Based on your teaching/learning experiences and pedagogical philosophy, do you consider yourself to be a linear thinker, holistic teacher, Laissez-Faire advocate, critical theorist, traditionalist, empiricist, or reconceptualize? Why?
Category: philosophy
Hume & Descartes
In a two-page essay (500 words), Do you think the Senses Can Account for All of Our Knowledge? Outline Hume’s objection to the use of inductive reasoning
to secure knowledge about how things will be in the future. How does Hume’s objection here represent his empiricism, and his skepticism? Do you believe
that Hume’s discussion of induction has any practical value? If so, what is it? If not, why do you think that it is considered an important part of epistemology?
In 200 words outline Descartes’ discussion of the “evil genius” and the potential that we are being fooled by him. What work does this do in Descartes’
discussion of knowledge? What should we doubt, according to Descartes, given the possibility of such an evil genius?
Harassment and Discrimination In the Workplace
In this final written assignment, Case Study: Ethical Theory Application and Evaluation, you will create your own case study based on
an ethical issue or social problem in your local community (neighborhood, town city, school district, religious community, local politics, water safety, housing
issues, etc.),
an ethical issue in your current job, or
an ethical issue in your field of study.
This final written assignment should be an essay and include the following sections with headings in bold font:
Part 1: Introduction, Case Study, and Ethical Question
In this section, you will create the case study. To complete this section,
Present a brief introduction to the case study.
Discuss background information.
Identify the central moral controversy at stake in the case study.
Articulate an ethical question based on the central moral controversy.
This section should be around 300 words.
Part 2: Philosophy Reading Reflection
In Sections 4 and 5 you will use two ethical theories to analyze your case study. In this section, you will choose a philosophical text associated with one of
the ethical theories you will be using in Section 4 or 5. The philosophical text can be the same one you used in the Week 3 written assignment, or you can
choose a new text. Copy and paste the text into this section. After applying the metacognitive strategies on reading philosophical texts from Week 1,
Examine the meaning of the text.
Discuss how your understanding of the text evolved after multiple reads.
Explain how the text might apply to the case study.
This section should be around 150 words (excluding the philosophical text).
Part 3: Explanation of First Ethical Theory
In this section, choose either utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics. This will be the primary or first ethical theory you will use to consider the case study.
You can choose the same ethical theory you used in the Week 3 written assignment or choose a different ethical theory. To complete this section,
Discuss the historical background of the ethical theory and the philosopher primarily associated with it.
Articulate the core principle(s) of the ethical theory.
Demonstrate how the principle(s) applies to an ethical question different than the ethical question in your case study
Part 4: Application of First Ethical Theory
In this section, you will apply the principle(s) of the ethical theory to the case study. To complete this section,
Clarify the central moral controversy at stake in the ethical question.
Analyze the core principle of the ethical theory.
Explain how someone using the core principles of the ethical theory would answer the ethical question addressed by your case.
This section should be around 350 words.
Part 5: Explanation and Application of Second Ethical Theory
In this section, you will choose a second ethical theory and apply it to the case study. The explanation and application here will be briefer than the first ethical
theory. To complete this section,
Discuss the core principle of the ethical theory.
Explain how someone using the core principles of the ethical theory would analyze the case study and answer the ethical question.
This section should be around 150 or 200 words.
Part 6: Evaluation of First Ethical Theory Application
In this section, you will evaluate the results of applying the ethical theory to the case study. The idea here is to assess the success (or failure) of the theory in
providing an adequate or actionable solution to the central moral controversy in the case study. To complete this section,
Discuss the answer to the ethical question provided by applying the first ethical theory.
Compare the answer to the ethical question provided by applying the first ethical theory to the second ethical theory’s application.
Explain which ethical theory you think offers the strongest resolution to the ethical issue.
Evaluate the strength of the application by considering one or more of the following questions:
Does applying the theory present an adequate response to the issue, or are there significant aspects of the issue the theory does not address?
Does the application differ from how the issue is currently being addressed?
Does the application present a better approach to how the issue is currently being addressed?
Does applying the theory to the issue raise other problems or concerns?
This section should be between 300 and 350 words.
Part 7: Conclusion
In this section, you will describe what you have accomplished in the paper. To complete this section,
Summarize the analyses and conclusions of applying the first and second ethical theories to your case study.
Evaluate the results of applying the theory
Did it offer an adequate solution to the issue?
What is the greatest strength or weakness of the theory when applied to the issue?
Provide any additional recommendations you think might help address the central moral controversy in the case study.
This section should be around 150 words.
Utilitarianism, Kantian Deontology, Virtue Theory
Choose two of the three ethical theories that we have engaged with (Utilitarianism, Kantian Deontology, Virtue Theory). Which of the two that you have
chosen is most philosophically and morally persuasive? Provide at least three philosophical reasons that your preferred theory is the stronger of the two.
Detail at least one philosophical flaw in the theory that you are rejecting. Include an example (either real-world or hypothetical) to support your position and
analyze it thoroughly. Quote and cite Sandel at least twice in the paper.
This term paper should respond to one of several optional multi-part prompts provided on Moodle on the date noted in the schedule. The student is expected
to discuss at least two philosophical perspectives or approaches in the paper and make an argument for the superiority of one over the other. The student is
expected to critique the positions discussed insightfully, articulately, and coherently. Students should make a well-reasoned argument for one perspective or
position over the other.
The danger of Darwin’s idea
What was the danger of Darwin’s idea?
Marx’s derivation of capital from wage labour to be inadequate.’ Assess
‘Colonial expropriation shows Marx’s derivation of capital from wage labour to be inadequate.’ Assess this claim and describe any implications of it that you consider significant.
Do you think primitive accumulation occurs only with violence? Justify your answer with an example of your own choosing.Ming Dynasty
After the fall of the Mongols, China was ruled by the native Ming Dynasty for nearly three centuries. The dynasty’s founder ruled for thirty years, becoming more paranoid and despotic over time. Though very few of his successors were particularly good rulers, China thrived in many ways.
Write an p that describes the ways that China thrived during this time period in terms of agriculture, education, culture, etc. and its impact on the population. Your p must be between 700 and 1,000 words in length. Your p will be assessed based on the strength of your thesis statement, command of supporting data, and overall quality of writing.
Self-fulfilling prophecy
Read the section in Chapter 12 before beginning this assignment. Students need to understand
the concepts in order to complete this assignment. If you are confused about the Chapter 12 concepts,
watch the videos on the Chapter 12 Module page. Define the terms in your own words explaining
your understanding of the definitions.
Answer the questions below. Define terms in your own words explaining your understanding of the
definitions. I ask students to define concepts so they consider what the terms mean. This assignment is not in MLA or APA style. You do not need to retype the questions. Only include the answers to the questions.
Do not include the assignment directions in your assignment. Please include only the question numbers and your answers.
Part 1: Definitions-2 Points each
1. a. Write the definition of self-fulfilling prophecy in your own words.
b. What does the self-fulfilling prophecy lead to?
2. a. Write the definition of cognitive dissonance in your own words.
b. Describe the emotional state the person is in and what causes it.
3. a. Write the definition of deindividuation in your own words.
b. Explain what causes deindividuation.
4. What is the difference between deindividuation and conformity?
5. Write the definition of bystander effect in your own words.
6. Explain the relationship of diffusion of responsibility to the bystander effect.
7. Write the definition of fundamental attribution error in your own words.
8. With the fundamental attribution error, what are the differences in how people attribute their own behavior versus attributing the behavior of others?
Part 2: Life Examples -3 points each
9. Describe a situation from your life that is an example of self-fulfilling prophecy or cognitive dissonance. Indicate whether this is an example of self-fulfilling prophecy or cognitive dissonance. Discuss how the concept applies to and explains the situation. You must state whether your example is an example of self-fulfilling prophecy or cognitive dissonance.
10. Describe a situation from your life that is an example of deindividuation or bystander intervention effect. Indicate whether this is an example of deindividuation or bystander intervention effect. Discuss how the concept applies to and explains the situation. You must state whether your example is an example of deindividuation or the bystander intervention effect.
11. Describe a situation from your life that is an example of fundamental attribution error. Discuss how the concept applies to and explains the situation.
“The unexamined life is not worth living.
As reported in Plato’s account The Apology, Socrates famously claimed at his trial that “The unexamined life is not worth living.” In this course, you have had the opportunity to examine your own life and reality through the thoughts of the Ancient Greek philosophers. The purpose of this touchstone assignment is for you (1) to engage with the philosophical ideas presented in this course and (2) to reflect on how these philosophical ideas have impacted your own life.
Psychological egoism
Among the dead of September 11, 2001 were over 300 firefighters and police officers who had gone into the burning Twin Towers to rescue people. At first glance, running into a burning skyscraper in order to help others get out certainly seems like an altruistic action (i.e., one done out of unselfish concern for the well-being of others); however, some philosophers would deny that this (or any other) action is truly altruistic. Write an essay which develops your response to the following question: “Does this example of sacrificial behavior show that psychological egoism is false?” However you answer this question, be sure to explain for the reader what psychological egoism is and how it differs from ethical egoism, and be sure to discuss reasons for and against your position. Why should the reader agree with you that the seemingly self-sacrificial behavior of the rescuers on 9/11 does, or does not, show that psychological egoism is false? Strive to be as clear and persuasive as you can; remember to cons der (and to meet as best you can) objections to your point of view.