Category: Philosophy

Use this prompt to write a 10-12 page, typed,
double-spaced essay in 11 or 12 point font, and submit it as a .pdf (.hwp files are not acceptable).
Please note that I will not accept late papers, or papers submitted in any other way than through
being uploaded on LearnUs, so please make sure to complete your paper in time to submit it
properly. Part of the point is to help you work on the completeness, clarity and concision of your
writing, and so you’re likely to be penalized for going substantially under or over the length
limits. Do not simply copy and paste things from the class notes: this will be considered
plagiarism.
Your task in this paper is to explain Taylor’s picture of what it is to be a person, building on the
picture he presented in “Self-interpreting animals” by focusing on the arguments of Part I of
Sources of the Self.
First, briefly summarize Taylor’s argument that we are self-interpreting animals as he presents it
in the essay of that title. Make sure to emphasize those aspects of his picture there that you will
develop further in the remainder of your paper, so you can lay the groundwork for your
discussion of Sources of the Self. In other words, this introductory section of the essay should
flow naturally into your discussion of that book.
As you discuss Sources of the Self, you should make sure to explain: (a) what a moral framework
is; (b) the three axes of evaluation, and Taylor’s metaphor of moral space; (c) Taylor’s arguments
that our relation to the moral space we inhabit is crucial for our understanding of our own
identities (i.e., the importance of having an orientation in moral space through an understanding
of the good, of having a sense of one’s location in moral space), and why Taylor thinks such self-
understanding is essentially narrative; (d) what hypergoods are, and how they’re different from
other goods; and (e) what moral sources (a.k.a. constitutive goods) are, how they are different
from other goods, and how they are important for us; as well as (f) why Taylor thinks articulating
our understanding of the good is important for our moral lives. As you tackle (a)-(f), it would be
helpful to make liberal use of concrete examples. You may use some of Taylor’s examples, but I
encourage you to formulate your own and/or elaborate on some of Taylor’s examples in ways that
will aid in the clarity of your explanations.
Lastly, as in the midterm paper, critically evaluate Taylor’s views. Since there are many moving
parts to his arguments, for this portion of your paper to be effective, you should consider a
discrete claim or argument Taylor makes, consider possible objections to it, and possible
responses to those objections, attempting to be as careful and precise as you can.
Previous comments that needs to be avoided at all cost:
-fair exposition: made no major mistakes, shows a
grasp of the argument, but doesn’t convey it to
the reader
poor exposition: made major mistakes and/or
doesn’t show a grasp of the main line of argument
misfire: off target
-somewhat effective critique: lacks development
and/or makes minor argumentative errors
and/or does not understand what’s been
accomplished
I appreciate your efforts to create a context for the
discussion of your essay, but I think you should consider
jumping right into the material by giving a briefer
summary of what you will talk about in the rest of the
essay. Plus, it would have been helpful to explicitly and
concisely define the notion of moral responsibility.
(3) As in your introduction, you’re talking about a lot of
things that aren’t directly relevant to the specific themes
we discussed in class, and failing to address the issues
that are: rational determinism, and radical choice. You
mention radical freedom, but you fail to characterize what
is ’radical’ about it.
(4) This is all correct, but you need to say something more
specific. What is Frankfurt’s view of freedom of the will,
and why precisely does he think it’s not necessary for
responsibility? I think this would be clearer if you used
some concrete example to illustrate.
(5) You need to explain Taylor’s criticisms of Frankfurt.
(6) The observations about the importance of cultural context
are external to the particular texts we discussed.
Overall: This essay reads more like a book report than an
argumentative essay. You need to focus more on the texts we
discussed in class and the terms in which we discussed them. By
relying on external resources, you’ve ended up bringing in a lot of
issues that come from work external to the texts we read, and
bringing in this external material resulted in overly brief and often
vague considerations of the material that we did discuss. The
impulse to consult secondary resources is a sign of lack of
confidence in one’s own ability to read and reflect on a text on its
own terms. Focus more on defining terms, laying out steps in
reasoning, and illustrating ideas using concrete examples. Make
sure to read the prompt carefully and study the specific material
that was discussed in lecture. It’s clear to me that you’re capable
of doing this, given the quality of the writing. If you shift your
emphasis, you could no doubt do a lot better. In your critique, as I
suggested pick a discrete claim or argument, making sure to
identify it clearly and precisely, and think about it on your own
rather than citing critical reflections from others in a somewhat
vague and summary fashion.
I tried by best and still got B- 🙁
This time I need help. 

Your first writing assignment was to submit the outline of an argument. I gave each of you quite a bit of feedback on that assignment.
Your second writing assignment was to take that first writing assignment and turn it into a three to four page essay. Again, I gave you quite a bit of feedback on that assignment.
Your third writing assignment was to evaluate the essay of another student. This was intended to 1) give you practice evaluating an argument and 2) give you even more feedback on your essay because the final goal has always been to take what you have been working on all semester and turn it into an eight to ten page argumentative essay for the final essay. 
Your paper must include: an introduction to the issue and a clear issue statement, an argument that supports your position, rebuttals of arguments that support contrary positions, a final conclusion that also includes suggestions on possible actions one can take on the issue. Be sure to cite your sources and provide a works cited page. Formatting should be double-spaced, 12-point font and one inch margins. Do not put large spaces between paragraphs. Indent paragraphs. 

For your final paper, you will write a case study of a quantity of your choice – any quantity you like! The case study should focus on philosophically relevant aspects of your chosen quantity. Although there is no particular essay question you are expected to answer, you should still offer arguments in support of your claims: your paper should not just offer a description of your chosen quantity.
Some examples of quantities: mass, charge, length, duration, velocity, temperature, colour, shape, hardness, spin, field strength, sensation, consciousness, well-being.
You paper should follow the following structure (the word counts are indicative):
Description of your quantity. Describe your chosen quantity: what is it like? How is it typically measured, and what role does it play in scientific theories? You should also note any other features of philosophical interest. [~500 words]
Philosophical problem. Present a philosophical problem related to your quantity. You should clearly state the problem and motivate why it really is a problem. You can find a list of potential questions below, but make sure that you consider the problem as it applies to your quantity specifically. [~750 words]
Solution to the problem. Propose a solution. Make sure to carefully explain how your solution solves the problem. Does your proposed solution have any downsides or further consequences? [~750 words]
Metaphysical account. Based on your solution, discuss the best metaphysical account for your quantity. You may defend one of the theories discussed in this course. Substantiate your answer. [~1000 words]
Conclusion. What have we learnt about your chosen quantity? Are there any questions left open? [~500 words]
You may find it helpful to consider some of the questions below (you should not answer all of these questions):
What makes your quantity quantitative?
Is your quantity a concept or an attribute?
Is your quantity measurable?
Is your quantity properly extensive?
Is your quantity a determinable with determinates?
What kind of numerical scales are possible for your quantity?
What kind of particulars can instantiate your quantity?
Is your quantity absolute or comparative?
Is your quantity a (structured) universal?
Are your quantity’s magnitudes locations in a value space?
Does your quantity have its causal powers necessarily or contingently?
Does your quantity always have determinate values?
Please consult the Marking Criteria for further information on the criteria your paper should satisfy. In addition, your paper should discuss at least two texts that are not on the reading list for the course. You are expected to find further literature yourself, but of course you may ask me for suggestions. I have uploaded the references section of Wolff’s book to make it easier to track down the papers she refers to.
The word limit for the final paper is 3,500 words including references but excluding a final bibliography. This is a hard limit: there is no margin of tolerance. If your essay is over the limit, I will deduct one point from your grade and one further point for every 100 words.

Part 1:
Does Roger Have Decision Making Capacity?

Watch the assigned video, in which a social worker is assessing an adult’s capacity to make decisions about money. The adult, Roger, has intellectual disabilities and resides in a supported living facility. Answer the following questions in your post:
Do you think Roger has the capacity to make decisions about money or not?
What about the social worker’s interview makes you think that Roger has, or does not have, the capacity to make financial decisions?
Write succinct and clear answers to these questions.
Part 2:

In this case simulation, you will will apply the concept of competence to the facts of a particular case. Answer the following questions when responding to the case: 
Briefly define the criteria for decision making capacity (e.g., understanding, appreciation, reasoning, and communication). 
Apply the criteria of decision making capacity to the facts of the Mary Northern case. 
Evaluate whether you think Mary Northern should have been allowed to refuse doctor’s recommendations for an amputation.
The Case of Mary Northern
Mary C. Northern was a 72 year old from Tennessee (JUSTIA US Law, n.d.).  She was admitted to the hospital for pneumonia. While in the hospital, she was found to have gangrene in both feet. The physicians were convinced that her life was in danger if her feet were not amputated (JUSTIA US Law, n.d.).  However, Ms. Northern refused to believe that there was a serious problem. She stated that her feet were only dirty. Ms. Northern refused to have her feet amputated. Tennessee Department of Human Services asked the courts to step in.
Upon evaluation, she had good memory, responded to questions appropriately, and was found to have sound mind (JUSTIA US Law, n.d.). However, when it came to her feet, she was unable to recognize that, without amputation, her infection would worsen and she would likely die. On the one hand she wanted to live. But on the other, she would not consent to the amputation.
Doctor’s petitioned the court to amputate her feet without her consent. An attorney appointed for Ms. Northern argued that the doctors were violating her liberty and autonomy to make her own medical decisions; the right to be left alone. On the other hand, the attorneys representing the state of Tennessee argued that Ms. Northern was not of sound mind and that the state needed to make decisions for her. 
The judge in this case was torn. The judge visited Ms. Northern in the hospital. After conversing with her about the recommended amputation, he found that she was unable to make decisions for herself.  Ms. Northern was made a ward of the state. The State of Tennessee, Department of Human Services, was assigned to be responsible for the personal welfare of Ms. Northern. Afterwards, the State consented to surgery (JUSTIA US Law, n.d.).
Tragically, on May 1, 1978, before surgery could take place, Mary C. Northern died in the hospital due to a blood clot from the gangrene.
The video below provides more information about the Northern case, including interviews and presentations from central players in the case.
Part 3: 
Defining Death –
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/02/05/what-does-it-mean-to-die
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jahi_McMath_case
Now that you know a little bit about the concept, measurement, and controversies of death, let’s explore this with the Jahi McMath case. Answer the following questions:
Do you think Jahi is dead or alive?
If you think Jahi is dead, why? What theory or framework of death are you appealing to?
Do you think Jahi’s doctors were wrong in recommending the withdrawal of care?
Write succinct and clear answers to these questions.

I want it perfect and professionally, NO plagiarism + NO ChatGPT. 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, but this is not required (since Canvas will tell me who each paper was submitted by). Professor name, course name, date, etc. need not be included.
The file should be in .doc or .docx (Microsoft Word) format. Note that as students of Florida Tech, you have access to Microsoft Office, including via a web browser, so this should not present any difficulty. Submit the final version here, via Canvas.
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. (the class book is Pojman, Classics of Philosophy, so be sure to talk about philosophers not mentioned in the book) . This should be done in approximately 600 words.
Since your second paper will need to do the same thing with a philosopher who does not entirely agree with the position summarized in your first paper, you will want to choose carefully. A few hints: 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.”
Your 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)

In answering these questions, first explore Locke’s account of primary and second qualities and show how Locke would respond.
Next, detail Berkeley’s criticisms of Locke’s distinction and discuss how Berkeley would answer. How might Locke reply to Berkeley?
Finally, talk about how Descartes answers these questions.
In the end, whose position is strongest? Why? Defend your answer at length.
While there is no set length, I think one would need at least a couple of pages to do the question justice. Attend to all parts of the question and give a thorough account, detailing the respective positions. Write as if you are explaining these issues to one who has done none of the reading — to a relative or a friend. Try, in other words, to be as clear as possible, demonstrating to me that you grasp the core dispute. You will also want to argue for one approach over another, offering reasons that would appeal to the fair-minded or neutral reader, one interested in learning the truth.
I prefer that you not quote other sources — either from within the course or without — back to me. This is not a research assignment but an analytical essay. Don’t Google the question and try to get the answer in this way
That said, any evidence of plagiarism — the close use of another’s work without attribution and, where necessary, quotation marks — may result in a score of zero on the assignment and, in some cases, an F in the course. Any work written, developed, inspired by, or created with the aid of artificial intelligence (AI) is considered plagiarism. The use of AI robs one of the opportunity to hone not only one’s writing skills, but the very ability to think — which is the goal of this class. You should avoid the use of AI altogether in your assignments for this course

Topic A: You try to live strictly by the moral rules contained in your religion’s moral code. The two most important rules are “Be merciful” (don’t give people what they deserve) and “Be just” (give people exactly what they deserve). Now suppose a man is arrested for stealing food from your house, and the police leave it up to you whether he should be prosecuted for his crime or set free. Should you be merciful and set him free, or be just and make sure he is appropriately punished? How do you resolve this conflict of rules? Can your moral code resolve it? To what moral principles or theories do you appeal?
Use your course texts to help you respond to the topic, and when you quote and summarize from the course texts, include information about the page reference.
You are discouraged from using additional sources. If you do choose to use an outside source, be sure to cite your source, just as you do when you use the course texts. If you use a quotation or an example from a website, cite the website’s URL and the date accessed.
Essay Length tips–To answer these topics completely, it takes a minimum of 350 words. Use the topic questions and the scoring rubric to see if your draft responds fully to all parts of the question. A complete thoughtful answer is more important than word count.

MUST BE 450 WORDS  ! 
Summarize one of the arguments offered by Judith Jarvis Thomson for the                  permissibility of (at least some) abortions. Then, offer a criticism of the argument        (and, if you’d like, reply to the criticism) (could be 700 words MAX but I wont pay        extra  if you decide to.
be sure to (a) make clear the meaning of the terms you use in your explanation and 
(b) use your own examples.
General Instructions
Word Range: 400-700 words. You will have to write concisely; training word          economy is one of the goals of the exercise.
Use in-text citations to support assertions about the author’s position (use the   pagination from the excerpts). *How many cites is not specified so only cite to   prove any claims or points! MUST CITE!*
Cite any sources (but note that using external sources is not  necessary).
Use one style guide consistently (e.g., Chicago, MLA, APA); I recommend               Chicago.
Use your own examples.
Give a gloss on any technical terms (e.g., I will be discussing deliberation as it      relates to practical reasoning—reasoning that is oriented towards action, rather than simply belief.)
i will provide the article this is based off as well as my notes so that you can        utilize my info from there! NO OUTSIDE SOURSES IS NECESSARY.

Please check the attached essay prompt pdf for instructions.
I do not expect you to read all the attached material but I do expect you to reference and cite the materials.
Thank you.

Write at least 7 sentences on “Why is Socrates known as the Father of Western Philosophy?” End your writing with a QUESTION for others to comment on. Then write a COMMENT of at least 5 sentences on another person’s post on the discussion platform.