Category: Philosophy

Can I know anything? 
Socrates famously declared that he knew nothing. What do you think you know? Anything? In this module, we will examine a very famous skeptical argument—René Descartes’ famous argument that he cannot be certain of anything except the fact that he exists. After all, he argues, “as long as I am thinking I know something exists—the being that is doing the thinking.” The problem he struggles with is that of showing that his knowledge extends to anything beyond his own thoughts, since it seems that we can never rule out the possibility that we’re misrepresenting whatever we are thinking about.
Of course, what philosophical skeptics like Descartes worry about is very esoteric, not obviously related to our experience of everyday life. Descartes himself acknowledges that these are questions that a person without a special interest in philosophy might not be terribly concerned about, which is why he makes an effort to put his meditations on the subject in the form of a dramatic story about being overcome by doubt about his ability to trust his idea of reality. These skeptical doubts represent philosophical problems that have motivated some important developments in our thinking about the nature of mind and the role of abstract reasoning in science. We will then view the classic film, The Matrix, which uses the premises of Cartesian skepticism in its depiction of a disytopic future world. 
Module Outline
To complete this module:
Read: Meditations 1 and 2 | Descartes (with Audio Option)
Watch: Movie: The Matrix | Netflix
Watch: Video: Lecture on Meditation 1
Watch: Video: Lecture on Meditation 2
Participate in the discussion (30 points)

https://www.netflix.com/title/20557937

General Instructions
First Step: Create a scientific hypothesis on your own (this is a fictional hypothesis that you will invent for this exercise) and the type of science it belongs to. This will be a made-up hypothesis (no need to research) in an area of science. For example: “Students do better in test when they have 8 hours of sleep”- Psychology. If two students have the same hypothesis I will deduct 10 points to both students.
Second Step: Provide confirmation of this hypothesis using the four ways in which we have studied.
•will provide assignment questions with file TOTAL OF 9 questions!!

Answer the following concisely and in sequence:
Choose two moral theories mentioned in Chapter 3 of our Vaughn text; ( Philosophy Here And Now. by Lewis Vaugh)  describe each.  Note similarities and important differences. Choose from among moral relativity; consequentialist moral theory (utilitarianism of J.S. Mill), virtue ethics (Aristotle), duty-based moral theory (Kantian moral theory); ethics of care (Schopenhauer’s ethics of compassion); Confucian ethics
Schopenhauer’s ethics of compassion is not mentioned in Chapter 3, ( Philosophy Here And Now. by Lewis Vaugh)  use the following links if you should choose to consider Schopenhauer’s theory of ethics:
Schopenhauer’s Ethics of Compassion
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&sca_esv=be88bab9d1b25e92&sca_upv=1&q=schopenhauer%27s+theory+of+ethics+mitleid&uds=ADvngMhUnxSsEVpgz9hQdoyhfa7DE2YjnmxqmxoHIlIYzZHhbaztHOrTWgSTT_OlfLKrDCJflfQF3R_Lc7QTAgMJZWjfCOvtpMzyN1nBgvoNRfCiCsyWxmJ4Fqz9ezPLSUjv-rxL0Fw056TniFV9smix9a7J9nH7UE1jv74ncEyocLA5_h5LoViEo-JaAHIJJ0fbNqNFUP7BUjq3mV8NVYFGEPu1ncn-4f8D_YSJNBZuXv8H3a-87gKD6SJxqH98triBhQyHWOARCvBqgY6v79n4nCjgvkf6JO1C8fPV7iUXVV22xz-xvBIlkTXkohwLUtCHiUZ7tjPcJmod2VGrymArpJXyuSQAMnBrh7QoFKBBkTW96toHAX6i7S_bbyyurKd757kPPj-TdLbOt5eVu12XWRFV8MVb0A&udm=7&prmd=ivsbnmtz&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiP1vempaOGAxWsoa8BHW9sCQgQtKgLegQIDBAB&biw=1206&bih=687&dpr=2.07#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:0c556d70,vid:jAeKylqj-Xg,st:0 
Schopenhauer, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Schopenhauer, Arthur

“How Schopenhauer’s Ethics of Compassion Can Contribute to Today’s Ethical Debate”
https://ddd.uab.cat/pub/enrahonar/enrahonar_a2015v55/enrahonar_a2015v55p41.pdf
Introduction to Schopenhauer’s Ethics
https://www.monsalvat.no/mitleid.htm 
Apply your favored moral theory to one of the following topics mentioned in Chapter 3: ( Philosophy Here And Now. by Lewis Vaugh)  
Human cloning
Death penalty
Slavery
Use of torture to elicit information from suspected terrorists
Argue forcefully for a position on the topic chosen.
For full credit,
write and upload 1 main entry of 200-300 words, as instructed, and add 2 follow-up entries of 50-75 words each, 
Both substantive and follow-up responses should be
thoughtful
topic-related
concisely and well-written

discussion reply to the following post: Free will, is it an illusion or is it a reality? I personally believe that we do have free will but for the sake of this discussion board I believe the logical determinist argument against free will is the strongest. Because I can understand how the question of if the future is already determined then how could someone have free will? It is a logical question that also then asks other questions about what free will actually is and how does time work. When you try to take the Creator out of the picture, I can see how scientist would say free will is an illusion but when you see the world through a Christian worldview determinism does not make sense. How can you hold someone accountable for their actions whether good or bad if they did not have a choice but to do them or not do them?
I believe the strongest argument supporting freewill is the libertarian view. They believe in incompatibilism, and that free will is genuine freedom. The reason that I believe this is because I believe in a good and loving God who has given all of his human creation free will. In the garden of Eden when he created Adam and Eve, he created them with free will even though he knew that they were going to use their free will to do things their own way. God being a kind and loving God put a plan in motion to give them a way to be redeemed back to him. He does not control people or make them do things, but he may bring a person to mind or bring about an opportunity to do something kind for someone, but we still have the option to do it or not to do it. People have free will and that’s why bad things do happen because people do not always do the right thing. I believe that God is working to turn things around for good. When you look for the good in situations you will see how God is working things out. God is not defined by the laws of time or laws of nature because he is the creator of them all.

Each student must write an argumentative essay on a topic related to the course. A brief summary of two opposing articles from the text should be used to frame the philosophical debate you are addressing. Secondary sources should be used to either analyze the selected articles or to construct your own position. Most importantly, the final paper should contain a clear thesis that states the position you are defending. Your paper should be 1 ½ spaced in 12 point font, between 1750-2250 words, and the final word count of the text must be included at the end of the document.
Sources
1.    
Chavez-Dueñas, Nayeli Y., et al. “Healing ethno-racial
trauma in Latinx immigrant communities: Cultivating hope, resistance, and
action.” American Psychologist, vol. 74, no. 1, Jan. 2019, pp. 49–62, https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000289.
2.  Cobas, José A., and Joe R. Feagin. “Language oppression
and resistance: The case of middle class latinos in the United States.” Ethnic
and Racial Studies, vol. 31, no. 2, 16 Jan. 2008, pp. 390–410,
https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870701491945. 

After reading all of Chapter 3, please utilize the ideas, concepts, and information in the chapter to answer the following question in 250-500 words:
If moral reasoning is largely about providing good reasons for moral claims, where do feelings enter the picture? Is it possible to present a logical argument that you feel strongly about? If so, provide an example of such an argument.

I’m trying to send the format. I have to upload more when this is accepted. It’s only letting me send 6

The purpose of this paper is to identity the reasoning process of Descartes’s deductive argument for the existence of God. 
Refer to Meditations 2 and 3, and answer the following question:
Discuss and explain how Descartes arrived at the conclusion that God exists, refuting the evil genius hypothesis.   
The assignment should be at least two full pages, use APA formatting with a title page, page numbers, double-spaced, and use material from the text with in-text citations. Also include a reference page.  The title page and reference page are not included in the page count. 
The marginal numbers refer to the pagination of the Adam and Tannery edition. It is sufficient to use DM when providing in text citation for the Discourse on Method, and use MFP when providing in text citation for the Meditations on First Philosophy, and then include the Adam and Tannery paragraph number located in the margin, e.g. (DM 36) or (MFP 28). Remember to use paragraph numbers and not page numbers. 
You will be graded on the relatedness to Rene’ Descartes and his Discourse on Method and Meditations on First Philosophy (Cress, 1998); and evidence of clear writing, grammar and punctuation.
Create your assignment on a separate Word Document (save your document) and then upload your Word Document to the Turnitin Assignment submission. If you submit your paper prior to the due date and forgot something you would like to add, you can resubmit and I will grade the latest submission. If you submit a late paper, only one submission is permitted.  
Use APA formatting by providing a title page and reference page, double-spaced, and 12-font. Use proper paragraph structure, grammar and punctuation. The title page and reference page do not count for the page number requirement.
You paper should be at least two full pages of writing.  
Use material from the text to support your ideas – use intext citation and list textbook  pages or margin numbers as a reference. ** need at least two of them from the text.
You will be graded on fulfilling the requirements above and breadth and depth knowledge of the reading material. 

i want an introduction, definition of terms like effective learning with 2 references and effective teaching with 2 references also, a body and conclusion then a page of references used in the assignment

By proceeding more or less historically through the different ways that politics, law, and the common good have been conceived, we have seen how various events have impacted thought (government policies, laws, and philosophies) and how thought has impacted events. In particular, we have studied five different approaches to the common good and are now studying a sixth. These approaches are American Theistic Suarezian Natural Law, Thomistic Personalist Natural Law, Catholic Social Justice, Progressive Liberalism, Wokeism: Progressive Postmodernism, and Marxist-Leninism.
The question for your life and for your final paper is this: Which one of these philosophical approaches (if any) provides the best way forward? Answering this question requires the following steps: evaluating the pros and cons of these various political philosophies both in terms of their goals, core values, and practices (this will enable you to pick the one that you think is best and identifying the reasons why the others are inferior). Then, in your paper, argue  either that one approach is better than each of the others for achieving the common good of one and all OR by constructing your own system by scavenging key ideas from each of the other systems. Finally, in your conclusion argue the relevance of your position for contemporary issues.
Justify your decision by using only course materials to prove the correctness of your decision, by including citations and quotes to prove your interpretations. This paper is a take-home final exam and not a research paper. Provide at least one quote for each approach. Use Chicago style footnotes at the bottom of the page (author, title of work. In title of anthology, editor, page #.  Here is an example of a pre-midterm citation: Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics Bk 10, ch 7, pdf page #; here is an example of post midterm citations:  Woodrow Wilson, “First Inaugural Speech.” In Documentary History of the United State, edited by Heffner. p. 323.). If you cannot supply a page number, then identify the title of the subsection and count the number of paragraphs to the quote (the idea is to make it easy for me to find the quote and be impressed with your perceptiveness). Pay attention to the word count. No brain-dumping; focus like a laser on making your case.
To help get your creative juices flowing, I’m attaching a handout briefly describing the key events and sources for each theory except for Catholic social justice which we will be working on for the next several classes. Even if you are not attracted to this approach, you will find Novak’s approach to making the case for Catholic social justice a helpful illustration of how to make a case philosophically–as our class discussions will show.  Final Paper Options-2.docx
Actions
Remember, I don’t grade opinion and so the paper earns points only by accurate analyses of course materials and by insightful arguments that are on-target and logical.