philosophy

Write 1000 page paper on the Nature of Sin using this book as your main sourcebook by Marguerite S. Shuster called “The Fall and Sin: What We Become As Sinners”. 1) Must use the book as the main source, and must have the page number when using quotes for footnotes and bio 2} Can use other sources. but use the main source For more information on Nature of Sin read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin

 Explain Jesus’ teaching of the Beatitudes (Matt 5)  300 words short essay based on notes No APA For more information on Jesus Teaching read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=Jesus+Teaching&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go&ns0=1

There are 6 (specific) requirements that must be fulfilled. However, you are ultimately responsible for choosing the topic and direction of your essay. There are obviously general requirements of any argumentative paper but I will add a rubric outline for argumentative papers below. If you muck up one of these, then expect big points off of your paper: 1. Find a movie, short story, documentary, or complex news item (not a one-page article but only investigative or in-depth pieces, check with me if you are unsure) to base your analysis around and focus your thesis. I have given you a few suggestions: the movie “Her” for Philo of mind or personal identity and “Minority Report” for free will. 2. You must present a philosophy of mind, personal identity, philosophy of religion, or free will topic. The purpose is to argue/explain, for example, a theory in the philosophy of mind or personal identity in terms of the movie “Her”. Examples: Functionalism, Substance Dualism, Memory Theory, etc… In this case, you would be arguing that the character Sam is a mind or how to interpret Sam as a person over time as a way to make the case that the theory you are advancing/arguing for is the best answer to the mind-body problem. 3. Include an objection to your view. Some possibilities: Could there be another theory that best explains our intuitions about thought experiments in the movie/show? Does your theory lead to some absurd consequences whether in real life or via the movie’s world? Is there a possible way to develop a contrasting view of the OSes from the behavior of one of the characters? 4. Include discussions of the thought experiments, ideas, philosophers found in the textbook and links given to you by the prof. 5. You must include one secondary source and provide a full works-cited page. (This means citing the articles we used IN CLASS, from the research, the textbook, and EC work). This also means you SHOULD be using the course material to help make your case in addition to the secondary source from the textbook. 6. Word Minimum: Roughly 1500 -1800 words (MINIMUM). It is permissible to go over the 1800 words if needed (no excuses about not knowing you could write more to fulfill the tasks). For more information on read this: 

Section 4.5 is on The traditional square of opposition.  And 4.6 is on the Venn Diagrams of the propositions that take the traditional standpoint.  Like I said in the intro, I’m going to do sec 4.6 first, and 4.5 seconds.  Here is some questions.1.  What is the difference in notation between the Venn Diagrams that adopt the Boolean standpoint and the Venn Diagrams that adopt the traditional standpoint?  There’s only one small difference.  Just draw it, or explain what it looks like, and explain what the new notation means.  2. Explain the logical relation between the ‘A’ and the ‘I’ propositions on a) the Boolean standpoint (look at the modern square) and b) the traditional standpoint (look at the traditional square).  Why are they different? 3. On the Traditional Square, the relation between the ‘A’ proposition and the ‘E’ proposition is said to be ‘contrary.’  Describe the contrary relation, and explain why it is different than the ‘logically undetermined’ relation on the modern square.  4. Draw (if you can) the picture of the Traditional square of opposition.  Label all the parts.  Familiarize yourself with the meanings of all the relations.  i will provide log in information for the online textbook for necesssry reference. 

Your response should be a minimum of 175 words total (approx. 50 words per question). Based on this week’s reading and activities, how would you define critical thinking? What are some characteristics of a critical thinker? What do you see as common barriers to critical thinking, and how might people overcome or avoid those barriers? Reflect on the learning activities, concepts, ideas, and topics covered this week. What is the most interesting activity or concept you learned this week? Mention any concepts that are still a bit confusing to you or that you have questions about.

What is mythic? For more information read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythic

Socrates and Buddha had some similar ideas and traits.  Write an essay defending this idea.  Give a few of Buddha’s basic ideas Socrates would probably agree with (focus here on the ideas Rahula presents in his first chapter) and then discuss whether it would be difficult for Socrates to follow the Eightfold Path.  Be sure to address all the aspects of the Path and to give support for your claims.  Are there any ways in which the two men are significantly different? Evaluation of the essays:  Essays are evaluated on a number of criteria including Evidence of a good understanding of the views under consideration Quality of the explanation of the views and their application to the new situation/question given Quality of arguments involved (this involves not only the giving of reasons and objection and response but also the quality of the writing as that affects how good an argument is) For more information on Socrates and Buddha read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=Socrates+and+Buddha&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go&ns0=1

This course has three written assignments that build upon one another and are designed to take you step-by-step through a process of writing a paper that identifies an ethical question, examines the context, issues, and arguments surrounding the question, and attempts to defend an answer to that question using strong moral reasoning. In the Week 1 assignment, “Ethical Question,” you chose an ethical question, provided an introduction, a position statement and supporting reason, and an opposing position statement and supporting reason. In the Week 3 assignment, “Applying an Ethical Theory,” you explained utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics, including its core moral principle or ideal, and applied that theory to the topic by demonstrating how its principles would support a particular position on your ethical question. In this final written assignment, you will combine what you have done in these two exercises by examining an ethical issue and defending your own position on an ethical question regarding that issue. This final written assignment should be written in essay form with the following clearly labeled sections: Introduction Ethical Argument Explanation and Defense Objection and Response Conclusion The paper should be between 1,300 and 1,500 words, utilize three scholarly resources, and include a title page and reference page.

Complete the  A “Great” Composer A “Great” Composer – Alternative Formats table by doing and answering the following Compare any two (2) different historical periods that you have read about in this course: Medieval, Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, and Contemporary. Who are all the most influential composers of the two periods? Why were they so influential? What are the hallmarks (unique characteristics) of the “styles” of each period and/or composer? Listen to work by each composer. Name the title of the piece and the composer you selected for each period. Do their works share any similarities? How are they different from one another? Think of a modern composer you think may have been influenced by the composers you chose composers. Write in complete sentences, to complete the  A “Great” Composer A “Great” Composer – Alternative Formats table. Use Microsoft Word and run a spell check/grammar check (under the “Review” menu in Word). Correct grammar and spelling will be part of your grade. Copy and paste your proof-read assignment into the Assignment DropBox (not the “Comments” Box.)

I need some assistance with these assignment. women philosophy Thank you in advance for the help! Short Essay Philosophy: Women Philosophy At the beginning of the part four of the dis Descartes explained his position concerning the omissions he had made when trying to explain the three kinds of primordial notions, namely. body, soul and the union existing between the body and the soul. He said that we cannot recognize the above three notions by way of comparing with one another (Women Philosophers, PP 18). Hence he felt that he must have stated the difference that subsists among the soul along with its functions, body, the union of the two and the means with which all these three notions become immediately obvious. He affirmed that although the soul is conceived as a material, it is distinctly separate from it (Women Philosophers, PP 18). The major difference among the three kinds of notions lies in the fact that the soul can be recognized by pure understanding alone whilst the body can be recognized by understanding assisted by imagination. But the matters that are relevant to the union of the body and the soul can be recognized only ambiguously by understanding or imagination (Women Philosophers, PP 19). They are known to the senses evidently. Hence those who solely rely on their senses consider the body and the soul as one single thing and believe that the body acts upon the soul. Descartes feels that the metaphysical thoughts that employ pure understanding make the notion of the soul clear to us (Women Philosophers, PP 19). Whereas one can conjure up the notion of the union of soul and body by availing oneself to life and simple conversations and refraining from meditating and studying matters which implement imagination (Women Philosophers , PP 19). There are some logical errors made by Descartes here. He himself admits that human mind is not capable of conceiving soul and body. At the same time he explains it is possible to understand the union through senses. In my opinion senses borrow their existence from mind. Without the aid of mind the senses cannot function. Hence even senses cannot conceive the union. Also I disagree with Descartes’ discovery that everything we conceive very clearly and very distinctively is true. Even in our dreams we conceive things very clearly and distinctively only to find when we wake up that they are nothing but the creations of our own mind. In the same way the waking reality can also be negated in our dream. For instance, if a beggar dreams to be a king, he would not agree if someone comes in his dream and says that he is actually a beggar. Another obscurity is that the word ‘soul’ is not defined clearly. Does soul include mind and the very person who tries to understand the notion of the union? Descartes agrees that the union is evident. But he must have tried to establish the fact whether it can be communicable. Works Cited Women Philosophers of the Early Modern Period. PP 18 -19. Ed. Margret Atherton. Indiana: Hackett Publishing Company, 1994. Print.