Category: Philosophy

What does it mean to be moral? Why be moral? What is the point? While deontologists like Immanuel Kant suggest that universal rules govern right and wrong, utilitarians like Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill suggest that hedonic calculus is a more accurate formula for defining morality. Stretching even deeper into the philosopher’s toolkit, what’s the meaning of all of this?
Unit 3 Essential Questions: What does it mean to be moral? Why be moral? What is the point?
Research Paper: Write a 4-5 page, double-spaced, formal academic analytical essay in Chicago format that responds to one or more of the unit essential questions. Your challenge is to extend analysis beyond what’s already been covered in class– to other units, disciplines, contemporary issues, etc. Embrace the philosopher’s way with this one– essays, articles, and books have been written for quite literally hundreds of years on these topics, so consider how your piece contributes to that anthology instead of simply mimicking something that’s already been done (many times over).
Reference Immanuel Kant, Jeremy Bentham, and John Stuart Mills, Aristotle, Plato, etc.
Please try to use at least THREE references from Unit.
My thesis question:  Do experiences shape one’s meaning of life?

commentary on this passage, include sources for analysis and comparison. 
6. But [as to myself, what can I now say that I am], since I suppose
there exists an extremely powerful, and, if I may so speak, malignant
being, whose whole endeavors are directed toward deceiving me ? Can
I affirm that I possess any one of all those attributes of which I have
lately spoken as belonging to the nature of body ? After attentively
considering them in my own mind, I find none of them that can
properly be said to belong to myself. To recount them were idle and
tedious. Let us pass, then, to the attributes of the soul. The first
mentioned were the powers of nutrition and walking; but, if it be true
that I have no body, it is true likewise that I am capable neither of
walking nor of being nourished. Perception is another attribute of the
soul; but perception too is impossible without the body; besides, I
have frequently, during sleep, believed that I perceived objects which I
afterward observed I did not in reality perceive. Thinking is another
attribute of the soul; and here I discover what properly belongs to
myself. This alone is inseparable from me. I am–I exist: this is certain;
but how often? As often as I think; for perhaps it would even happen,
if I should wholly cease to think, that I should at the same time
altogether cease to be. I now admit nothing that is not necessarily true.
I am therefore, precisely speaking, only a thinking thing, that is, a
mind (mens sive animus), understanding, or reason, terms whose
signification was before unknown to me. I am, however, a real thing,
and really existent; but what thing? The answer was, a thinking thing.

THIS HAS TO BE DONE IN GOOGLE DOCS
Imagine if you were either the defense or prosecution attorney for Meursault’s case: How could you prove him being guilty? What evidence could you provide to defend your assertions about him? Choose ONE side and develop a 3-5 page essay, arguing your claims. The following is the criteria for you to deeply consider:
Respond to the prompt with a clear and distinct claim in your introduction (Are you defending or prosecuting Meursault?)
Offer context to your reader (inform them about Meursault’s character S.T.E.A.L.)
Select and use appropriate evidence (3-5 pieces) that supports your claim.
Offer commentary (deep analysis) that supports your overall position.
Use appropriate grammar and punctuation to communicate your argument.
Times New Roman
12 pt. Font
Double-Space
3-5 pages

an argumentative problem within (one of) the texts to be discussed (750 words, double-spaced) and perhaps even suggest ways for overcoming it. 
the shorter one is optional, and the exposition should focus on one aspect you want to criticize. 
Only use information from page 132-176

Length: Your submission
should be at least two pages in length, not counting the title page and
references (if used).
References: No outside sources
are required for the assignment.
Details: This assignment
has two parts. Both parts will be completed in the same attached Unit VII Homework Template.
Part 1: Choose one of the
three topics from the table below. Write an argument with a clear conclusion
(thesis) that you have created about this topic. Your conclusion must be a
straightforward one-sentence assertion. Note that your thesis or conclusion can
be something narrow within each topic. For example, “I should stop
smoking” is a thesis or conclusion that falls under the topic of being
healthy.
Incorporate
the following guidelines as you write:
Briefly
introduce the issue or topic.
Identify
at least two premises for your conclusion.
Write
at least one page for your argument and written response.
Your
written response should include inductive (an observation arriving at a
theory) aspects of your argument as well as deductive (a theory that
arrives at a conclusion) aspects.
List
at least one fallacy that you may have committed but have avoided.
Write
at least one unstated assumption that is logically part of your argument.
If
your argument turns out to have a sub-argument (see Unit VII Lesson),
make sure you fill out a template for each argument. Follow the writing
guidelines on pages 273 through 275 of Chapter 12 of our textbook.
Possible Topics
Questions that may help in coming up with a thesis
(conclusion):
Money management
How should I manage my money? What spending habits
can I change? How can I save more?
Study habits
What is the best way to study? What can I do on a
daily basis to study? What can I do on a weekly basis?
Being healthy
What can I do to be healthy? What daily habits can I
change?
Part 2: After writing your
argument paragraphs, fill out the conclusion, premises, inductive aspects, and
deductive aspects in the chart at the bottom of the template. In the second
chart, include your potential fallacies and hidden assumptions.
View
the Unit VII Sample Homework for
an example of how your completed assignment should look. The first part of your
completed assignment must be at least one page in length. No outside resources
are required. APA Style is not required for this assignment.

6. But [as to myself, what can I now say that I am], since I suppose
there exists an extremely powerful, and, if I may so speak, malignant
being, whose whole endeavors are directed toward deceiving me ? Can
I affirm that I possess any one of all those attributes of which I have
lately spoken as belonging to the nature of body ? After attentively
considering them in my own mind, I find none of them that can
properly be said to belong to myself. To recount them were idle and
tedious. Let us pass, then, to the attributes of the soul. The first
mentioned were the powers of nutrition and walking; but, if it be true
that I have no body, it is true likewise that I am capable neither of
walking nor of being nourished. Perception is another attribute of the
soul; but perception too is impossible without the body; besides, I
have frequently, during sleep, believed that I perceived objects which I
afterward observed I did not in reality perceive. Thinking is another
attribute of the soul; and here I discover what properly belongs to
myself. This alone is inseparable from me. I am–I exist: this is certain;
but how often? As often as I think; for perhaps it would even happen,
if I should wholly cease to think, that I should at the same time
altogether cease to be. I now admit nothing that is not necessarily true.
I am therefore, precisely speaking, only a thinking thing, that is, a
mind (mens sive animus), understanding, or reason, terms whose
signification was before unknown to me. I am, however, a real thing,
and really existent; but what thing? The answer was, a thinking thing.
Commentary on this passage, references done in harvard style.

-You should watch the movie for quotations 
-don’t use ai
-respect the instructions:
– and i started writing about it you can just use what I started ( iwill send it to you) and incorporate yours
For your final paper, choose two of the three topics presented below:
Hobbes and Rousseau have opposed models for understanding human nature. Their models are animated by the different understandings of place and the role of power, violence, desires, and knowledge in forming a ‘normal (civilized)’ state. Choose one of these models to explain the characters’ interactions, group formation, struggle for domination, sources of violence, and usage of violence. Explain why you chose Hobbes’ or Rousseau’s model for your paper.
Nietzsche offers two models for understanding morality: ‘Master’ Morality and ‘Slave’ Morality. Choose two characters from the movie whose actions and their motivations could be interpreted according to the first model (‘master’ morality) and two characters whose actions and their motivations could be interpreted according to the second model (‘slave’ morality). In each case, explain your choice. Support your choice with episodes from the movie.
Reading Fromm, we learned to distinguish authentic, true disobedience from false disobedience and heteronomous obedience from autonomous obedience. Analyze the movie from Fromm’s perspective. Choose at least one character who represents true disobedience, one who represents false disobedience, one who represents autonomous obedience (based on Categorical Imperative), and one who presents heteronomous obedience in the movie. Explain and justify your choice using Fromm’s arguments and episodes from the movie.
Instructions:
The paper should not contain the movie’s plot or a summary of a philosopher’s arguments. Any general description or summary will not be accepted.
The paper should demonstrate your ability to apply a specific philosophical argument (studied in class) to analyze a character, a dynamic of his relationship with others, a dynamic of group formation, or a dynamic of characters’ interaction.
You are only allowed to use material studied in class. Any usage of material from outside of class will be considered plagiarism (See the syllabus on plagiarism).
When you apply a specific philosophical argument to a specific moment in the movie, provide a short quotation from the texts and the time mark for this moment in the movie.
Requirements:
4-5 pages.
Double-spaced, 12 Times New Roman fonts, standard margins.
Here’s what I started:
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is a classic film that explores various aspects of society through a small, closed off group of individuals. The film takes place in a mental rehabilitation center, and while the characters are ironically separated from society while committed, their stories reflect issues within the wider society even though they are unable to participate within it. The film explores the need for such institutions, while also questioning whether are not such institutions are necessary as there are multiple instances throughout the narrative where it is implied and asserted that many of the characters may not in fact require the services they are receiving.
The purpose of institutionalizing individuals should be rehabilitation, however, the system often corrupts those in power and breeds systemic issues such as recidivism. The two primary characters of the film Randal McMurphy and Nurse Ratched represent two opposing forces. Randal McMurphy is admitted to a mental ward following a series of arrests, and violent behavior. He is there to be evaluated so that the state may ascertain his mental capacity. Randal is a freedom loving criminal who is institutionalized because of his criminal history, reckless and dangerous behaviors and throughout the film, McMurphy clearly exhibits antisocial and sociopathic tendencies. Secondly, there’s Nurse Ratched, an authoritarian figure who rules the mental ward with an iron fist. Her character is far more subtle than McMurphy and as such requires deeper analysis to truly understand, but it is clear that both McMurphy and Nurse Ratched’s roles and approaches directly oppose one another.
The dynamic between McMurphy and Nurse Ratched intersect with social contract theory in an intriguing way. Social contract theory dictates that individuals in a society agree to give up certain freedoms in exchange for protection and the maintenance of order by the governing authority. However, McMurphy’s character is an embodiment of freedom and despises authority and so naturally, he stages a rebellion against oppressive authority, personified by Nurse Ratched. His actions and interactions with other patients can be seen as a challenge to the social contract as it exists within the mental institution. He offers them freedom and individuality regardless of the consequences.
While all human beings cherish freedom, we are still able to abide by the rules of society. What is the difference between McMurphy and the average person? I believe that McMurphy’s character embodies freedom to an extreme level, which ultimately leads to his disregard for authority and lands him into the trouble he finds himself in. Nurse Ratched on the other hand, embodies authoritarianism to an extreme level as well. The consequences of Nurse Ratched’s actions are displayed in subtle fashion, but upon further analysis, viewers can conclude that despite the fact that the ward appears to be run well and Nurse Ratched is considered the best nurse in the institution, her practices while good on paper may be at the detriment of her patients.
Nurse Ratched’s actions arguably make the patients in the ward dependent on the institution and if they are out of line, she dulls out consequences. Since all the patients in the ward are male, Nurse Ratched almost appears as a motherly figure and her strict authority can appear to infantilize and emasculate the men. No scene in the film is ever told from Nurse Ratched’s perspective so it’s difficult to fully ascertain whether or not this is intentional on her part, but I would lean that they are intentional as the character is proven to be very cold and calculated or say McMurphy would say “she likes a rigged game” in response to Nurse Ratched given the residents hope that they can vote on a change knowing that their votes could never be the majority get the changes they were hoping for enacted.
Despite all their apparent differences, both McMurphy and Nurse Ratched are actually quite similar in a lot of ways. You can even say that they are two sides of the same coin. Both characters are strong-willed and determined individuals who seek to exert influence over others. The only difference is that one character, Nurse Ratched, has the authority and position to do so. They engage in a power struggle throughout the film, each trying to assert their dominance over the other and the rest of the ward. Nurse Ratched’s position represents the hold that the wider society and its institutions have over the freedom of others. Sometimes you may feel as if you have a choice in a matter, but in reality you really don’t and because of the hold society has over individuals it often feels like there isn’t anything you can actually do about it.
As I have previously stated the mental ward should have been a place for rehabilitation, but instead, throughout the film it is portrayed as a prison that many of the characters yearn to escape from. We also eventually learn that some characters are voluntarily committed and McMurphy asserts that there is nothing wrong with them, no more than the average person out about in society. This can be seen as a critique of social norms and societies insistence on conformity. Correct it and integrate it to your work

We are organising a 4-week training course teaching students how to put an essay together. We will need to create a ppt for the course, 12 slides per week.

DIRECTIONS: Write an essay answer for each of the following three questions. In composing your answers, you may use your copies of Discourse on Method and Meditations on First Philosophy, by Descartes, the Princess Elisabeth handout
Be as thorough as you can in your answers!!!
Explain the principle of sufficient reason and the three modes of reality/being. Explain how Descartes uses these concepts to prove God’s existence in Meditation Three. (Hint: ex nihilo, nihil fit….) (10 points)
In Meditation Two, how does Descartes arrive at his certainty that he exists as a res cogitans? (5 points)
Explain Princess Elisabeth’s objection to Descartes’ substance dualism in as much detail as you can. (5 points)
Please be as thorough as possible.

ype your full name Type your last name and page number
Course
Date
Center Paper 1 or 2 or 3: Include your 2 themes in the title and the name of the movie
(Do not bold or underline title—only italicize film titles and foreign words)
A.) Did you like or dislike the movie and/or the documentary? Why? (10 pts.)
Use “I think,” “I agree or I disagree,” etc. (Type a lengthy paragraph).
B.) What is your philosophical theme after watching the movie? (40 pts.)
Indent first lines. Use double spaced. Type a lengthy paragraph.
Choose a philosopher’s name who you can back up for your selected philosophical theme. Let say Soren Kierkegaard on fear and trembling or Aristotle on happiness. Other philosophers such as Confucius, Descartes, Kant, Hegel, Mill, William James, etc. familiarize yourself with names of well-known philosophers mentioned in academic journals and books.
Explain as clear as possible why your chose this philosophical theme (for example, courage, fear, anger, truth, ignorance, creativity, knowledge, wisdom, empathy, solidarity, friendship, irrationality, the absurd, meaning in life, power, freedom, etc.). Comment on it. Use your own words. Back your arguments with rational explanations and back it up with at least 1 scholarly quote from a book and 1 peer-reviewed article from an academic journal. Cite the source in parenthesis, using the new MLA. For instance, “…” (Molloy 518) if it is from a book source or for article sources use the following format: (author’s last name and page number—no p. or pp.). For philosophical sources search in Galileo philosophy websites and journals like the American Philosophical Association website, or use quotes from philosophy electronic books and how they define your philosophical theme that you selected for your movie. Make the connection between the philosophical theme and the film narrative. Explain it in your own words. Use I.
C.) What is your religious and/or theological theme after watching the movie? (40 pts.)
Indent first lines. Use double spaced. Type a lengthy paragraph.
Choose a name of a religious thinker, scholar or theologian who has done research on this particular theme. Let say the XIV Dalai Lama on love in action or Thomas Merton on contemplative truth. Religious thinkers are theologians and/or religious scholars and authors such as Karen Armstrong, Paul Tillich, Martin Buber, A. J. Heschel, Elie Wiesel, etc.
Explain as clear as possible why your chose this religious and/or theological theme (for example, faith, enlightenment, salvation, liberation, love, compassion, selfish desires, lust, greed, envy, devotion, passion for life, sense of awe and wonder, authority, priesthood, forgiveness, determinism, free will, choices, the good life, death, etc.). Comment on it. Use your own words. Back your arguments with rational explanations and back it up with at least 1 scholarly quote from a book and 1 peer-reviewed article from an academic journal. Cite the source in parenthesis, using the new MLA. For instance, “…” (Wead and Lellis 111) if it is from a book source or for articles use the following format: (author’s last name and page number—no p. or pp). For religious or theological sources search religion, theology or spirituality academic journals like the American Academy of Religion, or use quotes from religion or theology electronic books and how they define your religious or spiritual theme that you selected for your movie. For instance, use quotes from books by the XIV Dalai Lama, Pope Francis, Desmond Tutu, etc. Make the connection between the philosophical theme and the film narrative. Explain it in your own words. Use I.
D.) Have the Works Cited page at the end of each paper (10 pts.).
Center Works Cited in the last page (it could be page 3 if need it in order to cite all the sources using the new MLA).
Do not bold it or underline Works Cited.
Use at least 4 scholarly sources (2 from scholarly books and 2 from peer-reviewed articles in academic journals using Galileo). Make sure they are good academic books and articles (peer-reviewed ones). They must cite names of authors, articles’ titles, journal names, volume, issue number, year of publication, website link, and enter your Accessed date of your entry. See samples in Purdue Owl website for citing properly all your sources using the new MLA.
Use the new MLA Manual Style. Check samples in Purdue OWL: MLA Formatting and Style Guide by googling it. Use alphabetical order. Use double spaced. Indent second and third lines. Italicize book titles and name of journal. Type Accessed date of your entry at the end of each article’s web link. Do it manually! Don’t expect the computer to do it for you. They don’t follow the last formats.