Analyze an episode of Black Mirror and relate it to this philosophical text.

/in /by

For your final (creative) project, you will reflect deeply on a topic of your choosing, all through the lens of a philosophical view we have studied in class. You may write about anything you want. You may choose to analyze a film, an episode of a television show (e.g. Black Mirror works great), a piece of music, lyrics to a song, or a music video. Perhaps you would like to look closely at an issue in sports, the arts, or politics. You may want to explore something in the news or current events, or even something related to the pandemic. Whatever issue you choose to take up, you have a choice in terms of the modality of the writing. For example, you may wish to write a reflective essay, dialogue, short story, poem, or short play. Perhaps you prefer to make a short film or conduct a reflective interview with a relative.

No matter the reading, topic, or modality you choose, you must produce a substantial piece of writing (approximately 1,100 words) in which you refer to one of our readings from Section 2 or Section 3 (see below). The project is meant to build on the skills of the 1-page outline assignment and the short paper in that you must make it clear not only that you understand someone else’s philosophical argument, but also that you are capable of expressing your own philosophical views and reasoning.

 

Why wouldn’t what the BIV means be true?

/in /by

Putnam argues that a brain-in-a-vat (BIV) could not truly say ‘I am a BIV’.What does Putnam think a BIV would mean if he said that, and why? Why wouldn’t what the BIV means be true?

Distinguish eudaimonia from other common ideas about what it means to be happy, and pay special attention to the connection between happiness, ends that are good in themselves, and excellence or virtue.

/in /by

Your task in this essay is to 1)explain Aristotle’s idea of happiness, eudaimonia, 2)apply it to a case drawn fromThe New York Times, and 3)draw a conclusionaboutAristotelian flourishing as a way of judging the good life in the contemporary world. Distinguish eudaimonia from other common ideas about what it means to be happy, and pay special attention to the connection between happiness, ends that are good in themselves, and excellence or virtue. You should write for an audience that has never read Aristotle. Be a good teacher. Find an article on a specific figure–perhaps a celebrity, a political figure, an athlete, an artist, or an “ordinary” person–and explain if they are happy by Aristotle’s standards. Decide whether or not Aristotle’s idea of happiness helped you better understand the figure you chose, and judge on that basis whether or not his philosophy is applicable in the contemporary world. Here is the link for reference to Aristotle’s article: http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.9.ix.html Here is the New York Times article that I will be applying Aristotle’s concept to: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/08/opinion/esther-salas-murder-federal-judges.html?searchResultPosition=1 fktor if you can find one for me, that will be great!

Consider Fred onFriday (when he still doesn’t know): is he writing the paper?

/in /by

setiya defends the thesis that ‘knowledge how explains the otherwise troubling possibility of knowledge in intentional action’. His argument is complex. To put it to the test, suppose Fred starts writing a philosophy paper on Wednesday and plans to complete it by the following Monday; but on Thursday he learns that he might be drafted into the army on Saturday, in which case he would never finish the paper.

Suppose that if he doesn’t finish it, he was never writing it in the first place, because there will never be any paper for him to have written. Consider Fred onFriday (when he still doesn’t know): is he writing the paper? Does he believe he is?Does he know he is? Is he exercising knowledge how? Do the answers depend o

How can the Homestead guesthouse adopt an innovative culture, and have a deeper understanding of the customer needs that sharing platforms are fulfilling?

/in /by

Main research question

  • How can the Homestead guesthouse adopt an innovative culture, and have a deeper understanding of the customer needs that sharing platforms are fulfilling?

Sub questions

  • What are house sharing platforms, what do they offer, what responsibilities do they have and what regulations apply to them?

Research population: websites of house sharing platforms, research sites or data selling/sharing companies e.g. bdex.com and bolagsverket such companies sell/share valuable data such as annual reports and interim reports. Trendwatchers might help me to understand challenges that house sharing platforms are facing or challenges they might face in the future

What does the whale represent in Langdon Winner’s article?

/in /by

Please try to finish this assignment in 1 hr and 30 mins. Just answer the given questions according to the provided documents. short answers should be about 3 sentences.
Short answer questions:
*For Buckminster Fuller, why is the earth a spaceship? What are the moral implications?
*What does the whale represent in Langdon Winner’s article?
*Why does Amory Lovins argue that we should re-invest in natural capital?
*Does J.K. Galbraith propose a technological solution to the problem he is discussing?
*In the Tragedy of the Commons, are the people doing what is in their best interest?
*Does Schumacher argue that we will benefit from labor-saving technology?
*Is Ian Barbour, by his definition, an optimist with regard to technology?
*Identify the racists involved in Langdon Winner’s discussion of the parkway overpasses.
*What does Karl Marx mean by ‘class conflict’?
*For Jacques Ellul, is there a way out of the technological order? Why?
*According to Marinetti, what is there that we can learn from the past?
*For the Ted Kaczinsky (the Unabomber) how can we regain the opportunity to undergo the so-called ‘power process’?

Briefly describe the three stages this method of ascent follows.

/in /by

What is the “method of ascent” that Bonaventure describes? In your own words, explain what this method of ascent is – i.e., what it’s goal is and how it proceeds toward this goal – and briefly describe the three stages this method of ascent follows.

In the first stage of the ascent, Bonaventure’s contemplations lead him from a consideration of what the five senses tell us about the external world to a consideration of the common sense. Explain this development by (i) clearly defining and explaining both the first kind of sensation and the common sense, clarifying the contrast between them; and, (ii) explaining how this development is an illustration of the “method of ascent” Bonaventure says he’s engaged in.

Augustine argues that we make an error about ourselves, that confuses us about the nature of the mind. What is this error? Identify it,

/in /by

Explain the debate surrounding the Altar of Victory. That is, explain at least two of the reasons Symmachus gives for why the altar and its associated rituals should stay, and explain Ambrose’s response to each of these reasons and his own position on the relevant matters.

Augustine argues that we make an error about ourselves, that confuses us about the nature of the mind. What is this error? Identify it, sufficiently explain it in your own words, and indicate why it’s a natural error to make. Also, indicate what notion of the mind we tend to have when we’ve made this error, and what notion of the mind we tend to have once we correct this error the way Augustine thinks we should.

Explain the Stoic distinction between what is in our power and what isn’t.

/in /by

Explain the Epicurean “tetrapharmakos” (or “four-fold remedy”). That is, clearly state what it is, explain what it intended to do, and sufficiently explain it in your own words – including explaining how it is thought by Epicureans to accomplish its aim.

Explain the Stoic distinction between what is in our power and what isn’t. That is, explain this distinction, explain why it is relevant to the Stoic way of life, indicate what it is that is in our power and what isn’t, and indicate why Epictetus thinks most things are not in our power.

Explain, in your own words, why FH might be thought to be a plausible candidate for the supreme principle of morality

/in /by

Your paper should be written in the form of an essay—the question is only divided up in order to clarify the main points you need to discuss in the essay.

1. Kant argues that the supreme principle of morality is the categorical imperative, while Mill argues for the merits of the utilitarian criteria of right and wrong. Focusing on the second formulation of the categorical imperative, the Formula of Humanity (FH):

1. Explain, in your own words, why FH might be thought to be a plausible candidate for the supreme principle of morality (be sure to explain what is meant by ‘supreme principle of morality’).

2. Doing the same for Mill, explain in your own words why the utilitarian criteria of right and wrong might be thought to be a plausible candidate for the supreme principle of morality.

3. Kant offers several examples meant to illustrate how FH helps us understand why certain ways of treating others is morally wrong. Taking either his second example (making a promise you do not intend to keep) or his fourth example (the duty to aid others in need of assistance), explain in your own words how the example illustrates the value of FH for understanding the wrongness of the way of acting the example assumes is intuitively morally wrong.

4. How would Mill analyze the example you have just discussed?

5. Explain which analysis you find more plausible by identifying a respect inwhich one the analyses identifies a consideration you take to be morally important that the other does not. Be sure to offer reasons for taking this consideration to be important.

6. Finally, give an example of your own devising in which you take FH to fail to offer a plausible explanation of the moral wrongness of acting in a certain way. Be sure to explain why you find the analysis FH suggests unsatisfactory. Now, offer a second example of morally wrong conduct whose wrongness you find to be not plausibly explained by the utilitarian criteria of right and wrong. Be sure to explain why you take the utilitarian approach to be unsatisfactory in this case.

7. Having explored the weaknesses of both approaches, offer some reasons why a morally serious but undecided person might find either Mill’s or Kant’s approach to understanding why certain ways of acting are morally wrong to be more compelling than the other.

Citations and examples:

1. The question requires that evidence from the text be cited in defense of your arguments.

2. Cite Kant in the following manner: (G Section #:Paragraph #)

3. Cite Mill (Book #, Paragraph #)