Edward is taking his daily walk near the train tracks when he notices that the t

Edward is taking his daily walk near the train tracks when he notices that the train that is approaching is out of control. Edward sees what has happened: the train driver saw five workmen ahead on the tracks and slammed on the brakes, but the brakes failed, and the driver fainted. The train is now rushing toward the five men; the banks are so steep that they will not be able to get off the track in time. Fortunately, Edward is standing next to a switch, which he can throw, that will turn the train onto a sidetrack. Unfortunately, there is one person standing on the sidetrack with his back turned. Edward can throw the switch, killing the one, or he can refrain from doing this, letting the five die. Remember, Edward did not build the train, nor is he responsible for its current predicament. However, if he pulls the switch, he is both intervening and making a judgment regarding human value. Take this into account when writing your essay. There is a reason this is considered a “moral dilemma.”
Incorporating what you have learned from ethics, answer the following questions. 1. “Do you think Edward should throw the switch? Why?”
2. Would a Utilitarian agree? Why?
3. Would a Kantian agree? Why?
4. What do you believe is the best option “What is The Good?” Why?

Write an essay that focuses on one of the arguments or positions found in any of

Write an essay that focuses on one of the arguments or positions found in any of the readings assigned for sections 2 through 3. The primary goal is to offer your own argument in response to one of the arguments assigned for the class.
1. Submit your essay as an attachment. Use a word document file extension of some sort (rtf., doc., docx., odt., etc.) do not submit a pdf file.
2. Do not quote or cite (or plagiarize) the PowerPoints from the course—they should only be used to help you understand the material. All citations and quotations should come directly from the readings.
3. Do not use outside sources. You may use any of the assigned readings assigned from sections 2 – 3 as sources. DO NOT USE ANY ONLINE SOURCES.
4. There is not a set page requirement, but it will be difficult to complete the assignment in an adequate manner in less than 3 pages.
5. APA, MLA, and Chicago Manuscriipt are all acceptable citation styles.
Your essay must follow this format:
1. Begin with an introductory paragraph that a) presents your thesis, b) identifies which text and author you will discuss, and c) prepares the reader for the organization of your paper. Your THESIS is a clear and exact statement of the claim you will support in your essay.
a. Thesis Statement: You must tell the reader specifically what position you will defend.
Example of a thesis statement:
“Carl Cohen’s claim that reason is required to justify the extension of moral consideration is flawed. One’s capacity to suffer, should be the only requirement necessary to justify the extension of moral consideration.”
2. The body of the paper should consist in a focused discussion on the author’s argument from your chosen reading. Your paper should provide a clear exposition of one of the arguments offered by the specific author from the text you focus on. Following the exposition, give one or two objections to the author’s claims. Discuss your objection(s) carefully. Provide the strongest possible counter-argument or counterexample. Be sure that your objection(s) are specifically linked to the arguments given by the author whose work you have exposited. Next, offer possible responses to your objections. In other words, examine and discuss possible responses/issues/problems with your objections/argument.
3. The conclusion should not simply repeat what you have already said in the body of the paper. The concluding remarks may reiterate briefly the structure of your foregoing argument and the conclusion(s) you have reached. But, crucially, concluding remarks should say something more than this. Are there still further, related questions that you have not addressed? Does your discussion have an important implication for the topic, for philosophical theory, for life in general? In other words, try to show how your work in this particular essay reaches out to other topics of interest or paves the way for further argument or analysis. Remember that philosophy papers rarely solve problems once and for all time, so resist the temptation to overstate or exaggerate your conclusions. It is reasonable, even admirable, to acknowledge the limitations of your discussion in your concluding remarks.

4. Quote and cite the text to support your discussion (Footnotes or parenthetical citations are preferred). All verbatim quotation must use quotation marks. Citations are also required for paraphrases of the text. The goal is to point the reader to the appropriate passages of text where the claims are made. Use quotations selectively; most of the paper should be written in your own words. Use a works cited page.
In a nutshell:
1. Tell the reader what text you will discuss, identify the specific author you will address, offer a thesis statement (the position you will defend), and give a brief overview of how the essay will proceed.
2. Explicate the specific author’s argument from the text you have chosen—explain the argument in detail, walk the reader through the argument step by step.
3. Offer objections to the argument—point out problems with the author’s argument, and offer your own argument in an effort to justify your claim that the author’s argument contains these problems. Do not ignore the author’s counter arguments—for example, if the author addresses a particular objection in their piece, and offers (a response) a reason to think these objections are not problematic for their position, then be sure that you do not simply offer that very same objection without addressing why their response does not work.
4. Examine possible responses to your objections—discuss possible weaknesses/problems with the argument you present in section three. What sorts of issues might one raise against your argument? Note the weaknesses and/or limitations with your original argument.
5. Conclusion (see above)
* Be sure to read “How to Write a Philosophy Paper” in Blackboard. OTHER IMPORTANT INFORMATION:
• You need not do additional research. Focus on the essays we have read, or any of the others in Blackboard (provided they were assigned and we have discussed them).
• Your work must be your own, original writing. There are severe penalties for plagiarism and cheating. See the syllabus for details.
• Your paper should be double-spaced in 10 or 12-point font. Use standard margins. Do not use a cover page.
• Spell-check your paper. Proofread and edit your work to check for mistakes that computer programs cannot catch.
• At the top of the first page provide the following information single spaced:
Student Name
PHI 1010: Introduction to Philosophy Date
• Give your paper a title. DO NOT USE A COVER PAGE!
• Quote and cite the text to support your discussion. (footnotes or parenthetical citations) All verbatim quotation must use quotation marks. Citations are also required for paraphrases of the text. The goal is to point the reader to the appropriate passages of text

where the claims are made. Use quotations selectively; most of the paper should be written in your own words.
• The exposition should provide a clear, accurate, precise, and selective account of the author’s position.
CLEAR: Write in complete, grammatical sentences. Organize your thoughts. ACCURATE: Give a fair and reasonable representation of the author’s position.
PRECISE: Avoid offering vague claims and mere generalities. Make your discussion detailed, specific, and focused on the exact claims the author gives in support of the particular arguments you will examine.
SELECTIVE: In a short paper you cannot cover all of the arguments or claims the author gives. Select only those ideas, reasons, arguments that are directly relevant to your discussion.
• As a guideline, your first, introductory paragraph should not be more than 1⁄2 a page. The exposition should take about 1 page and the presentation of your objection(s) and response(s) should take about 1 page.
NOTE: This paper assignment focuses on exposition AND on critical thinking. The first goal is to demonstrate that you have a solid understanding of the text, that you can explain specific arguments from the text, and that you can appropriately cite and quote the text in support of your discussion. The second goal is to critically evaluate the text. In formulating your objection(s) to the text, you are attempting to provide reasons why we might reject the author’s argument or claims. These reasons should identify specific problems with the author’s claims, not merely a general difference of opinion or view. The reasons you offer in formulating your objection should be reasonable, clear, intelligent, and as convincing as possible.1
Plagiarism
Your essays will be run through a plagiarism checker. If you plagiarize an essay you will receive a 0% for the essay, and may be failed for the course. There are no second chances. If you are unclear about what constitutes plagiarism, then please contact your professor prior to submitting your assignment.

1- I want someone to know how to do this kind of paper it should focus on explai

1- I want someone to know how to do this kind of paper it should focus on explaining ONE claim that your chosen philosopher makes. I don’t want any historical facts.
You need to pick one claim—preferably quote it!—and then develop that claim. Why does he believe it? Why should anyone else? That is the substance of the assignment.
2- ONLY TWO sources you will use and you are required to use at least ONE ANCIENT SOURCE.
Format: 8.5″x11″ pages, 1″ margins, Times New Roman font, double-spaced lines, indented the first line of each paragraph. Substantial errors in spelling or grammar will result in a reduction of grade. Student name and page number may be placed in a header within the margins.
Content: Your first paper should summarize the position, on a matter of philosophical import, of a philosopher who lived between about 600 B.C. and 1350 A.D. This need not be a philosopher we have or will discuss in class. This should be done in approximately 600 words. (the class book is Pojman, Classics of Philosophy, so be sure to talk about philosophers not mentioned in the book) . I WILL ATTACH PHOTO OF THE philosopher’s NAMES IN THE BOOK to avoid using them.
The philosopher you choose should be one who does not entirely agree with the position summarized in your first paper. In other respects your paper should be much the same as your first: you should not try to summarize everything the philosopher claims–just one claim should be summarized in depth. It may be a metaphysical claim, a value claim, or an epistemological claim, but it should be one of those! If you can figure out how to navigate this map of refinement and disagreementLinks to an external site( https://www.denizcemonduygu.com/philo/browse/.), it may prove quite helpful to you. Just be wary of the dates, many philosophers on that list are not included in the appropriate time range! You may also find the Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy links to an external site (https://plato.stanford.edu/.) useful. Your paper should cite few sources–obviously you should cite the original work of the philosopher you are summarizing, but beyond that you should not use more than one or two other sources. Your bibliography should not be included in your word count. I do not have a citation format preference beyond “consistent.”
The paper will be graded across five areas:
Did you identify a specific argument about metaphysics, values, or epistemology from a philosopher of the appropriate time period? (0-20 points)
Did you clearly and accurately summarize that argument? (0-40 points)
Did you cite the original text(s) in which that argument was made, along with no more than two other academically appropriate sources? (0-20 points)
Is your paper grammatically correct, proofread, formatted as instructed, and otherwise linguistically coherent? (0-20 points)

Edward is taking his daily walk near the train tracks when he notices that the t

Edward is taking his daily walk near the train tracks when he notices that the train that is approaching is out of control. Edward sees what has happened: the train driver saw five workmen ahead on the tracks and slammed on the brakes, but the brakes failed, and the driver fainted. The train is now rushing toward the five men; the banks are so steep that they will not be able to get off the track in time. Fortunately, Edward is standing next to a switch, which he can throw, that will turn the train onto a sidetrack. Unfortunately, there is one person standing on the sidetrack with his back turned. Edward can throw the switch, killing the one, or he can refrain from doing this, letting the five die. Remember, Edward did not build the train, nor is he responsible for its current predicament. However, if he pulls the switch, he is both intervening and making a judgment regarding human value. Take this into account when writing your essay. There is a reason this is considered a “moral dilemma.”
Incorporating what you have learned from ethics, answer the following questions. 1. “Do you think Edward should throw the switch? Why?”
2. Would a Utilitarian agree? Why?
3. Would a Kantian agree? Why?
4. What do you believe is the best option “What is The Good?” Why?

Hello! The primary aim of this 1650 words essay is to develop A CRITICAL AND ANA

Hello! The primary aim of this 1650 words essay is to develop A CRITICAL AND ANALYTICAL ARGUMENT answering the question: “ “When paradigms change the world changes with them” (Kuhn). Discuss.” Before I continue with the guidelines, remember it is essential to be CRITICAL IN EVERY ARGUMENT, EACH ARGUMENT HAS TO GO WITH A CRITICAL ARGUMENT. If you do a descriiptive essay I would rate you with 0 stars.
It should be independent in its thought, YOU HAVE TO EXPRESS YOUR OWN CRITICAL OPINION OF THE LITERATURE, AND ADOPTING A VIEWPOINT OVER THE ESSAY ON THE BASIS OF YOUR OWN REASONING. It is very important that you are clear when defining the terms of Kuhn statement. THE READER SHOULD AT ALL TIMES BE ABLE TO FOLLOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT IT, AND WHAT YOU THINK IS WRONG WITH WHAT KUHN OR OTHERS HAVE SAID. The most important aspect of this essay is that you express your distinctive viewpoint. USE THE FIRST PERSON, to say “I find X’s position unconvincing because… As I have argued, Y …”
REGARDING STRUCTURE IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT YOU INCLUDE AN OBVIOUS AND DISCERNIBLE INTRODUCTION, MIDDLE PARAGRAPH AND CONCLUSION. THIS IS THE EXACT STRUCTURE YOU MUST FOLLOW:
1)THE INTRODUCTION PARAGRAPH MUST INTRODUCE THE PROBLEM YOU WILL DISCUSS, AND THE APPROACH YOU WILL TAKE TO IT. At the end of the introduction you have to include a clear structure of what you talk in each paragraph of the essay such as: “Firstly…(corresponding to the first pair of paragraphs); Secondly… (corresponding to the second pair of paragraphs) etc…” You have to split your argument into clearly marked sections (group of paragraphs).
2)THE MAIN BODY OF THE ESSAY MUST INCLUDE A SUITABLE BALANCE BETWEEN EXPOSITION AND ARGUMENT. The exposition must be concise BUT clear and devote the majority of the essay to critical argument and evaluation. Over the essay you have to move from convincing and critical premises to a conclusion.
3)The conclusion paragraph MUST round off and summarise the discussion with a statement of the position you have ultimately defended.
This is an example of how your structure should look like (it is a different topic but for you to see how your essay should look like): 1) The utilitarian claims that … , and provides these reasons: (a), (b), (c) … 2) For the purposes of this essay I shall focus on reason (a)
3) The following objection can be made to reason (a) 4)There are two possible responses to this objection that the utilitarian could make. Firstly, the utilitarian could argue that …; and secondly, he/she could argue that …4) Further objections can be raised against each of these responses. In the case of the first response, it could be argued that …5) In the case of the second response, it could be argued that … 6) But the utilitarian could, in turn, defend his/her position by pointing out that … 7) In the light of these considerations, I conclude that, at least with regard to reason (a), the utilitarian’s position is highly plausible / implausible
Overall, the aim of the essay is to demonstrate your ability to make clear, critical and logical arguments, not the ability to read a load of books and articles and mention them all at some point. AS YOU CAN’T COVER THE WHOLE DEBATE, YOU HAVE TO FOCUS ON AN ISSUE AND DISCUSS THAT IN DETAIL. YOU MUST SHOW YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE RELEVANT LITERATURE, THAT WOULD HELP YOU TO MAKING YOUR CASE. Regarding the readings I have included 8 readings. You must use minimum 8 sources. Use at least 5-6 sources of the readings I have uploaded (you can use all of them but just use readings that are pertinent for the essay) and then complement them with others of your own. I have also uploaded some notes under the name “Chapter A”, that you can use in the essay as it is the theoretical aspect of the topic, where you can take some ideas from. I insist on the importance of doing a CRITICAL and CLEAR essay.

Interview the oldest person you know (who can respond), and find out how technol

Interview the oldest person you know (who can respond), and find out how technology has changed from when they were younger to now. Has technology affected their health? Good or bad? How were the elderly treated when they were younger? Has it changed? Before the interview, did you talk to this person often, and what were your conversations usually about? Do you think this interview will affect future conversations?

Comparison to Ancient Greek Ethics, with a focus on Aristotle (idea of virtues a

Comparison to Ancient Greek Ethics, with a focus on Aristotle (idea of virtues and golden mean), with ethics is right now all over the world with a focus on the USA. A Short History of Ethics from Macintyre is the book used from this class and the first chapters will be helpful to understand Aristotle from the author position, which is something good to refer on the paper. 2000/2500 words with 3 to 5 sources from articles about the research used for the paper with articles or books not older than 10 years.

The assignment is to be 2 pages in length (approx. 400 words per page) using sta

The assignment is to be 2 pages in length (approx. 400 words per page) using standard 12″ font size with 1.5 spacing.
You may use bullet lists sparingly for only part of your essay. Any late assignments will receive partial credit and must be turned in before advancing to the next week.
If you have any problems with submission call the student help line in Canvas from the global menu on the bottom left.
Topics & Prompts
this comparison/contrast essay will involve two parts.
On Page One: BK II of Plato’s Republic
Socrates says that “Justice (morality) is really concerned with himself and his inner parts.” [See page 65; column one] Discuss what he means by this and choose at least two of the following prompts to respond to.
What are the three types of Good?
What account is given concerning the origin of Justice according to Glaucon?
List and describe the 3 parts of the soul.
List and discuss the virtues and how they are produced in the soul?
What is meant by a functional and dysfunctional soul?
According to the selection, why should we be moral (Just)?
On Page Two: Ethical Egoism Compare & contrast Hobbes position to either Ayn Rand or James Rachels.
According to Thomas Hobbes, “True moral philosophy is a science of natural law.”
What does Hobbes mean by the above expression and how does he justify it?
How does it impact man’s natural state and condition?
How does Hobbes position on natural law compare to Ayn Rand notion of a “code of values”
Would Ayn Rand agree with Hobbes about the need for a social contract & submission to an arbitrator?