Categories
Philosophy

One of the ways philosophers share their knowledge is by collecting short essay

One of the ways philosophers share their knowledge is by collecting short essays about the most important
ideas in their fields of study. For the final project for this class, each student will need to deeply consider and
craft a final essay on one big idea within the hundreds of ideas in this course.
For the short reflective essays (~750 words), we will pause in our material (no new readings) after each major
section of the course (Virtue Ethics, Universalist Ethics, or Utilitarianism) to make time to reflect further on the
ideas that have been most important to you in the module. Your peers will read your work and respond to
your ideas (not as editors, but in dialogue as thinkers.) You should help each other a lot in the process. This
project is actually a lot of fun, because everyone in the class gets to choose their own focus and follow their
passions.
Everyone will have the same final deadline for their expanded essay: You will need to compose both the reflection and expansion formally, and your final paper will be ~2000 words in
length. If you would like feedback and the opportunity to revise, please turn in your paper via email. I am happy to give extra-credit for extra-work, and I am open to
students adding sections to their papers if they meet the requirements below. There will be a late penalty of
10% for every 12-hours late, but I am happy to grant Incompletes or support you in other ways as needed.
Reflective Essay Instructions—->Analytic Revision
Some of you wrote longer reflection essays and may have already completed aspects of the outline. The ‘a’
points are for the reflection; the ‘b’ parts of the extension and revision instructions.
Outline for Reflective Essay (part a) and Outline for Final Essay (part b)
Part 1a: Define
Define the big idea, key concept, or terminology. Include important examples and counterexamples used by our
authors. ONLY use references from our course materials. Parenthetical references are fine; no bib needed.
Part 1b: Refine with textual evidence
You will need to locate 3-4 quotes from our readings refining the definition of the big idea, and explain the idea
in greater detail across 3-4 paragraphs. This is your chance to revise any misunderstanding from your reflection
presentation, but also to specify more closely how the philosopher’s specific big idea is different from the
common sense definition of the concept chosen (ex. Aristotle on friendship vs general usage of friendship.)
For the final paper, you will be graded for accuracy in your definition and the quality of your textual support.
Part 2a: Reflect on place in class
Discuss why you think this idea was assigned in any Ethics class and this class in particular.
Part 2b: Put into dialogue with another philosopher, author, or film from the class.
To demonstrate an analytic (not reflective or speculative) understanding of our materials, you will need to
integrate the work of another text/film from the class. There are several options for developing your analytical
writing: 1) show how another text extends or expands the idea you chose, 2) show how another text points to an
oversight (missing) point that should be added to the big idea, OR 3) show how another text helps us in
understanding an important ethical problem or question raised by the big idea. You will need to use at least 3-4 quotes or scenes from the other author/film as textual evidence to support your analysis. Again, you will be assessed according to the quality and accuracy of the connections you draw. It helps to almost role play a dialogue between the author of the big idea and another author from the class. What would they say to one another if they met in real life and had a conversation about the big idea?
Part 3a: Impact
Explain why you chose to focus on this idea and what is important about it to you. Write in the first person and
as if you are trying to explain the impact of this idea. You may want to also raise questions or describe
possibilities for applying this idea.
Part 3b: Impact as the class concludes.
This section should be written in the first-person and should discuss what the idea means to you now that we
have finished the class. How will it stay with you after the end of the semester? This section is still reflective,
but it is a summary reflection that draws together your understanding of the entire semester. This section
should comprise no more than 250-500 words of your paper.
Essentially, you need to follow the directions above and turn in polished college-level writing (not first publish
prose) to do well on this assignment. Excellent work earns an A, very good work a B, etc. I expect you to
incorporate insights from the discussion of your paper and suggestions from my feedback into your revised and
expanded essay.
Below is the information on Utilitarianism; the topic that you wrote for my short reflective essay, and I’ll also be attaching my short reflective essay below.
BACKGROUND
1. Watch this short video on utilitarianism (or consequentialism): Utilitarianism: Crash Course Philosophy #36 – YouTube
2. We will be focusing on Chapters 1 and 2 of Mill’s Utilitarianism. You may find a clean copy of the reading at these web links: 1. Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill and 2. Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill.
3. I have also scanned my copy of the reading with my notes. It is harder to read, but I thought it might be fun for you to see, and I will use it as a reference for my audio lecture: Mill (1). (attached)
PROMPT — DO NOT PLAGIARIZE, please. Your ideas are enough.
Utilitarianism is accused of promoting a life of pleasure that is immoral and reduces human beings to pigs (our lowest impulses). Mill counters that human beings who have experienced the ‘higher’ or more ‘elevated’ pleasures found in education, civic freedom, and compassion will choose these over ignorance, oppression, and cruelty. He does acknowledge that some people do find great pleasure in cruelty, for instance, but that this is only because they have not known the greater pleasure of kindness.
I think you can use “Ida B.Wells and the Red record” for part 2b of the paper. This is the information on this topic:
Note: Be sure to read/listen to the materials in order, because I am providing background info which will allow deeper engagement. We are very lucky that a rich archive of resources has been created in connection to a 2021 PBS project remembering Wells, so the content this week includes very important archival materials. However, I also want to encourage you to use self-care in reviewing the materials and let me know if you are concerned about specific triggers related to the topic. I have provided alternative texts and options as needed in the past.
BACKGROUND and MATERIALS
Read this hand-out: Guide to Wells and King (attached)
Watch the 2021 WTTW film: Ida B. Wells: A Chicago Stories Special Documentary.
Follow up by reading ONE of the resources below.Read Exposing the “Thread-Bare Lie”: How Ida B. Wells Used Investigative Journalism to Uncover the Truth About Lynching | Ida B. Wells | Chicago Stories | WTTW Chicago. This includes primary materials of images and writing from Wells. Some of the images are graphic, but you have to click-through to view them.
Read Joy James’s “The Quartet in the Political Persona of Ida B. Wells.” James is a contemporary Black feminist philosopher who unfolds the importance of Wells as a political thinker in 4 parts.
Read Tommy J. Curry, “The Fortune of Wells.” Curry is also an influential contemporary philosopher; here he connects Wells to the intellectual tradition of militant resistance to racist violence. This reading also helps us expand our understanding of the power of friendship in moral development.
PROMPT
All of our readings have placed great emphasis on the importance of justice and the rule of law. These are seen as vital to the principles of humanity (Kant) and the defense of our mutual respect, dignity, and fundamental autonomy and freedom as persons. These are also seen as vital in our fostering of King’s beloved community, a vision of justice, but also of love and non-violence. He was despised for holding out hope for true integration, the protection of all, and a path of growth for every child not marred by hate. Finally, Wells was driven by principles of truth, fairness, justice before the law, self-determination, and self-defense. Wells allied with a great number of white antiracists and had deep, intimate friendships, but she first wanted Black Americans to speak dangerous truths, demand justice, and organize for their own protection and felt this was the precursor to meeting the white establishment as true equals and from a position of power.
And these were my professor’s comments for the reflective essay:Utilitarianism:
Wow! The clarity and cogency of your writing throughout the class has been very impressive. Your description of utilitarianism in both Mill and Bentham is spot on. As you move forward with the final paper, here are some notes that will help you take your work to the next level.
Be sure to follow the outline for the paper. I could read between the lines, but you didn’t directly address Parts II and III. As a reflection assignment, I do want you to address the questions included in the prompt and respond in the first-person. Part of the point is to include your voice and thoughts as part of the philosophical practice of dialogue.
You also end with this statement, “As this topic has shown, utilitarianism is less compelling and reasonable when seen from a distance,” but I don’t know that you developed a critique of utilitarianism in a way that supports this conclusion. I am certain you could, but there is barely any discussion of this point. I would love to hear your thoughts!
Congrats on this work. Please don’t hesitate to get in touch if you have questions as you work on your final essay. It would be my pleasure to help!
Please write the whole paper in very simple language.
NO plagiarism should be found.
Read through all the instructions and materials given and write the paper accordingly.
Write the paper in first person.
Also, look at the comments of my professor and please make the necessary changes.
This paper should be 2000 words of length.
Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Categories
Philosophy

Part 2: Short-Answer. Answer these questions in 2 to 4 complete sentences, more

Part 2: Short-Answer. Answer these questions in 2 to 4 complete sentences, more or less. Be concise and precise, but write in full, grammatical sentences (avoid fragments). Avoid vagueness and info-dumping—answer just what the question asks, rather than writing everything you know about the topic(not a good strategy). Strive for clarity. CAUTION: Answers must be in your voice, explained in your own words. If detected, copying/pasting from the Powerpoints and swapping out synonyms will not get full credit.
Total points possible: 20
1) Worth 6 points: Why does Montaigne think that whether someone had a good life is something that can’t be judged until their last day? A complete answer 1) explainsMontaigne’s conception of death, 2) why the final day is important to Montaigne, and 3) what this has to do with the good life.
2) Worth 6 points: Marx explains 4 ways that capitalism alienates workers. Describe 2 ways in which Marx thinks workers are alienated under capitalism. A complete answer 1) describes what alienation is in general, then 2) explains 2 ways in which capitalism creates alienation for workers, and 3) for each of these, explains what is wrong about it.
3) Worth 8 points: In your own words, define moral schizophrenia as discussed by Stephen Gardiner then give an example of it. A complete answer 1) defines the idea of moral schizophrenia [2pts], 2) explains why it is “schizophrenic” [2pts], 3) provides an original example of this phenomenon [2pts] and, finally, 4) includes an explanation why/what it is an example of the phenomenon [2pts].
1) Worth 4 possible points: Is the following argument valid? Explain your answer. (Remember that the definition of validity is that if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. In evaluating this argument, it is also useful to consider the type of claims each of them is.)
Premise: Human beings are by nature selfish.
Conclusion: Therefore, we should act selfishly.

2) Worth 6 possible points: According to Amia Srinivasan, why does effective altruism require the wrong thing from us? Use an example to explain your answer. For full answer, you must 1) explain how effective altruism works and what it requires, 2) use a relevant example (either from the reading or the ppts on the topic, or an original one), and 3) explain what is required by EA in the example and why this is the wrong kind of thing to require.

Categories
Philosophy

Present the concept of dignity in Kant’s Groundwork. As part of your analysis an

Present the concept of dignity in Kant’s Groundwork. As part of your analysis and critical discussion, consider the issue raised by Andreas Matthias in his article ‘Dignity and Dissent in Humans and Non-humans.’ I.e., do AI systems currently have, or could they conceivably have, dignity?
Matthias, A. 2020. ‘Dignity and Dissent in Humans and Non- Humans, ‘ Science and Engineering Ethics 26: 2497-2510.
Quote directly from both texts to illustrate and support your claims.
Length- Approx 10 pages

Categories
Philosophy

Part 2: Short-Answer. Answer these questions in 2 to 4 complete sentences, more

Part 2: Short-Answer. Answer these questions in 2 to 4 complete sentences, more or less. Be concise and precise, but write in full, grammatical sentences (avoid fragments). Avoid vagueness and info-dumping—answer just what the question asks, rather than writing everything you know about the topic(not a good strategy). Strive for clarity. CAUTION: Answers must be in your voice, explained in your own words. If detected, copying/pasting from the Powerpoints and swapping out synonyms will not get full credit.
Total points possible: 20
1) Worth 6 points: Why does Montaigne think that whether someone had a good life is something that can’t be judged until their last day? A complete answer 1) explainsMontaigne’s conception of death, 2) why the final day is important to Montaigne, and 3) what this has to do with the good life.
2) Worth 6 points: Marx explains 4 ways that capitalism alienates workers. Describe 2 ways in which Marx thinks workers are alienated under capitalism. A complete answer 1) describes what alienation is in general, then 2) explains 2 ways in which capitalism creates alienation for workers, and 3) for each of these, explains what is wrong about it.
3) Worth 8 points: In your own words, define moral schizophrenia as discussed by Stephen Gardiner then give an example of it. A complete answer 1) defines the idea of moral schizophrenia [2pts], 2) explains why it is “schizophrenic” [2pts], 3) provides an original example of this phenomenon [2pts] and, finally, 4) includes an explanation why/what it is an example of the phenomenon [2pts].
1) Worth 4 possible points: Is the following argument valid? Explain your answer. (Remember that the definition of validity is that if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. In evaluating this argument, it is also useful to consider the type of claims each of them is.)
Premise: Human beings are by nature selfish.
Conclusion: Therefore, we should act selfishly.

2) Worth 6 possible points: According to Amia Srinivasan, why does effective altruism require the wrong thing from us? Use an example to explain your answer. For full answer, you must 1) explain how effective altruism works and what it requires, 2) use a relevant example (either from the reading or the ppts on the topic, or an original one), and 3) explain what is required by EA in the example and why this is the wrong kind of thing to require.

Categories
Philosophy

please follow instructions in screen shots. Also the first answer is you answeri

please follow instructions in screen shots. Also the first answer is you answering these 3 videos. The other 2 are you replying to other student’s responses. I will be able to see the other student’s responses when I submit the first 1. So send as quickly as possible
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXXXTqWBGpghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGhPCMcj0Q0https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPkaB8YvD9k

Categories
Philosophy

Instructions: Please write a 2-3 page essay answering all parts of the following

Instructions:
Please write a 2-3 page essay answering all parts of the following question. Feel free to use material and ideas from throughout Chapter 8. However, if you choose to use any direct quotes from the chapter, or any other outside sources, then please remember to properly cite that material. The use of any outside material without citation will be considered plagiarism and will result in a 0 for the assignment.
Prompt:
According to Thomas Hobbes, all individuals are self-interested and competitive. Given this assessment of human nature, what does Hobbes think a state without government, or a state of nature, would be like? How can we get out of this state of nature and what is the role of the social contract in this process? Do you think that Hobbes is correct in his account of the origins of government?
Textbook link https://view.publitas.com/p222-13032/philosophy-a-…

Categories
Philosophy

What is cultural relativism? Explain at least one of Rachels’ objections against

What is cultural relativism? Explain at least one of Rachels’ objections against cultural relativism. In your view, does Rachels defeat cultural relativism? Explain.
At least one page

Categories
Philosophy

Instructions: Please write a 2-3 page essay answering all parts of the following

Instructions:
Please write a 2-3 page essay answering all parts of the following question. Feel free to use material and ideas from throughout Chapter 8. However, if you choose to use any direct quotes from the chapter, or any other outside sources, then please remember to properly cite that material. The use of any outside material without citation will be considered plagiarism and will result in a 0 for the assignment.
Prompt:
According to Thomas Hobbes, all individuals are self-interested and competitive. Given this assessment of human nature, what does Hobbes think a state without government, or a state of nature, would be like? How can we get out of this state of nature and what is the role of the social contract in this process? Do you think that Hobbes is correct in his account of the origins of government?
Textbook link https://view.publitas.com/p222-13032/philosophy-a-…

Categories
Philosophy

What is cultural relativism? Explain at least one of Rachels’ objections against

What is cultural relativism? Explain at least one of Rachels’ objections against cultural relativism. In your view, does Rachels defeat cultural relativism? Explain. At least one page

Categories
Philosophy

You are to place yourself in the Original Position behind the Veil of Ignorance.

You are to place yourself in the Original Position behind the Veil of Ignorance. You are to choose an education system, a health care system, a social security system and roughly decide on a system of taxation and spending.
In order to justify your position, you can add three principles of justice in addition to the ones Rawls proposes (I am going to assume that Rawls is correct when he thinks everyone would agree to his principles).
The best way to think about this thought experiment is to read and reread the 2nd paragraph from Anthony Kenny and the 2nd paragraph from Michael Sandel, from my lecture notes parts 3 & 4.
You must all agree on these proposals and the principles underlying them.
Keep in mind that this discussion is worth 10 points, if you only do your usual amount of discussion, I will grade you on a 5-point scale.