Category: Philosophy

Discussion: Find a fallacy of weak induction or emotional appeal Weak induction fallacies and fallacious appeals to emotion are quite common.  See if you can find one online.  Look at web sites like the NRA; Fox News; NRLC; PETA; and other such political or agenda-driven  organizations.  Comment on another students’ post. Weak induction:  Small sample; unrepresentative sample; questionable cause; slippery slope; faulty analogy; biased experts; irrelevant expertise. Emotional appeals:  Fear; Pity; Anger

The essay is completed. I just need it revised according to the professor’s comments. I have attached pictures of the comments the professor left and the doc of my essay.    Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you! 

I need to write a literature review on two books: 
Dark Continents
Psychoanalysis and Colonialism by Raja Kana and Black skin white masks by Fanon 
The goal will be to compare white both authors said about psychoanalysis and colonialism 

Pedagogy – The student will analyze how Pedagogy influences a student’s ability to learn and apply knowledge in personal, academic, and/or professional ways by reviewing one or more assigned readings from the course and providing examples.
The student will be evaluated in the following areas:
1) Knowledge of philosopher(s)
2) Ability to compare ideas
3) Critical thinking skills
Please note the following questions when reviewing the rough draft:
Is the subject of analysis clearly introduced in paragraph one?
Is the essay’s thesis clearly worded?
Is the paper properly sourced (quotes to prove your point)?
Are the body paragraphs clearly unified?
Does the essay properly transition between paragraphs?
Are the philosophers noted in the paper properly explained?
Is the analysis (explanation) clear?
Does the paper contain a strong conclusion?
Is the paper at least 4 complete pages? 

–  Provide an interpretation of Nietzsche’s criticisms of ‘anti-natural’ morality. Provide some contemporary examples to help explain his target. Do you find his argument compelling? What may some objections be?
– Pease use down to Earth language. The purpose of the essay to show understanding and interpretation of his philosophy so it must be understandable for people who arent familiar with the subject. 
–   Include a list of at least six academic references you used in your project. Cite these in your writing. (An ‘academic source’ is one that is found through the Queens College Library search. This includes journal articles, published books, as well as the websites ‘Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy’ and ‘Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.’ Other websites (eg. Reddit, Quora, Spark Notes and Cliff Notes) are not academic sources!)
2 out of 6 sources you can use are provided below:
1. 
https://stanford.library.sydney.edu.au/index.html
2.

Welcome

– Please, provide AI and pagiarism reports. 

Prompt
What are philosophical zombies? Present and explain Chalmers’s zombie argument (pp.388-389). According to Chalmers, how does the possibility of philosophical zombies challenge or raise a problem for materialism/physicalism? Do you find his argument convincing? Why or why not? (To clarify, the task is to give your evaluation of Chalmers’s argument — not to present Dennett’s.)

You
are required to write a commentary (maximum
length: two pages) on the two questions below.  Each question requires a detailed answer
consisting of at least 200 words. In each answer, you are also required to use short
quotes (at least two lines each) from
the appropriate readings in order to demonstrate knowledge of the readings. If
there are no relevant quotes from these texts, then no grade will be given. Avoid
unnecessary overlap between the two answers. Finally, grammar, spelling, clarity,
and organization will all be marked. Each question is worth 2.5 marks. 

According to Butler, the sex gender distinction does nothing more than prop up cultural gender norms. In her view, biological sex is also a cultural categorization/construction, not a natural reality. Write a paper where you take a position on this topic.

Here is the prompt to my essay: 
Topic B. Cultivating Virtues and Reasoning about the Common Good
Near the end of Justice: Whats’s the Right Thing to Do? Micheal Sandel writes “over the course of this journey, weve explored 3 approaches to justice. One says justice means maximizing utlity or welfare-the greatest happiness for the greatest number. The second says justice means respecting freedom of choice either the actual choices people make in a free market (the libertarian view) or the hypothetical choices people would make in an original position of equality (the libertarian egalitarian view). The third says justice involves cultivating virtue and reasoning about the common good. As you probably guessed by now, I favor the third approach. 
In recent decades, Americans have leaned away from supporting the common good. Instead of campaigning for public parks, pools, and playgrounds, they buy homes in gated communities where these amenities are for members only. Instead of advocating for improvments in public education that will benefit all children including their own, they move to exclusive school districts where their children will get a better education than those in neighboring communities. Instead of sending their children to public schools, they send them to private or charter schools. To what extent do you think this trend is racially motivated?
Please explain why Sandal favors the third approach and what he thinks is involved in cultivated virtue and reasoning about the common good. What examples does he mention? What virtues and the common goods are now being fostered in America? What virtues and common goods do you think should be fostered? And by what means do you think our society should foster them? 

this has to be in google docs
Consider Meursault’s personhood from part I and II: Is he a stranger to society or to himself?  Lend deep consideration to Meursault’s conflict, is it internal (Man vs. Self) or is it external (Man vs. Man, Man vs. Nature, or Man vs. Society)? Also consider Meursault’s ways of knowing: Does his ability to reason, emotional capacity, memory, or faith (or other ways of knowing) contribute to his inner or external conflict; his knowledge or lack thereof? The following is the criteria for you to deeply consider:
Respond to the prompt with a clear and distinct claim in your introduction (A stranger to society or himself?)
Offer context to your reader (inform them about Meursault’s character S.T.E.A.L and predicament.)
Select and use appropriate evidence (3-5 pieces) that supports your claim.
Offer commentary (analysis) that supports your overall position.
Use appropriate grammar and punctuation to communicate your argument.
Essay should have the following criteria:
Times New Roman
12 pt. Font
Double-Space
3-5 pages