Category: Philosophy

Classical Philosophy, Native Pragmatism, Feminist Thought,
American History, History of Philosophy, Philosophical Anthropology and Social Philosophy  

The assignment is pretty straight forward and easy but please be very careful. The
course is Mods of reasoning which is a simple philosophy and writting. In this pdf i put
the article that needs to be analyzed, after that i put all the fallacies that you should find
in the article. Moreover, at the end i putted the steps that you have to do. It is 8 step
which you dont have to do step 6. All the explanations are there for each step as well as
an example. Also i will upload 2 example of this assignment so you can see the format
and the correct way to do. Rely more on the “Article analysis assignment” example
since got a better mark. If i get a 90% or more I will leave very good tip and a review.
Thank you very much for your time. 
Also, for the PASSAGE ANALYSIS EXAMPLE, I also putted the marked version so you can see the marking method. 
Also all these steps should be around 2200 words depending on the argument. If you think that it should be more write it down and I will pay the extra. thank you very much

Punishment and Disadvantage : Criticize an argument.  First, present the argument you wish to criticize. It can be taken from Boonin or Cholbi on restitution, Lewis, or Shelby. You should analyze the argument – explain the conclusion to be established and the reasoning that supports it. Be as charitable as possible. Then, carefully explain how the argument goes wrong. Does it rely on weak premises? Is there a devastating counterargument it fails to address?  The criticism should be your own, not one that is found in the reading. 
Make sure to address at least one possible response to your objection. 
Finally, briefly discuss the stakes of your criticism: does it invalidate the author’s point in its entirety, or does it merely require modification of the argument?  

This paper solves the Knowledge Aporetic Cluster that is provided in the attached file. Two tools/concepts and two philosophers need to be cited within the paper. 

make it more coherent, take out wrong information, keep at least 1500 words, dont go over 1600 words

1500 words, times new roman, double sided.
Refer to example essay that answers the same prompt. 
Make sure to include many intext citations.
Two authors: John s. Mill ( On liberty or other) and  Madison (The federalist.)
Prompt: In Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville writes, “The moral dominion of the majority is based in part on the idea that there is more enlightenment and wisdom in many men combined than in one man alone, more in the number than in the choice of legislators. It is the theory of equality applied to minds.” What does he mean by this claim, and how does he characterize the “theory of equality applied to minds” more generally? Compare and contrast these arguments with ones drawn from at least two other texts we have read so far this semester. Do those authors agree with Tocqueville about the risks associated with such beliefs?

Imagine that you are a journalist and your task is to uncover a case where reasoning severely malfunctions. For this essay, you are to research some thing that actually happened (e.g., in history, in current society, in the digital sphere, wherever); and then you are to take us through the story of how reasoning malfunctioned. Get as detailed as possible with the story and, most importantly, show me your original analysis. I want to see how you uncover bad reasoning. Your essay should be structured as follows:
1) Have an introduction where you tell me: a) what case study you’ll be discussing; b) what your thesis is (the thesis should tell us exactly WHAT is malfunctioning in the reasoning); c) the outline of your discussion (e.g., what you will be discussing first, second, and third and so one). 
2) Body paragraphs where your point is analysis. Each paragraph should provide a puzzle piece to the story that you are telling. Make it original. Apply the concepts that you are learning. Get really detailed in telling us how the reasoning malfunctions. 
3) A conclusion. Tell us what you have done in your discussion and also why this case study is important. 
4) Citations. Any time you are using someones quotes and also ideas, you must cite. Did you know that even if you use part of an old paper for another class and you don’t cite yourself, that’s plagiarism? I know! That’s wild. Now that you know, cite EVERYTHING that is not your own original idea because turn it in will flag it. I do not care if it’s APA, MLA, or Chicago, just cite consistently. For a reference on MLA and APA citations go to: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/2/10/Links to an external site. 
5) Do NOT use someone’s analysis. I repeat, this must be your original analysis. One concern is that if you are using someone else’s analysis it will be flagged by the turnitin software and that’s plagiarism. So, don’t use some journalist’s article. Do not look for someone to organize the information for you. Rather, start searching around for an interesting topic and then find a rich source of information that you can analyze yourself. Now, here’s the thing, I’m a realist: you may have to rely on other journalist’s stories in order to get to the direct source. For example, suppose that you google, failures in reasoning and you get a Vox article about McArthur Wheeler and the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Good. Now use that article to get to the direct source of the information; and rely on your own analysis of that information. Please use confirmation and disconformation reasoning as the example and how those who participated in the insurrection reasoning malfunctioned. 

Using two of the six moral theories we have discussed (Virtue Ethics, Natural Law, Utilitarianism, Ethical Egoism, Deontological ethics, and contractarianism, discuss one of the moral issues found in our text book.  I suggest you try to use a specifc scenario and analyze it, rather than discuss the issue in abstract terms.   Recommended length 4-6 pages.
Just to make sure you dont do the same mistakes I did on the first paper so please read this carefully (section makes some good points but too vague and general. Try a specific scenario, not just abortion in abstract because utility is vert fact specific. For Kant you must apply categorical imperative. You just take a couple of buzzwords from Kant reinterpret those terms and then call it deontology.)

Using two of the six moral theories we have discussed (Virtue Ethics, Natural Law, Utilitarianism, Ethical Egoism, Deontological ethics, and contractarianism, discuss one of the moral issues found in our text book.  I suggest you try to use a specifc scenario and analyze it, rather than discuss the issue in abstract terms.   Recommended length 4-6 pages.
Just to make sure you dont do the same mistakes I did on the first paper so please read this carefully (section makes some good points but too vague and general. Try a specific scenario, not just abortion in abstract because utility is vert fact specific. For Kant you must apply categorical imperative. You just take a couple of buzzwords from Kant reinterpret those terms and then call it deontology.)
The assignment grade is  150 so I need to get at least 120/150 or you will get half of your 
moeny so be careful and read the instructions carefully PLEASE !!!!

This is a 2-3 page philosophical essay solving an aporetic cluster. It needs to address the conception of justice and apply it to the cluster. It also needs to use two philosophers to defend the position.