Category: Philosophy

The essay is written and has tutors comments to be used to correct the essay ent

The essay is written and has tutors comments to be used to correct the essay entirely, pharaphrase everything and proofread and use base old esasy and ideas of the tutor to improve this essay. 900-1000 words (excl. quotes) Thank you,
Explain how the idea of jên or humanity (sometimes rendered as love, sometimes as goodness) works in Confucian philosophy. Note that explaining the concept itself is a necessary component.

DISCUSSION 1: 
What is the difference between a fallacy of relevance, a fallacy

DISCUSSION 1: 
What is the difference between a fallacy of relevance, a fallacy of weak induction, and a fallacy of ambiguity?
Provide at least one example of each, either something that you have heard or construct your own.
DISCUSSION 2: Describe the electron configuration of an atom using principal energy level, sublevels, orbitals, and periodic table. Give one example others may not think about and why you made this selection.

Short
Essay Question:
(100 marks) Citing the course readings, provide a concise

Short
Essay Question:
(100 marks) Citing the course readings, provide a concise formulation of Utilitarianism.
In particular, explain the distinction between Bentham’s and Mill’s
formulations of it. Citing the course readings, provide a concise formulation
of Kant’s deontological ethics. In particular, explain the role of the
Categorical Imperative in Kantian ethics. In light of the criticisms offered of
both accounts from the course readings, which account is more plausible?
Provide an argument in support of your conclusion. 

Do not use material from any outside (i.e., secondary) sources, and do not use q

Do not use material from any outside (i.e., secondary) sources, and do not use quotes from the primary source material longer than several words; I want to read what you have to say about the text. When you do quote the text, however, be sure to enlist the appropriate punctuation
As a reminder, be sure to construct grammatical sentences that:
give a clear and concise description of the case at hand or the central problem each thinker addresses.
introduce and describe the relevant philosophical concepts.
give a thorough, philosophical explication of the relevant aspects of each thinker’s arguments. (Remember the tips on how to successfully analyze a text.)
present an argument applying the relevant philosophers to the case at hand or to the question posed.
present an argument explaining why one of the philosophers can be viewed as offering a more successful solution to the case at hand or answer to the question posed.
present an argument of your own regarding the moral status of the solution(s) to the case at hand or answer to the question posed. Be sure your argument does not replace the explication instructions above.
Please save your work as a Word document or similar program, so that you have a copy of your work for your records. You can then “paste” your completed essay in the text field or upload the file.     
Assignment Question
Consider the following scenario: A burning building, relatively structurally sound, is engulfed in flames, with 4 small children trapped inside. There are two people who must decide how to respond to the situation: Abuela — an 80-year-old misanthropic, pyrophobic, Luddite, who saw her mother burn to death in a fire when she was younger. She’s in relatively good health, although she uses a cane. She has a cell phone for emergencies, but she hates it. Domingo Ash — a 30-year, world-renowned firefighter who is on his way back from the latest firefighting championships. He has all his gear with him but is tired from the demands of the recent championships and, to be honest, a bit burned out from relentless firefighting.
Explain, thoroughly, the relevant aspects of Aristotle’s virtue theory. In other words, what would Aristotle think is (morally) at stake in this scenario?
Explain how both Abuela and Domingo Ash should respond to the situation of the burning building. Would Aristotle require both Abuela and Domingo Ash to do the same thing? Why or why not?
Make an argument for whether or not Aristotle’s moral guidance is good. If you think it’s good, explain why. If you think it’s not good, explain why. Be sure to thoroughly explain your assessment here.

Assignment Content
Assignment objective: Students will create a paper involving

Assignment Content
Assignment objective: Students will create a paper involving the development and analysis of an argument that seeks to solve a real-world problem.
Length: Your submission should be at least two pages in length, not counting the title page and references (if used).
References: No outside sources are required for the assignment.
Details: This assignment has two parts. Both parts will be completed in the same attached Unit VII Homework Template.
Part 1: Choose one of the three topics from the table below. Write an argument with a clear conclusion (thesis) that you have created about this topic. Your conclusion must be a straightforward one-sentence assertion. Note that your thesis or conclusion can be something narrow within each topic. For example, “I should stop smoking” is a thesis or conclusion that falls under the topic of being healthy.
Incorporate the following guidelines as you write:
Briefly introduce the issue or topic.
Identify at least two premises for your conclusion.
Write at least one page for your argument and written response.
Your written response should include inductive (an observation arriving at a theory) aspects of your argument as well as deductive (a theory that arrives at a conclusion) aspects.
List at least one fallacy that you may have committed but have avoided.
Write at least one unstated assumption that is logically part of your argument.
If your argument turns out to have a sub-argument (see Unit VII Lesson), make sure you fill out a template for each argument. Follow the writing guidelines on pages 273 through 275 of Chapter 12 of our textbook.
Possible Topics
Questions that may help in coming up with a thesis (conclusion):
Money management
How should I manage my money? What spending habits can I change? How can I save more?
Study habits
What is the best way to study? What can I do on a daily basis to study? What can I do on a weekly basis?
Being healthy
What can I do to be healthy? What daily habits can I change?
Part 2: After writing your argument paragraphs, fill out the conclusion, premises, inductive aspects, and deductive aspects in the chart at the bottom of the template. In the second chart, include your potential fallacies and hidden assumptions.
View the Unit VII Sample Homework for an example of how your completed assignment should look. The first part of your completed assignment must be at least one page in length. No outside resources are required. APA Style is not required for this assignment.

In terms of limit and unlimitedness (peras and apeiron), construct a Platonic cr

In terms of limit and unlimitedness (peras and apeiron), construct a Platonic critique of modern consumer society.

your task is to compose an initial post in which you construct and
explain what

your task is to compose an initial post in which you construct and
explain what you believe to be the best possible traditional theodicy (or combination of
traditional theodicies). As a reminder, traditional theodicies retain the traditional concept of God
as omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent and argue that evil and suffering are compatible
with the existence of such a being. Traditional theodicies attempt to explain why an all-knowing,
all-powerful, and all-loving God would allow or bring about all the evil and suffering we see in
the universe. So, your task is to offer what you believe to be the best explanation of this sort –
what you believe to be the best explanation of why an omniscient, omnipotent, and
omnibenevolent God would allow or bring about all the evil and suffering we see. The world
“all” in the preceding sentence is important. A successful traditional theodicy will
explain both moral evil (human-caused suffering) and natural evil (nature-caused suffering).
And it will explain why there is so much of these two forms of suffering. Note that your response need not appeal to a single theodicy. In order to offer the best
explanation of all the suffering we see in the universe, you may need to combine different
theodicies. You may also need to adjust or refine those theodicies – to improve upon them in
some way, perhaps by responding to one or more of the objections posed to the theodicies you
use. You are also free (and encouraged!) to create new theodicies of your own making. If you
can think of ways to effectively explain some of the evil and suffering we see in the universe that
weren’t covered in the readings, lecture videos, or lecture notes, then by all means include them!
Your task is to construct the best possible traditional theodicy (or theodicies). What ultimately
matters thus isn’t that your response fit into the categories of the different theodicies we covered,
but simply how well it explains all the evil and suffering we see in the universe.
While you’re therefore free to use as many or as few of the traditional theodicies that we
examined in class as you want, you should make clear how your proposed theodicy relates to
those we studied. If you’re using one or more of the theodicies that we covered, clearly state that.
If you’re adjusting or refining the theodicies we studied in some way, make clear how you’re
changing them. And if you’re proposing a new theodicy of your own invention, clearly state that.
In each case, a clear statement of how your proposal relates to the course material will help you
to better with respect to the “clarity” grading criteria described below.
Here are a few more things to keep in mind as you compose your initial post:
I AM A CHRISTIAN AND GOD IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF MY LIFE. I WANT THAT TO BE CLEAR IN THIS PAPER. SO THE THEORIES THAT ARE DISCUSSED I WANT TO BE BELIEVING IN GOD. THANK YOU.

Please ensure it is in MLA format and use all information and material you share

Please ensure it is in MLA format and use all information and material you share.
Answer all questions 

Explain Locke’s view of human nature. Use details from the textbook to support y

Explain Locke’s view of human nature. Use details from the textbook to support your description. Explain 
Using Vaughn’s Ch. 8 and the excerpts from Locke reprinted there, explain Locke’s view of human nature. Use details from the textbook to support your description of his view. Next, explain Hobbes’s view of human nature, again using details from the textbook to support your description of Hobbes’s view. How does Locke’s view of human nature differ from Hobbes’ view? Which thinker’s argument do you find more convincing? Explain fully, and defend your answer.

Essay
Students are to complete an essay between 500-700 words in response to one

Essay
Students are to complete an essay between 500-700 words in response to one of the prompts listed below. While you can go over the word limit, you should ensure that your essay is at least 500 words.  Essays that come in well under 500 words may have marks taken off.  
The essay is to be a personal piece of writing and does not need to be written in a standard academic form. Students should attempt to relate the issues in question to their own experiences. 
Essays will be graded based on the following considerations:
– the students’ ability to identify and summarize central points in the reading in a clear and well-organized manner
– the students’ overall understanding of the material 
– the student’s ability to relate the readings to their own experiences and to raise thoughtful questions about the material.
please choose one from the essay prompts
(): Ryan, Pacifism as War Absolitionism, pp. 1-41.
: Ryan, Pacifism as War Absolitionism, pp. 42-69. 
Essay Prompts: 
(1) Outline the realist view of war (i.e., what does a realist think war is all about?), and they think that the world would be safer and more secure if everyone thought as they do. Do you agree with the realist position on war? Why or why not?
(2) Outline some of the principles of just war theory and discuss why you believe they make for a compelling account of a just war.
(3) One of the common criticisms of just war theory is that it is too dangerous a tool to rely upon because human beings are so self-deceptive. Drawing on our readings, outline some of the ways human beings tend to deceive themselves. Do you agree that our tendency to deceive ourselves makes just war theory too dangerous a tool to rely upon? Why or why not?
(4) One of the issues discussed in just war theory is whether soldiers should be expected to know whether their war is just or not. Drawing on our readings, outline some of the reasons why a soldier should be expected to know whether their war is just or not. Do you agree that they should know and be held responsible for this or not?
(5) It is sometimes argued that the use of lethal armed robots will increase the number of wars in the world. Outline some of the reasons why people believe this. Do you agree that the increased use of lethal armed robots will only increase the number of wars in the world? Why or why not?
(6) Some argue that, in the future, the use of autonomous robots may actually make wars more just. Outline some of the reasons why certain people believe this to be the case. Do you agree with this position? Why or why not?
(7) One of the articles we read raises the question of who should be held responsible for the actions of lethal armed robots during war. Drawing on our robots, outline why it is thought that certain parties should not be held responsible for the actions of lethal armed robots. In your view, who, if anyone, should be held responsible and why?