Given the background of the Apology what do you think Socrates means by this. What is the overall topic of the Meno? and how is it relevant to the Athenians or to us for that matter?

/in /by

CASE STUDY

At the end of the Meno (around 100b) Socrates says that if Meno can convince Anytus of the things they have concluded in the dialogue he will provide a benefit to the Athenians. Given the background of the Apology what do you think Socrates means by this. What is the overall topic of the Meno? and how is it relevant to the Athenians or to us for that matter?

Summarize Anselm’s ontological argument. Do you agree with it? why, or why not? Anselm claims that it’s impossible to be an atheist. Explain his reasoning. Do you agree, or not?

/in /by

 Anselm’s ontological argument

Summarize Anselm’s ontological argument. Do you agree with it? why, or why not? Anselm claims that it’s impossible to be an atheist. Explain his reasoning. Do you agree, or not?

Choose one conspiracy theory and explain it in one paragraph. Apply the criteria of evaluation of scientific theories to the theory of your choice. How does your theory fare based on these criteria?

/in /by

Conspiracy theories

The objective of this assignment is for you to demonstrate understanding of the criteria for evaluation of conspiracy theories by applying them to a theory of your choice.
1. Study class notes on conspiracy A theories to get acquainted with the criteria for their evaluation.
2. Choose one conspiracy theory and explain it in one paragraph.
3. Apply the criteria of evaluation of scientific theories (consistency, fruitfulness, simplicity, probability) to the theory of your choice. How does your theory fare based on these criteria?
4. Evaluate the motives of conspirators and the motives of people who are endorsing the theory. The trust in which institutions is eroded by this theory?
5. Do you personally think this theory is credible? What do you think is the social impact of the theory?

Your essay should be 2-3 pages, double spaced, using font 12 Times New Roman.

At Phaedo 86a-d Simmias puts forward the view that the soul is a sort of harmony. Socrates provides at least two arguments against this view of the soul in the text that follows. Describe his arguments and explain why you think they are convincing or not.

/in /by

DISCUSSION ESSAY

Write a 2-4 page essay (in Word or rich text format, double spaced, size 12 font) on one of the following topics.

1. In the Euthyphro the third definition of piety is what all the gods love. What are some objections to this definition that are offered by Socrates.

2. In the Apology the two most famous quotes are “the unexamined life is not worth living” and “a good man is not harmed in life or death”. Discuss what you take to be the meaning of either one of these quotes. That is “what do they mean?” and “are they true?” Why or why not?

3.In the Crito Socrates is asked to leave the jail by his friend Crito. Crito offers several reason why Socrates should listen to him but Socrates resists all these arguments and presents a series of arguments of his own. One you can describe these arguments as the “no wrong doing argument”, the “agreement argument” and the “Differential of Right Argument”. Find any one of these arguments in the text and discuss it. Is it persuasive? why or why not?
4. What would it mean to persuade the laws as it is described in the Crito? Does Socrates’ account adequately allow for resisting evil legislation or is it essentially just a way to maintain the status quo?

5. Discuss the nature of virtue in the Meno and/ or Phaedo. If you choose the Meno things you should mention are some of Meno’s definitions of virtue and their objections and whether virtue is teachable or not. If you choose the Phaedo things you mention things you should mention are the difference between true and false virtue.

6. Discuss the topic of Meno’s Paradox in the Meno. What is it? and how does Socrates solve it? can you provide any critiques of the solution?

7. At Phaedo 86a-d Simmias puts forward the view that the soul is a sort of harmony. Socrates provides at least two arguments against this view of the soul in the text that follows. Describe his arguments and explain why you think they are convincing or not.

8. Discuss the nature of the Forms in the Phaedo. What are the Forms. What are they meant to explain? What stand does Plato take on the existence of the Forms?

9.Compare and contrast any two (or three) of the five dialogues we have studied one of the dialogues must be either the Meno or the Phaedo; make sure to refer to the text by title and line number and cite any secondary sources used.

Summarize Anselm’s ontological argument. Do you agree with it? why, why not? Anselm claims that it’s important to be an atheist. Explain his reasoning. Do you agree, or not?

/in /by

 Anselm’s ontological argument

Summarize Anselm’s ontological argument. Do you agree with it? why, why not? Anselm claims that it’s important to be an atheist. Explain his reasoning. Do you agree, or not?

Analyze the student’s learning experience in the course, discuss the value of what has been learned for the student’s own live and/or interaction with others, and demonstrate an enhancement of the student’s appreciation of the value of philosophy.

/in /by

Final Paper

The paper must reflect on what was learned about What is Life like after death?, What was life like before birth? and What is life?

The paper must analyze the student’s learning experience in the course, discuss the value of what has been learned for the student’s own live and/or interaction with others, and demonstrate an enhancement of the student’s appreciation of the value of philosophy.

The paper must include sources from:

How the Philosophers address my three questions

Write a short DIALOGUE (1250-1500 words) that builds on ONE of the following scenarios and develops some associated philosophical themes.

/in /by

DIALOGUE

Write a short DIALOGUE (1250-1500 words) that builds on ONE of the following scenarios and develops some associated philosophical themes (this exercise could also be useful as a way to prepare for some of the final exam questions).

You find yourself in a discussion with some classmates that don’t think it’s possible to know whether God exists and don’t think it matters too much whether you believe in God. What do you say to get them to take an interest in the subject and help them see that it’s possible to know that God is real? Write the dialogue.

 

How would eitherRobert Bullard or Kristin Shrader-Frechette respond to Yeampierre’s perspective on climate justice? How would either Stephen Gardiner or Joseph Aldy respond to Yeampierre’s perspective on climate justice?

/in /by

PHILOSPHY EXAM 3

THIS PAPER/QUIZ NEEDS TO BE TWO THOUSAND WORDS MINIMUM.

1. Read the interview with activist Elizabeth Yeampierre (“Unequal Impact: The Deep Links Between Racism and Climate Change”Links to an external site.) and then write an essay addressing the following items. Be sure to make explicit references to the texts.

  • How would eitherRobert Bullard or Kristin Shrader-Frechette respond to Yeampierre’s perspective on climate justice?
  • How would either Stephen Gardiner or Joseph Aldy respond to Yeampierre’s perspective on climate justice?
  • Yeampierre and the interviewer describe her activism as “fighting” for justice. Drawing on the article by Kevin O’Brien, discuss the advantages and disadvantages of viewing her work as “fighting” and suggest what other moral metaphors, terms, and concepts might be appropriate.
  • What is your overall evaluation of Yeampierre’s perspective?

 

2. Review the film Food, Inc.and then write an essay addressing the following items. Be sure to make explicit references to the film and texts.

  • How would one of the following authors respond to the film: William Rees, John B. Cobb, or R. Edward Freeman (with Jeffrey York and Lisa Stewart).
  • How would one of the following authors respond to the film: Michael Allen Fox, Jonathan Rauch, or Mae-Wan Ho.
  • The film contrasts two alternatives to corporate agribusiness: Joel Salatin’s small Polyface Farm and Gary Hirshberg’s large Stonyfield Farm. Drawing upon any material from the syllabus, discuss which one provides the most ethical model for food production. (Alternatively, you may argue why they both are good models or why both fail to be good models.)

 

 

 

Do you think your valid argument is also sound? Do we need empirical research to tell us if the premises are true? Are there possible ambiguities in how the argument has been translated? Would a reasonable person disagree with any of your translations?

/in /by

Final Project

INSTRUCTIONS

PHILISOPHY- KINDLY HELP WITH ONLY NUMBER 4 AS HIGHLIGHTED BELOW (RETRANSLATION) AS I HAVE WORKED ON THE OTHERS.

  1. English Argument:

P1: Abortion is a woman’s right

P2: If Abortion is a woman’s right, then women have the right to control their bodies.

P3: If women have the right to control their bodies, then abortion should be allowed.

P4: Abortion should be allowed, so it could decrease the rate of women dying from unsafe abortion, and abortion is not a crime.

P5: 25 million unsafe abortions takes place each year (https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/sexual-and-reproductive-rights/abortion-facts/)

P6: If 25 million unsafe abortions take place each year, then either abortion is not a women’s right or abortion is a crime

Conclusion: Abortion is not a crime

 

 

  1. Translation

p – Abortion is a woman’s right

q – Women have the right to control their bodies.

r – Abortion should be allowed.

s – It could decrease the rate of women dying from unsafe abortion.

t – Abortion is a crime.

v – 25 million unsafe abortions takes place each year.

 

 

  1. Proof
  1. p Premise
  2. p → q Premise
  3. q → r Premise
  4. r → (s & ~t) Premise
  5. v Premise
  6. v → (~p V t) Premise

___________________

C: ~t

  1. p → r HS (2, 3)
  2. r MP (1, 7)
  3. (s & ~t) MP (4, 8)
  4. ~t Simp. (9)

 

  1. Re-translation- SEE THE SAMPLE EXAMPLE ATTACHED

 

  1.  Explaination and Summary
  • Do you think your valid argument is also sound?
  • Do we need empirical research to tell us if the premises are true?
  • Are there possible ambiguities in how the argument has been translated? Would a reasonable person disagree with any of your translations?
  • What other information besides symbolic logic might we need to decide whether to accept this argument as sound and believe the conclusion?
  • In your opinion, did symbolic logic add anything useful to the discussion of this issue?
  • Did it help you understand it better, or make a better argument for your point of view? Did it just make things more complicated?
  • If some members of the group disagree on translations, the validity or soundness of the argument as presented, this is the place to include that!

Use any/all 18 rules, as well as Indirect and Conditional Proof strategies to solve these practice problems

/in /by

Indirect and Conditional Proof strategies

Instructions: use any/all 18 rules, as well as Indirect and Conditional Proof strategies to solve these practice problems.

 

  1. (~a V c) & (a V b)
  2. (b & e) –> d
  3. e
    _________________
    c V d

 

 

 

  1. (a V b) & (c V d) (HINT: try IP inside CP)
  2. a –> (e –> (c & d))
  3. c <–> ~d

______________________
e –> b

 

 

  1. (q & ~p) V (~r & q)
  2. ((~p –> s) & (~t –> r)) V (p & r)
  3. (q V p) –> ~t

_______________________

s

 

 

  1. ~(~q <–> p)
  2. ~r –> (p V q)
  3. p –> ~q

_____________________

r