems most reasonable to you, and why? Remember: As you answer, don’t forget to do the following: Your initial reply should be at least 300 words. Support your ideas with the sources – the course textbook, the lessons, relevant web research, etc. Cite all sources properly in either MLA, APA, or Chicago style (I don’t care which). Proof-read your writing so that there are no typographical errors or mechanical problems (grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc.).

Except for logic, both physics and ethics, according to Kant’s division of philosophy, have an “empirical” part, in addition to a “non-empirical” or “a priori” part. (The Latin expression ‘a priori’ in philosophy means “coming prior to, and standing before all experience of the world—experience itself being made possible by the use of the various senses.”) Why, according to Kant’s way of thinking, is there a need for a “pure ethics”—that is, one that is grounded in purely a priori principles? Why can’t ethics concern itself only with what is strictly “empirical”?