Category: Philosophy

Write a double-spaced 5-8 page paper in MLA that discusses the philosophical ideas about Love, Hatred, and Resentment. Use the ideas of Alan Badiou’s Philosophy on “The Truth of Love” and how love is “Truth Procedure.” Relate these ideas to the film, “LaLand” starring Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling and discuss their relationship in comparison to the Truth Procedure (The event, the fidelity to the event, the action, and the emergence of a universal truth). Cite Badiou’s Truth of Love. I have attached the directions that show the different prompts to use (I am ecorporating prompt #1 and #5 together) and have also attached a sample paper, as well as notes on the truth procedure, and the paper I have very briefly started, that you can use as an outline. 

Express the author or authors’ central thesis, claim, or conclusion. This should be expressed as concisely, clearly, and fully as you can. What is the author arguing for?
Note that with some of the earlier readings, in which we will be dealing with various philosophers’ ethical theories, it may be difficult to isolate one key claim. Do your best here to describe their overall theory in as concise a fashion as you can. 
Articulate, to the best of your ability, any argument or arguments that the author presents in defence of their thesis.
Try to distil their argument into its simplest form.
What premises does their argument require?
Are there any hidden premises that the author assumes but does not explicitly state?
What evidence and reasons do they present in defence of their claims?
Provide citations and references from the texts to show where you are getting your information from—show me why you think an author is saying what you think they are.
Note: When there are two assigned readings for the week: 
Choose one reading to focus your summary on. 
Read the other assigned reading as well so that we can discuss it in class.
Does it defend the same thesis, or an opposing one? 
Does its argument directly relate to the one you summarised? 
Do not summarise the text page for page: your goal is to isolate the author’s thesis and argument, not to write a book report. You should read the text and then, only once you’ve got a sense of the entire text, try to capture its key parts. 
Responses that meet the word requirement, isolate a central thesis, and clearly present an argument will receive full credit, i.e. 3 points. Note that you can incorrectly interpret the author’s thesis or argument, and still receive full credit, so long as it is clear to me that you have made a concerted effort to read the text (providing references to the text is good evidence of this!).
Note: the responses will be turned in to Turnitin to check for plagiarism. Plagiarised responses will receive 
0 points. 

As a student, it is important to understand the relationship between critical thinking and writing. In this assignment, you will write a 750-1,000-word paper about this relationship, specifically argumentative essays. Include the following in your paper:
A title page
A description of at least two differences between argumentative and informative essays
A description of at least two aspects/points that are needed for an essay to be considered argumentative (reasoning by analogy should be included in some way here)
At least 2 references on a reference page (one being the book and an outside scholarly source) and accompanying in-text citations when the references are used
The paper should be formatted in APA style. Use the template provided below to start your paper, as it is already in proper APA format. Be sure to remove the existing text in the template and replace it with your own

Please DO NOT USE CHAT/GPT or AI in this assignment. No use of secondary sources.            No sources are required.   Please use the lecture files I have attached for answers and information. This assignment  would be passed via Turnitin, so please, no plagiarism. 
Write a 400 – 600 word essay explaining Epictetus’s stoicism.  Your essay should address the following: 
1) You should begin by explaining the stoic project of achieving ataraxia and how this project relates to the emotions.  
2) Your essay should explain what, according to Epictetus, causes our emotions and what we can do about unpleasant emotions that trouble us.  Here you will need to define what beliefs are as discussed throughout the semester (see Lecture 1 and the list of definitions in the syllabus).  
3) This is the most important part of the essay because here you are demonstrating you’ve understood how to use Epictetus’s philosophy even if you don’t agree with it.  Therefore this should be the lengthiest and most detailed portion of your essay.  Don’t phone it in.  You may not use examples similar to ones I discussed in class (breakups and traffic).  I want to see original thought that shows you’ve deeply understood the material and how to use it  concretely.  
4) Once you have explained the basics of Epictetus’s stoicism, discuss a difficult  thing you have experienced in your life where you experienced troubling negative emotions.  Be detailed and thorough explaining what happened and what you were going through. 
5) Now, following the step by step method you were taught in Lecture 6, apply Epictetus’s method to what you experienced and how you could have gotten rid of the negative           emotions you were experiencing.  For Step 2, you should come up with 3- 4 beliefs and        desires that caused your emotion.  Again, be detailed, thorough, precise, and explicit in discussing these beliefs and desires.  Here you are doing psychology and exploring how the way you thought about things without realizing influenced how you felt or the emotions you experienced.  For Step 3 you will need to discuss 3- 4 beliefs and desires you could have adopted to change your emotional response to the situation.  Remember, Epictetus is about changing how we think rather than changing what we do.  Be careful not to slip into action language in this essay. 

This thesis will evaluate the positive and negative correlations between social media and its general impact on the ideal democracy
Sources:
https://academic.oup.com/jcmc/article/17/3/319/4067682
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13278-012-0079-3
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20190658
Connect to plato and Socrates 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.