Category: Philosophy

 
For this assignment you are asked to critique the contemporary relevance and/or explanatory ability of one of the key theories mentioned below this paragraph. In many ways, this assignment mirrors the instructional prompt given for your class discussion on Kawaida Philosophy

Definition and Context: This is not a research assignment; it is a reflective essay. Please do not consult or refer to any sources outside of the journal articles/chapter essays, lecture slides and class readings for this course. Within the body of the essay, students should select one of the theories listed above and identified in the PowerPoint presentations or the Karenga text. In addition to identifying how Karegna defines and explains the term or theory, students should define the term more broadly by putting the term in their own words and placing it in a familiar context using examples from one or more of the journal articles/book chapters or class readings for this course. Note: Please do not cite or reference a journal article that you have or plan to submit for one of your three article review assignments. Students must discuss the theory at a critical level. Critical discussion includes your opinion of the items mentioned, but also includes your ability to reference material from class readings, online PowerPoint presentations and class discussions.

When discussing the contemporary relevance and explanatory ability of the theory that you have taken under investigation, please limit your discussion to the unit of analysis the theory claims to describe. For example, the Pathological/Pathogenic School of Thought (Chapter Six) is a paradigm that views the Black family as dysfunctional and provides reasons for that dysfunction. The paradigm does not purport to explain the athletic prowess (or lack thereof) of the Dallas Cowboys football team. Similarly, the Cross Model of Nigresence (Chapter Ten) emerges out of psychology and seeks to describe/explain the stages an African American goes through in gaining an awareness of and appreciation for his/her racial identity. The theory does not attempt to explain why some African Americans (or other groups) might decide to abuse drugs or alcohol.

Essay Length and Structure: Each student is required to an essay that is a minimum of five (5) pages (approx. 1,250 words) critiquing the social practicality of a key theory, philosophy or concern in African American Studies. Students should use a thesis statement to guide their discussion. Essays will be counted off for incorrect punctuation and poor grammar use. Essays must be typed, double-spaced, in Times New Roman, 12 pt. font. Do not use block quotes. Employ quotes from other texts as little as possible. Format your citations using either the American Psychological Association (APA) or Chicago Manual of Style guidelines

 
This order is for two different discussions, please put the first discussion on the first page and the second discussion on the second page, also within the discussions please properly cite the references for example (authors name, date) in brackets. each discussion should have its own reference page as well.

Week 3 discussion 1
Philosophy of Education
Prepare: Read the articles “Philosophy as Translation: Democracy and Education from Dewey to Cavell” and “Philosophy as Education and Education as Philosophy: Democracy and Education from Dewey to Cavell”by Saitofrom the EBSCOhostdatabase in the Ashford University Library.
Reflect: As you take notes on the two articles, think about the importance of understanding the philosophy behind taking general education courses and how your courses have taught you academic integrity, global citizenship, and cultural sensitivity.
Write: For this discussion, respond to the following prompts:
• Describe the implications Stanley Cavell’s ordinary language philosophy has on democracy and education. Provide an example of ordinary language philosophy.
• Examine the ideas of mutual reflection and mutual understanding as it relates to cultural differences.
• Share a learning experience of an ethical or moral lesson based on John Dewey’s quote: “democracy must begin at home.” Explain how that experience has influenced your level of integrity while receiving your education.
• Support your claims with examples from required material(s) and/or other scholarly sources, and properly cite any references.
• Your initial post should be at least 250 words in length.
Week 3 discussion 2
Scholarly Sources & Bibliography Analysis
Prepare: In order to prepare for this assignment, you should review the following tutorials in the Ashford Writing Center:
• Annotated Bibliography
• APA Checklist
• Sample Annotated Bibliography
Also, review the following information from the Ashford University Library:
• Popular & Scholarly Sources tutorial
• Primary and Secondary Sources tutorial
• Primary Vs. Secondary Sources infographic
Takes notes by listing examples and differences between these types of resources.
Reflect: Compare your list of examples between primary and secondary resources. Good research is a combination of many types of sources. Prior to taking this course, did you understand the differences between these resources and the importance of finding one type of resource over another?
Write: Provide your initial post that addresses these prompts:

• Explain the differences between primary and secondary sources used in research.
• Identify a type of resource for your Final Research Project topic which is prayer in schools, I believe that prayer in schools is important. that would be considered a primary source and one that might be a secondary source, and explain why they fit in those categories.
• Explain the advantages of using primary source documents in your research on your Final Research Project topic.
• Review two peer-reviewed, scholarly resources from the Ashford University Library that you will use for your Final Research Project, and explain why they were chosen.
• Provide full reference information of the two scholarly articles chosen in APA format at the end of your response.
• Download and attach the two articles that you found from
The links to the articles are as follows, I will also upload them in a document with order labeled the articles for week 3 discussion 2

this essays basic idea from this book Eliot Deutsch, Introduction to World Philosophies the essay describe or summarize given questions Would William James’ pragmatic conception of truth help us to understand Nietzsche’s critical re-evaluation of morals? Another interesting point of contact would be to look again at Russell’s “Value of Philosophy”, but this time, through the perspective of James. Russell, of course, is not a pragmatist; his notion of truth is, as we have seen, based on ‘correspondence’ or agreement. But when he defines the value of philosophy as consisting in its ability to help us escape (whatever it is that he might want think we would want to escape from), does that bring his own position closer to that of James? Finally, which of the two positions do you find more compelling?

Discuss the views of Aquinas, Agustine, and Grotius on whether deception is always bad/wrong. Discuss why the author(s) considered held the view he/they did and why the reasons you ascribe to him/them might have counted as reasons for him/them.

 

Write a single essay in response to the following topic:
Compare and contrast the positions of two philosophers (Descartes and Hume) with respect to the ‘God Hypothesis’ OR ‘Naturalism’ . (Choose’God Hypothesis’ OR ‘Naturalism’)
The God Hypothesis is the notion that God is hypothesized in order to answer the following sorts of questions: Why are we here? What is the world like? What is the meaning of Life? How can we know anything? How do we determine how to act? etc.

Naturalism is the idea that, in answering such questions, we seek to find our answers in terms of the world that we observe, or experience, or otherwise directly interact with via our senses and bodies, rather than in terms of supernatural entities (like God, or gods, or faeries, etc.).

DO NOT attempt to, for example, compare the entirety of Descartes’ meditations with the entirety of Hume’s dialogues concerning natural religion. That is NOT what I want ! !

You need to select SPECIFIC arguments, or lines of thought, offered by two philosophers (Descartes and Hume) that you believe bear directly upon the ‘God Hypothesis’ and discuss these particular arguments or lines of thought. (IMPORTANT!!)
You can Only cite from the books I uploaded to you(with Page Numbers). Make sure they are match! I need to find your citation on that page! Do not cite from others. Use your own words otherwise you will fail this course and get plagiarism!
This essay should be typewritten pages with one inch margins.

Please pay attention that this paper is completely different from the one you wrote last time(Is God innate?) You cannot use similar sentences.

11

find 3 paintings produced in the second half of 17th century from Metropolitant museum, and discuss about simiarities in terms of concept, style, and cultural significance. Then you are to establish a philosphical connection with one of folowing:Pascal,Descartes, spinoza, hobbes.

Your final essay should be between 1400 and 1500 words long. double-spaced, in a font comparable to the one used on this page. Any quotations and paraphrases from the text must be cited (in whatever format you prefer), and your paper must be edited and proofread. The final essay must be submitted to Canvas by 5PM on Tuesday, December 8. Special Instructions: On Wednesday 12/9 I will email any student who has not turned in a paper. Please check your university email account on that day. If you do not get an email from me, I have your paper. If I email you because I don’t have your paper, it is your responsibility to respond immediately. If I do not receive your paper by the time I submit my final grades, you will fail the course. Throughout this course, we have focused on identifying arguments and formulating objections to the main claims in those arguments. Each week, we’ve read a lead article and have followed it by reading 2 to 3 criticisms of the argument presented in the article. For your final essay, I want you to present a focused, well-organized criticism of one of the following authors: Reiman (capital punishment), President’s Council (cloning), Pateman (Prostitution), or Wonderly (video games). The goal of the essay is to evaluate the argument of the author. Thus, you should not select an author based on whether you agree with his or her conclusion. Instead, select an argument that you understand and will be able to criticize. Prompt: In light of the criticisms you present, does the author present a good argument? In the course of your essay you must (this is a checklist not an outline): 1. Explain the argument that you will criticize. You should focus on those facets of the argument that will be particularly important to your criticisms and not simply summarize the
paper from beginning to end. 2. Present one or more criticisms of the argument. You may not use criticisms that are presented in the readings. You must fully explain your criticism, giving examples if needed to help demonstrate your points. It is better to spend a lot of time developing one criticism than to give a long list of criticisms. 3. Consider how the author might respond to your criticism. Are there any ways in which the author could defend his or her argument? 4. Express whether or not the original argument is a good argument. You must take a side.
Your essay will be judged on its overall organization, the clarity of your presentation, your
attention to and use of the text (through frequent citation), and the thoughtfulness of your argument. You must structure your paper as an essay. It should have a clear statement of purpose (an answer to the prompt) in the introduction. You must edit and proofread your paper several times. Papers with basic grammatical errors will be significantly penalized. Finally, all quotations and paraphrases: Quotations: All quotations must be cited with a page number. You can place this citation in parentheses at the end of the quotation or in a footnote. • A quotation is material that is copied directly from a source and placed in quotation marks. For example, Fullinwider constructs an example in which, “Jones is walking down a street. Smith steps from behind the corner of a nearby building and begins to fire a gun at Jones, with the appearance of deliberate intent to kill Jones. Surrounded by buildings, Jones is afforded no means of escape. Jones, who is carrying a gun himself, shoots at Smith and kills him (37).” • If the quotation is taken from a work used in class, you do not need to provide a full citation on a works cited page. Full citations are required for all other works.
Paraphrases: All paraphrases must be cited with a page number. You can place this citation in parenthesis at the end of the paraphrase or in a footnote. • You paraphrase material when you take a specific passage and put it in your own words. It is not sufficient to change a word or two. The paraphrase should be your own sentence, not a modified version of the original sentence. If you are looking directly at the reading when you
write your new sentence, you are not paraphrasing. You’re plagiarizing. • Here is an example of a paraphrase of the passage I quoted above. Fullinwider uses an example in which Jones and Smith meet in an alley. Smith fires at Jones and tries to kill him. Jones cannot escape and draws his own weapon, killing Smith (37). • If the paraphrase is taken from a work used in class, you do not need to provide a full citation on a works cited page. Full citations are required for all other works. Works “Consulted”: When you utilize material in a general way, making reference to a major claim but not a specific passage, you should provide a full citation. Put this citation on a works cited page. • There is room for judgment here. Specific claims should be cited by page number, while general claims often cannot be. Your goal in providing these citations is to give the reader: (1) a full sense of all material used to formulate the main claims of your essay and (2) the ability to track down the information you are using. If you are closely following a source, for example the
introductory material in our textbook, then you should absolutely cite that source.
General notes: 1. Quotations disrupt the voice of your essay and often do more harm than good. Only quote passages that cannot be paraphrased or passages in which the specific wording is very
important. Fewer quotations are usually better. 2. It is never good practice to quote lecture material. If necessary, you should paraphrase that material. Better, you should go to the text and find the passage that was discussed in lecture. 3. When explaining source material (i.e. explaining Fullinwider’s argument) paraphrases are essential. Paragraphs that are primarily explanatory might have several citations. 4. If you are looking at material when you are writing your essay, you need a citation. This includes web-pages, introductory material, or course notes. 5. The essays for this course all require a significant amount of explanation. Nearly one-half to two-thirds of each essay will be the summary and explanation of course reading. Thus, in those parts of the essay more citations is better than fewer. Every specific claim, every quotation and paraphrase, should have a citation.

 
The Final Paper is meant to build upon the knowledge and research of your previous work. You are expected to competently problematize your previous argument by adopting a new theoretical framework and a 3rd photographic image of your choice. You are not allowed to simply copy and paste from your first paper but will have to rework and reword your initial argument to gel with your new research.

Length: 12 pages excluding bibliography and images.
*The comment after the first paper:

Reading the brief more carefully would have allowed you to write a much better work. It’s not that the essay is not good, your discussion of the similarities and differences between film and photography are interesting and pertinent as is your adoption of theoretical frameworks from different theorists. However the brief expressly asked that you choose 2 works of art and that you analyze them carefully. Instead, your discussion is mostly generic, drawing on too many examples that are only mentioned or touched upon. Otherwise the structure of the essay is good, academic conventions are followed consistently and the bibliography is also very good. Unfortunately there are too many grammatical quirks and typos in this essay–please visit the writing center in order to sort everything out before submitting the last paper for this course!

 
Write a two- page (double- spaced, 12- point Times New Roman font, 1- inch margins) essay on each of the following three topics. TO BE CLEAR: IN THIS ASSIGNMENT YOU MUST WRITE THREE ESSAYS: ONE ON TOPIC (1) AND ONE ON TOPIC (2) AND ONE ON TOPIC (3). EACH ESSAY MUST BE TWO PAGES IN LENGTH FOR A TOTAL OF SIX PAGES.

Your essays should NOT include any introduction, conclusion, footnotes, bibliography, or any other paraphernalia of the standard college term paper. Avoid the use of jargon (any term that would be unfamiliar to someone who has not taken a philosophy course) and ‘- isms’ (for example, ‘relativism,’ ‘subjectivism,’ ‘nihilism’) UNLESS you give a precise definition of the term with its first occurrence in your essay. Best to play it safe, though: a philosophical essay ought to be written in clear, and so short, declarative sentences.

(1) In John Perry’s A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality, Gretchen Weirob argues that even if a person has a soul, sameness of person (or personal identity) can’t consist in sameness of soul. Explain how Gretchen argues for this conclusion by answering the following questions. Why does she think we can’t know whether the principle ‘Same body, same soul’ is true? How does she argue from the fact that we don’t know whether that principle is true to the conclusion that we can’t know whether any person at one point in time is identical to (the same person as) a person at a later point in time. And how does Gretchen use that conclusion to argue that sameness of person does not consist in sameness of soul?

(2) In Death, Shelly Kagan claims that “there are some implications of rejecting the existence requirement that may be rather hard to swallow” (p. 217). What is the version of the existence requirement that appears as a premise in Epicurus’ argument? What are the implications of rejecting it that Kagan finds hard to swallow? (Hint: here you need to explain what a possible person is and how they are harmed.) How can these implications be avoided by adopting what Kagan calls the “modest” version of the existence requirement? What if any counter- intuitive implications does the modest existence requirement have?

(3) Kagan thinks that death can be, and very often is, bad for the person who dies (and this is so because death deprives that person of the goods of life). But Kagan denies that it is reasonable or appropriate to fear death. Explain as clearly as you can his view. What are the conditions he places on reasonable or appropriate fear? What are the different things he thinks we might fear in 2 fearing death? And why does he think it isn’t reasonable or appropriate to fear any of these things?

 
Develop a statement of philosophy of teaching/learning, inclusive of clinical teaching. There should be concepts/variables included in the statement. Concept/variable should be chosen from nursing education concepts and variables.

Philosophical statement should reflect beliefs about teaching/learning based on a selected review of literature in nursing education, education, philosophy and other related disciplines.

Discuss how you will operationalize the philosophy as a nurse educator. This paper should also reflect an informed position on what has been documented as best practices in the teaching-learning field.

Suggested headings:
Introduction
Statement of Philosophy of Teaching/Learning
Beliefs as Supported by Literature
Operationalizing the Philosophy