Category: Philosophy

PHIL 113
Assignment #1
Jeff Noonan “The Life-Value of Death”
(10 points)
Directions:
1. Read all of Jeff Noonan’s “The Life-Value of Death” (PDF in Canvas)
2. Answer all the following questions. Questions (-1pt for each question not answered or not answered correctly):
1. Summary:
a. In your own words, summarize the reading as thoroughly as possible. i. Please feel free to quote the author if you would like to do so.
b. In your summary, be sure to answer these questions:
i. What was the author’s conclusion or main point?
ii. What were all of the author’s reasons for believing the conclusion or main point? Explain for each. 2. Response:
a. What did you think of the author’s viewpoint? i. Did you agree or disagree? Explain why as thoroughly as possible. 1. Make sure your response is precisely relevant to the author’s argument and main point and be sure to NOT commit any logical fallacies. Essay Guidelines (-1 pt each if not completed): All essays MUST follow these guidelines:
• Length: 2 full pages in length (minimum, no maximum page limit).
• Font: Times New Roman 12pt font.
• Name: Placed your name on the top left corner of your paper, followed with course name, and the professor’s (my) name. • Spacing: Double spaced lines throughout the entire essay. • Page Numbers: Insert page numbers on the top right of each page. (Your software should have an “Insert Page Number” option. Use the “help” on your software to find out how to do this.)
• Margins: Margins must be no more than 1 inch on all sides.
• Indentions: The first line of each paragraph must be indented. • Spelling: Check the spelling throughout the entire essay.
• Grammar: Make sure you use proper grammar and punctuation. • Essay Structure: make sure you have proper paragraph breaks where needed. • Save File: Save your file as a DOC or DOCX file type. If you do not do this, I will not be able to read it. If I can’t read it, I can’t grade it. If I can’t grade it, you will not get a grade. • Upload: Upload a copy into Canvas for my evaluation and for plagiarism analysis.

Instructions
You are required to complete a creative philosophical project. You will choose a philosophical topic and create a piece exploring that topic.  The topics to choose from are:
Nozick – The Experience Machine.pdf 2.1 Nozick – The Experience Machine.pd
2.2 Salmon – The Scope of Logic (excerpts).pdf 2.2 Salmon – The Scope of Logic (excerpts).pdf – Alternative Formats (2.675 MB) 
3.1 Rezkalla – Moral Relativism and Subjectivism.pdf 3.1 Rezkalla – Moral Relativism and Subjectivism.pdf – Alternative Formats (20.771 MB) 
3.2 Morgan – Divine Command Theory and Natural Law Theory.pdf 3.2 Morgan – Divine Command Theory and Natural Law Theory.pdf – Alternative Formats (22.479 MB) 
4.1 Abumere – Utilitarianism.pdf 4.1 Abumere – Utilitarianism.pdf – Alternative Formats (16.479 MB) 
4.2 Singer – Famine, Affluence, and Morality.pdf 4.2 Singer – Famine, Affluence, and Morality.pdf – Alternative Formats (396.033 KB) 
5.1 Giles – Virtue Ethics.pdf 5.1 Giles – Virtue Ethics.pdf – Alternative Formats (22.148 MB) 
6.2 Mackay – Feminism and Feminist Ethics.pdf 6.2 Mackay – Feminism and Feminist Ethics.pdf – Alternative Formats (24.604 MB) 
7.1 Kranak – Kantian Deontology.pdf 7.1 Kranak – Kantian Deontology.pdf – Alternative Formats (24.1 MB) 
7.2 O’Neill – A Simplified Account of Kant’s Ethics.pdf 7.2 O’Neill – A Simplified Account of Kant’s Ethics.pdf – Alternative Formats (158.983 KB) 
8.1 Gettier – Is Justified True Belief Knowledge.pdf 8.1 Gettier – Is Justified True Belief Knowledge.pdf – Alternative Formats (812.331 KB) 
8.2 Descartes – First Meditation.pdf 8.2 Descartes – First Meditation.pdf – Alternative Formats (5.995 MB) 
9.1 Markosian – Do You Know that You are not a Brain in a Vat (excerpts).pdf 9.1 Markosian – Do You Know that You are not a Brain in a Vat (excerpts).pdf – Alternative Formats (1.211 MB) 
9-10. Basu – The Spectre of Normative Conflict.pdf 9-10. Basu – The Spectre of Normative Conflict.pdf – Alternative Formats (849.369 KB) 
11. Sider – Free Will and Determinism.pdf 11. Sider – Free Will and Determinism.pdf – Alternative Formats (253.285 KB) 
12.1 Aquinas – The Five Ways.pdf 12.1 Aquinas – The Five Ways.pdf – Alternative Formats (125.947 KB) 
12.2 Mackie – Evil and Omnipotence.pdf 12.2 Mackie – Evil and Omnipotence.pdf – Alternative Formats (3.853 MB) 
13.1 Jackson – What Mary Didn’t Know.pdf 13.1 Jackson – What Mary Didn’t Know.pdf – Alternative Formats (1.47 MB) 
13.2 The Zhuangzi (excerpts).pdf 13.2 The Zhuangzi (excerpts).pdf – Alternative Formats (4.731 MB) 
15.2 Nagel – Moral Luck.pdf
For example, you might film a movie, write a script, record a song, compose a poem, draw a comic, edit a podcast, paint a picture, take a collection of photographs, or make a sculpture (or something else). If you are unsure whether a particular project would be suitable, please check with me first.
Alongside the creative piece, you will write at least 500 words explaining the philosophical significance of your creation. In this discussion, you must relate your work to the philosophical topic you have chosen. I encourage you to reference the readings, or other texts.
Philosophy is a creative discipline. Coming up with new arguments, ideas, and objections requires patience, an open-mind, and inspiration. This assignment will allow you to practice your philosophical creative expression. It will also exercise your ability to recognise philosophical issues in the world around you. When grading your work, I will be assessing the underlying conceptual content of the work, effort, execution, philosophical understanding, and originality.
If you receive a C+ or lower, I will give you the option to revise and resubmit your work. Please submit your project on time, to ensure that I can reasonably make this provision. Late work (even once revised) will be docked by one partial-letter grade per day late (e.g. B+ to B).
Reflection
In addition to your project and discussion, I would like you to submit a brief reflection about the process of completing this assignment. Please include this reflection in the same file as your discussion. The reflection will not contribute to your discussion’s word-count, nor to your project’s final grade.
Some things you might consider: What worked well in creating this project? What worked poorly? Did I do enough initial research and reading? Did I plan my project thoroughly enough? Did I break the task down into smaller, more manageable tasks
first? Or did I just throw myself into in? Did I leave my project too late, or did I start early? Did I work after lunch when I was sleepy? Or after dinner when I was wide awake? What else was going on in my life at the time, and how might that have affected the result?

We have mostly read epistemologist (theorists of knowledge) each of whom talk about how to acquire knowledge.  The traditional definition of knowledge (which has known problems) is that knowledge is a justified true belief.  A belief that is also knowledge, by definition, must be true (false knowledge is impossible by definition). To say that I believe a statement is just to say that I think that statement describes the way things are.  If I believe that the 2020 election was stolen, and you believe that it was not stolen, then one of us must be wrong.  Truth/reality is not relative to the individual, but beliefs are.  Whether I believe something is something I decide.  Most (if not all) epistemologists would say that we have a moral obligation to make sure that our beliefs are not contrary to the available evidence. 
In light of our readings in epistemology, I want you to write a paper on conspiracy theories in general and in particular I want you to look at:
•    The claim that Biden only won the 2020 election because of fraud.
•    The claim that vaccines cause autism or are a way for the government to control us.
During the course of your paper you must address the following issues:
Do People have a moral obligation to make sure that all of their beliefs are reasonable?
Does an individual’s belief about a vaccine being dangerous endanger other people?
Does an individual’s belief that the 2020 election was stolen potentially harm other people?
Is there good evidence that the outcome of the 2020 election was determined by fraud?  
What evidence can you find about whether the 2020 elections were conducted fairly? (Do some searching for evidence about the reliability of the 2020 results and report on what you found).
Is a person who believes that the 2020 election was determined by fraud being irresponsible?
Is there good evidence for believing that vaccines cause autism?
What would good evidence for vaccines causing autism look like?
For both conspiracy theories (the claim that the 2020 election was stolen and the claim that vaccines cause autism) who has the burden of proof? Does one side have a greater obligation to produce evidence than the other?
Descartes:
How much evidence would Descartes think is required for forming a belief?
What would Descartes say about the belief that the 2020 election was stolen?   
What would he say about people who believe that vaccines cause autism?  
Hume:
David Hume, in the Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding says that it is impossible to be certain of a ‘matter of fact.’  Does this sort of claim make a belief, such as the 2020 election was stolen or the QAnon claim that our country is run by cannibalistic pedophiles reasonable?
In section 12 Hume talks about dogmatists and skeptics.  Would those believing that vaccines cause autism or that the 2020 election was stolen look more like skeptics or dogmatists?
Looking at Hume’s discussion of miracles, what might he say about whether it is rational to believe the stolen election conspiracy or that vaccines cause autism?
Plato:
Is Socrates right that we ought to live examined lives?  (That an unexamined life is not worthy of a human being?)  Would a person living an examined life believe that the 2020 election was stolen?  Explain.

Option #2 – Educational Policy Analysis – address all five points: A, B, C, D, and E (worth 20pts each)
Include references/quotes from our readings so far this semester
You can analyze an educational issue/policy that interests you, relating it to your own experiences/observations and our
readings/discussions in class thus far. See the list of resources in our Inquiry Assignment in Canvas and use one or more
of the links provided there.
FYI: If you chose Option #2 for your 1st Inquiry Project, you can discuss the SAME issue/policy– BUT do so through the
lens of our readings/videos/discussions since Spring Break. OR you can discuss a NEW issue/policy. It’s up to you.
A) Introduce your topic: i) Briefly state the issue/policy you’re addressing.
ii) List the issue/policy sources you’re using from the list provided on Canvas.
iii) Briefly indicate which of our readings and/or class discussions relate to this issue.
B) Explain the main points of the issue and the conflicts or questions involved (for students, parents, teachers, leaders,
communities, etc.)
C) Summarize the discussion in the policy source(s) you’re relying on. Provide a link to that source.
D) Share how this issue relates to (or contrasts with) your own experiences/observations.
Highlight statements/claims in the policy source that you think are especially important.
Provide references or quotes from our readings/videos that relate to this issue – whether in positive or negative ways.
[Consider approaching this as if you are interviewing a thinker we’ve read and/or reporting on their views.]
E) Conclude by saying how you think the issue should be addressed – and why?
Feel free to refer back to your own experiences/observations and/or our class readings/videos to strengthen your case.

I like the third option if you could write about Simone and choosing between Sleeping Beauty or Cinderella.

Belief Essay Instructions
Holding a belief with insufficient evidence to back it up is something that everyone does.  Any stance (except agnosticism) on God, for instance, whether one believes that God exists, or one believes that God does not exist, is a belief based on insufficient evidence.  James thinks that when we are presented with a genuine option between two hypotheses (living, forced, momentous) where sufficient evidence is unavailable, our passions push us to pick one of the hypotheses and form a belief.  James can be interpreted as implying that the beliefs we hold based on insufficient evidence are justified to some extent (though not necessarily the actions that flow from the belief, especially if they are immoral or illegal).  Basically, you need to respect the right of the person to hold such a belief, though you do not need to respect the belief itself.  For example, your neighbor could believe that she is Cleopatra reincarnated.  According to James, you must respect your neighbor’s right to hold the Cleopatra belief, even if you think the belief itself is completely ridiculous.
For your essay, pick a belief that someone else holds but that you find to be ridiculous or repulsive or stupid (or you strongly disapprove of the belief in some other way).  For example, you might know someone who believes that one virgin needs to be sacrificed each year to appease the gods.  Explain the belief you disapprove of.  James thinks that you need to respect the right of the person to hold that belief.  Do you agree with James?  Putting aside any actions that flow from the belief, do you think people should have the right to hold beliefs without sufficient evidence or do you think people should not have the right to hold beliefs without sufficient evidence?  Give at least one reason supporting your position.  Keep in mind that whichever position you take can be applied not only to beliefs you disapprove of but also beliefs that you hold.
Your essay, at minimum, should be at least half a page (12 size font with regular margins and double-spaced) and will be turned into a dropbox on D2L.  The due date for this assignment is Monday, March 25 by 10 p.m.

Philosophical Analysis Paper
You will read both W. K. Clifford, “The Ethics of Belief” (Norton 85-95), and William James, “The Will to Believe” (Norton 97-105). You will then write a philosophical analysis paper. Your paper must have the following specific structure and this structure must be clearly distinguishable.
I. Summary. In this section you will give a brief overview of both articles. For each article, your overview must identify the author, the title of the article, and the specific question or position discussed.
II. Analysis. You will give a more detailed analysis of each argument, identifying the major steps and arguments. This section must be at least two pages.
III. Evaluation. You will evaluate the argument of each article by identifying strengths and weaknesses. What supporting arguments to the argument might somebody make? What objections might someone make to the argument? This section must be at least two pages.
IV. Position. You will present and argue for your own position on the point at dispute between Clifford and James. Be sure to consider and address possible objections someone might put forward against your position. This section must be at least two pages.
V. Conclusion. You will end with a paragraph describing what you have done in the course of your paper, as well as the fundamental conclusions you have drawn.
Additional Requirements
* Your paper must be double-spaced, 12-point font, with ordinary margins. It must also be in one of the required formats: .doc, .docx, .odt, .pdf, .rtf. No other format will be accepted.
* Your analysis should not just make claims about the article but give evidence. You should cite the articles you are using. Citation is not merely listing it as a source! Your citation should make clear which information is based on which passage in the article. Common ways of doing this are footnote, endnote, or parenthetical citation. You are free to use whatever format you prefer, as long as you are consistent, but you should use page numbers or paragraph numbers where possible
* Your evaluation should not just give your opinion; philosophy is primarily concerned with reasons.

Thesis – something along the lines:
Although prenatal testing (particularly for Down Syndrome) could benefit parents of lower socioeconomic backgrounds, it is often more accessible to middle/upper class parents as a form of family management.
Use the texts provided below and 2-3 external sources to argue the above. Please use the texts I’ve attatched as theoretical framework that you will use in order to justify the thesis statement. Do not apply normative understandings of disability – after all it is a philosophy paper.
I’ve also attached a link to my blog for this class as it is essential you keep my writing style in mind. This is a very small class so the professor is quite familiar with all our writing.

Select one of the following case studies from your textbook. Provide your response to the case study you select (I.e. What is the right thing to do). Use one of the ethical theories (Utilitarianism, Deontology, or Virtue Ethics) to justify your response. Responses should be in the form of a paragraph starting with a topic sentence that states your position in the 3-4 sentences that support your position and at least 2 paragraphs total. Answers are evaluated based on how well they employ the specific ethical theory to justify the stated position.
Case Studies:
Mixed Martial Arts Pg 101
Watching Football Pg 103
Ethics of Flopping Pg 183
Ethics of Banning PED Pg 282
Swimsuits in Volleyball Pg 285-86
Ethics of Extreme Sports? Pg 316
The book is imaged below.

Write a 250 summary of the article. – Heidi Grasswick article
c. Then, you’ll write a 250-word reply, where you engage with the ideas, expand on the
argument mentioned, offer an objection to a claim, relate to personal experiences, etc.
This is your opportunity to flex your philosophical expertise
The Value of Philosophy” by Bertrand Russell. 
b. In 500 words, you will present your own view on the Value of Philosophy, taking into
consideration the four units we’ve dove into this semester: Traditional Epistemology,
Personal Identity, Social Epistemology, and Epistemic Injustice.
i. You might agree with Russell and expand with your own argument.
ii. You could object to Russell’s claim and state that perhaps there is no value in
philosophy.
c. You will provide evidence for why there is or there is not Value in doing Philosophy