Please see the attached documents for the case study; please use the case study
Please see the attached documents for the case study; please use the case study and the provided source website to fill out and complete the document form accordingly with the required notes.
Thank you!
Nietzsche’s Challenge
A challenge to what?
To say why he is wrong! To show
Nietzsche’s Challenge
A challenge to what?
To say why he is wrong! To show that there is more to “ethics” than he thinks. Defend the idea of duty! Or the requirement about the happiness of others! Or that being a noble person is in the end more like what Plato said – being virtuous is more than just being “a will to power”! Or if none of these seem right, and you think Nietzsche was onto something, then pursue that path. Whatever you do, don’t have NO path.
So get to it: Lodge an objection, explain Nietzsche’s mistake, or defend him in this discussion board.
The diagnosis should appear on one line in the following order.
Note: Do n
The diagnosis should appear on one line in the following order.
Note: Do not include the plus sign in your diagnosis. Instead, write the indicated items next to each other.
Code + Name + Specifier (appears on its own first line)
Z code (appears on its own line next with its name written next to the code)
Then, in 1–2 pages, respond to the following:
Explain how you support the diagnosis by specifically identifying the criteria from the case study.
Describe in detail how the client’s symptoms match up with the specific diagnostic criteria for the disorder (or all the disorders) that you finally selected for the client. You do not need to repeat the diagnostic code in the explanation.
Identify the differential diagnosis you considered.
Explain why you excluded this diagnosis/diagnoses.
Explain the specific factors of culture that are or may be relevant to the case and the diagnosis, which may include the cultural concepts of distress.
Explain why you chose the Z codes you have for this client.
Remember: When using Z codes, stay focused on the psychosocial and environmental impact on the client within the last 12 months.
There will be a Zoom Call held at the beginning of Week 5 (7/1) for discussio
There will be a Zoom Call held at the beginning of Week 5 (7/1) for discussion of the Final work
Please compose an APA academically formatted and composed work with a minimum of four peer reviewed academic references (scholarly journal articles and academic books only). The work must be a minimum of 1500 words
The Life-Span Perspective
Choose three topics below to discuss in your work Be sure to use sources other than your book, however, your book may be used as one of your sources.
Include the physical, cognitive (thinking), and socio-emotional aspects of each stage. Include personal examples of each.
Prenatal Development and Birth
Infancy
Early Childhood
Middle and Late Childhood
Adolescence
Early Adulthood
Middle Adulthood
Late Adulthood
In addition include one robust substantive section that personally covers what you liked about this course and what you learned.
It is worth 200 points (150 content, 25 organization, and 25 mechanics (APA).
Purdueowl.com is a good source for help with your APA.
work should include page headers (upper left side, page numbers upper right side, section headings for organization, 12pt Times New Roman Font only, and entire work should be double spaced.
Make sure that you have a reference page (using hanging indents).
****Any reference on your reference page has to be cited in the work and any citation in the work must be on your reference page.
Title
Introduction
Section….
Section…
Section…
Personal Opinion
Conclusion
Make and defend an argument about whether or not metaethical cultural relat
Make and defend an argument about whether or not metaethical cultural relativism (or moral relativism) is true or false. To do so you’ll need not only to explain reasoning from course content but also identify objections to the argument you make. (minimum 400 words).
If your only two options for a moral theory are utilitarianism or Kantianism, which one would you pick and why? In other words, make an argument defending one or the other. You’ll need to be sure to work with course material and to consider objections. In addition, since you’re arguing why is better than the other you’ll need to display an understanding of both moral theories. (minimum 400 words)
Second: After reviewing your readings and the videos, answer all of the follo
Second: After reviewing your readings and the videos, answer all of the following questions.
1) What are some common criticisms you’ve heard about Critical Race Theory? How might a clearer understanding of CRT and/or Critical Pedagogy contribute to the discussions about education, race, and (in)equality?
2) What potential benefits may arise when incorporating these philosophies into the curriculum? What might be the challenges?
3) Think back to your own educational experiences. Did you learn about a diverse Oklahoma? Take a few minutes and use the OK History search tool to learn something new (eg: from a BIPOC perspective) about Oklahoma’s history: https://www.okhistory.org/publications/encyclopediaonlineLinks to an external site. Share what you learned with the class, and include a link to what you found interesting.
Watch the vidoes and answer the questions above.
Here again is the Basic Problem of Evil:
1. If God is omnipotent, then God is
Here again is the Basic Problem of Evil:
1. If God is omnipotent, then God is able to prevent evil
2. If God is omnibenevolent, then God wants to prevent evil
3. If God is omniscient, then God knows how to prevent evil.
4. If a 3 “O” God exists, there is no evil.
5. There is evil.
6. Thus, a 3 “O” God does not exist.
Is this argument persuasive? Why or why? Be clear and precise in your comments (e.g. stating which step of the argument you are challenging or defending), and most importantly, be respectful and civil in your exchanges with others. Religion can be a sensitive topic for many people!
Reply
a) Kant’s Categorical Imperative
b) Mill’s Principle of Utility
You must firs
a) Kant’s Categorical Imperative
b) Mill’s Principle of Utility
You must first explain the author’s argument then give a step by step argument explaining why you think the argument is plausible or implausible. If you defend the argument you must explain a possible objection (problem) and explain why the author would be able to respond to it. If you attack the argument you must also explain a possible objection and explain why the author’s argument cannot respond to the objection. Note: You may also create a ‘middle of the road’ position by showing that the author can respond to part of, but not all of, the objection.
Detail on the screenshot file
Resources:
The Universe Next Door “https://www.
Detail on the screenshot file
Resources:
The Universe Next Door “https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Universe_Next_Door/JRLPDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover”
First: Pick ONE of the ethical problems/scenarios below to be the subject of
First: Pick ONE of the ethical problems/scenarios below to be the subject of your discussion reflection.
You’ve just loaded a cart full of groceries from the shopping cart into the trunk of your car. It’s raining, and your toddler is throwing a tantrum. There’s an empty parking space beside you, but the ‘return shopping cart’ corral is 20 yards away. Do you return the cart to the corral?
You’re at work, and you realize you’ve somehow been granted internet access to confidential personnel data. You find out that the person who gave you that access is a work friend, but they weren’t supposed to have access to that information either. Do you tell anyone?
Your apartment was burglarized, and many things were stolen, including a television in your living room. That television, however, had been broken down, irreparably, and was worthless—you just haven’t had the time or money to replace it. Luckily you have renter’s insurance to cover your losses. Do you include the television in your insurance claim?
Second: Explain how you would respond in that scenario and why. Your response should clearly connect to one of the 5 Main Ethical Frameworks below. Don’t stop at “because that’s what I think.” Why is that what you think? Remember: to critically evaluate your understanding. Explain what your ethical framework is all about and how that informs how you act in ethically tricky situations. (I would do…. because my ethical framework is ___virtue ethics___ which says that…..)
Divine-Command Ethics
Consquentialism / Utilitarianism
Deontological Ethics
Virtue Ethics
Relativism