philosophy

1. In Descartes’ First Meditation, why does he set about doubting all of his knowledge? What is he hoping to achieve?  2. In the First Meditation, Descartes provides two skeptical arguments. What are they, and what kind of knowledge claims does each argument call into question? 3. In the Second Meditation, Descartes argues that we can be certain of one thing. What does he claim we can know with certainty, and what is the reason he gives? Do you agree that we can know this with certainty? 4. In the Second Meditation, Descartes introduces the wax analogy. Explain the significance of the wax example. What was the purpose in Descartes’ example? 5. In the Third Meditation, Descartes talks about three sources of ideas: innate, adventitious, and self-created. Explain what these ideas are. How does Descartes relate the idea of an idea’s source with the idea of God? Where does Descartes claim the idea of God comes from?

Over the course of the semester, we have studied, discussed, and reflected on a variety of ethical perspectives on what it means to be a good human being and live an ethical life. As Aristotle reminds us, however, knowing how to be a good person is only half the battle; we must translate what we know into action. So, for this assignment, your task is to choose one of the ethical theories we have learned about so far: utilitarianism (Ahmed Sara (2010) “utilitarianism and empire” in the promise of happiness, deontology, virtue ethics, or care ethics( held, the ethics of care) and live according to that ethic for two days. More specifically, during this two-day period, use your chosen ethical theory to guide your actions, decisions, and behaviors (within reason). After you complete this part of the assignment, write a 3 page, double-spaced reflection paper detailing your experience living like a utilitarian, deontologist, virtue ethicist, or care ethicist. In order to make your reflection paper as strong as possible, I suggest taking frequent notes during your two-day experiment to keep track of your thought process as you make decisions. Take note of how your chosen ethical approach might have led you to make different decisions than you would have originally made. Your reflection paper should clearly explain how you applied the ethical theory to your particular situation and the various considerations involved in your decision making. You might also consider questions such as: What was difficult about applying the ethical theory? What was easy about it? What did you learn about the practicality of your chosen ethical theory from this experiment? Have your views about the ethical theory changed because of the experiment?  Choose one that you want to write and i will upload resources later.

Reflect on your own beliefs and the positions presented in the course. Demonstrate knowledge of major arguments and problems in ethics. Apply ethical concepts and principles to address moral concerns. Develop a coherent argument supporting a particular moral theory. This exam is intended to assess your thoughtful reflection on course content. You may refer back to your written assignments and discussion forums. But please do not engage in outside research. However, you must demonstrate that you understand the key moral concepts and theories you refer to in the course. You must respond to BOTH questions below. The exam should be submitted as a single file attached to this page. The total amount of written work should be two-four (2-4), double-spaced pages. Each answer will require 300-500 words to answer adequately. Longer is not better, but you must demonstrate sufficient thought and support for your positions.   Essay Question #1 Which moral theory studied in this class appeals to you most? Describe the moral principles, evaluative criteria, and metaethical commitments of the moral theory. Consider at least one objection that may be raised either from the perspective of other moral theories or from the perspective of someone skeptical that this moral theory is right. Respond to the objection. And explain how this moral theory would apply to one difficult case. The case should be a well-known or easily described moral dilemma and the theory should provide guidance to assist in making the right sort of judgment in that case. Or, if your theory denies that there is one right judgment explain why that position best explains the nature of this moral dilemma.   Essay Question #2 How have you views on ethics changed over the course of this class? The goal of this question is for you to reflect on your own beliefs around ethics through the course of this class. There is no correct answer, but I will assess the degree to which you demonstrate that you have seriously engaged with the topics in the class. I will also assess the degree to which you demonstrate the ability to understand how the class has impacted you. The following questions are merely prompts for your own thinking. You should not attempt to answer all questions as I am looking for a series of short-answer responses. Assess where you started when you began the class and where you are now. What, if anything, has changed? If nothing has changed, why not? Even if your views have not basically changed, have they been strengthened with more evidence or better arguments? Have you come to appreciate some possible objections to your position? Has your outlook on moral disagreements changed? How to you view others who might disagree with you?

Write a three to four (3-4) page paper in which you: State your position on the topic you selected. Identify (3) three premises (reasons) from the Procon.org website that support your position and explain why you selected these specific reasons. Explain your answers to the “believing” questions about the three (3) premises opposing your position from the Procon.org website. Examine at least two (2) types of biases that you likely experienced as you evaluated the premises for and against your position. Discuss the effects of your own enculturation or group identification that may have influenced your biases. Discuss whether or not your thinking about the topic has changed after playing the “Believing Game,” even if your position on the issue has stayed the same. The paper should follow guidelines for clear and organized writing: Include an introductory paragraph and concluding paragraph. Address the main ideas in body paragraphs with a topic sentence and supporting sentences. Adhere to standard rules of English grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and spelling. Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements: This course requires the use of Strayer Writing Standards (SWS). The format is different than other Strayer University courses. Please take a moment to review the SWS documentation for details. Based on the guidelines in SWS, “A well-researched assignment has at least as many sources as pages.” Since this assignment requires you to write at least 3-4 pages, you should include at least 3-4 references. The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are: Identify the informal fallacies, assumptions, and biases involved in manipulative appeals and abuses of language. Create written work utilizing the concepts of critical thinking. Use technology and information resources to research issues in critical thinking skills and informal logic.

After you read the Warren, the power of the promise of ecological feminism,   Leopold, The Land Ethic” and Jamieson’s “The Frontiers of Ethics.”  listen to the first 25 minutes of this podcast (or the whole thing if you have time). Then, drawing on what you’ve learned from the texts (particularly the Land Ethic), post your responses to the following discussion questions to Blackboard Journal: http://www.wnycstudios.org/story/galapagos/ 1. The episode describes hundreds of thousands of goats being killed to help indigenous species and the natural environment recover from overgrazing. Do you think the tortoises are more valuable than the goats? Was it wrong to kill the goats? Why or why not? 2. Should economic development (e.g., tourism) or wildlife protection takes precedence in places like the Galapagos (places that are unique in terms of their biodiversity, beauty, etc.)? 3. Do humans have a responsibility to save endangered or extinct species? Do humans have a responsibility to save threatened places?

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?

For this week’s assignment respond to one of the following options, and include Option 1, 2, or 3 as part of your heading. Option 1: The first option is to name and describe in detail a key specific and recent healthcare technology. What are at least two key moral problems this technology creates? What are the proper moral guidelines for dealing with it in your view? Compare your approach to what a utilitarian and ethical egoist would say (each independently). Option 2: In the second option, name and describe in detail a key specific and recent social technology. What are at least two key moral problems this technology creates? What are the proper moral guidelines for dealing with it in your view? Compare your moral approach to what a utilitarian and social contract ethicist would say (each independently). Option 3: John Doe, Patient One, is in late-stage of kidney disease. If he does not receive a new kidney, then he is predicted to die within a week. Doe is 45, single, and has no children. Doctors theorize that Doe damaged his kidney by not following a low-salt diet. Doe inherited one million dollars and is known for giving money to charity. Without a transplant, he will probably be forced to spend all his money searching for a kidney outside of the usual legal channels. Patient Two is Jane Doe (no relation to John). Patient Two is the mother of two children (ages 21 and 24). She is divorced and 55 years old. She developed kidney problems due to eating a high-fat and high-sugar diet. If she does not receive a kidney within one month, doctors believe she will die. Patient Three is an orphan. This orphan lives in a state facility. She was born with a genetic condition that constantly damages her kidney. The only known approach to her condition is to provide her with a kidney transplant every so often. She is 11 and has already undergone two kidney transplants. She will perish in two months if she does not receive another transplant. All three patients are at the same hospital. The hospital only has one kidney to give out. The orphan’s birth parents were known to be of a religion that is opposed to organ donation. The other patients come from religions that do not oppose organ donation. Who should get the kidney? Why should that candidate receive it over the others? Devise a course of social action and a solution for this case by using the ethics of egoism and then utilitarianism to a key moral conflict involving health care in this case. Appraise the interests of diverse populations (in terms of ethnicity, race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.) and how they relate to the case. For all the options: Cite the textbook and incorporate outside sources, including citations. You should not be using any text you used in a discussion board or assignment for this class or any previous class. You will submit all of the following: A written report that presents one of the options above (Be sure to give equal time to each element.) An oral presentation that summarizes the report and examines the ethical ideas beyond the particulars of each case. The link or a scan of the article mentioning the health technology, social technology, or case you are reporting on. If you made up the case, please indicate that in your report. You should not be using any text you used in a discussion board or assignment for this class or any previous class. Cite the textbook and incorporate outside sources, including citations. Writing Requirements (APA format)

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.

1) The Euthyphro where Socrates asks if the pious is pious because the Gods love it, or do the Gods love the pious because it is so pious. In short is it a God’s will that something is pious or is there some reason the pious is pious? For example, (the quiz question) Jesus comes to your door. Hypothetically, you know it is Him and you know He is God. He says to sell all you have, give the money to the poor, and come follow Him. Do you go with Him? Or do you ask questions and even argue with Him about it?2) The concerned Plato’s Republic where he describes his psychology. Do you agree with him that each person’s character is fixed from birth?Length: 250 words for each question.