Categories
Philosophy

The second term paper will be a 3-page summary which is equivalent to 1150 words

The second term paper will be a 3-page summary which is equivalent to 1150 words from the textbook, Copleston Frederick, Vol. II, pp.74-80 (On the World).

Categories
Philosophy

Your first publish ended up getting me a low C grade. I’m going to provide you tha

Your first publish ended up getting me a low C grade. I’m going to provide you that publish as well as the prof’s feedback. Please use the feedback to improve the paper. Please let me know if you are able to click on and read the feedback notes in the PDF I attached. If not, I’ll try to send them to you another way.
Consider the following claims: (a) In general, there is an intrinsic moral difference between killing a person and letting a person die. (b) In specifically medical contexts, there is typically no difference between killing a person and letting a person die. This is particularly so when dealing with terminal patients who are in considerable suffering. (c) In certain contexts—again, involving the sort of patient mentioned in (b)—a person has a right to die, using the means that, of those available, would involve the least amount of suffering. Can any of these claims be defended, in your view? If so, how? (Make sure to consider the relevant objections.) Important: 1. Discuss the main ethical theories we have looked at in this course in making out your argument. 2. Consider and take seriously opposing positions and arguments against the position you are defending. 3. Try to be as comprehensive as possible in your consideration of the relevant ethical considerations. Do not leave out important arguments or other pertinent matters, even if you yourself as not as inclined as others to find them persuasive. 4. Finally, be sure to provide clear evidence that you have completed and assimilated the relevant assigned readings and materials. Useful readings for quotes:
Nesbitt, “Is Killing No Worse Than Letting Die?”
Campbell, “A Problem for the Idea of Voluntary Euthanasia”
“Should Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legal?” (NPR)
Singer, “Voluntary Euthanasia: A Utilitarian Perspective”
Rachels, “Active and Passive Euthanasia”

Categories
Philosophy

What you’re reviewing is plato 1.docx. The feedback I got was… “If you want t

What you’re reviewing is plato 1.docx.
The feedback I got was…
“If you want to improve, add a separate introductory paragraph first.
Then, I would suggest revising especially by paying attention to language. I cant fix all your grammatical mistakes for you, so you have to try to improve your writing on your own. You can spend more time explaining your points, making it easier for the reader.”
You must identify an argument by referring to its conclusion. You must state how many premises it contains. You must explain each premise, step-by-step. Each premise should be quoted, not just summarized. No more than 1 premise per paragraph. Then, you must apply the terminology from chapters 1-3 from the textbook to the argument. Please before everything else read ESSAY OUTLINE. CHAPTER 1-3 are vocabulary that you have to use and apply.

Categories
Philosophy

Premise: Language games alter our perception of reality (and consciousness), and

Premise:
Language games alter our perception of reality (and consciousness), and therefore could have a causal connection to quantum interference and the collapse of the wave function.
Summary
Quantum-events (collapse of the wave function) are potentially affected by conscious observation and consciousness (Von Neumann-Wigner etc ref). – quantum interference.
Language makes up a large part of our consciousness.
Examples (like recursion) show how important language is to what it means to be human (and therefore a part of consciousness):
‘Recursion, in sum, allows language to become an infinite system. The Chomskyan view is that this ability is quite special, unique to humans. It is, in essence, what distinguishes us from other animals – the source of complex thought and communication, and thus complex mathematical, artistic and linguistic ability.
Wittgenstein’s language game theory suggests that meaning is a result of rules that underpin the ‘games’. Do these rules impact our appreciation/shape of our reality, or do they stop at meaning? What impact does meaning have on the different metaphysical layers of reality? (counter arguments/non-wittgenstein/minds theory)
Is it therefore possible that language games, shaping at least part of our reality and conscious experience, can have a measurable effect (projection?) on quantum level events (i.e. different games producing different realities, producing different consciousnesses, creating variations in the same quantum experiments and results)?
‘Henry Stapp has argued for the concept as follows:[4]
From the point of view of the mathematics of quantum theory it makes no sense to treat a measuring device as intrinsically different from the collection of atomic constituents that make it up. A device is just another part of the physical universe… Moreover, the conscious thoughts of a human observer ought to be causally connected most directly and immediately to what is happening in his brain, not to what is happening out at some measuring device… Our bodies and brains thus become … parts of the quantum mechanically described physical universe. Treating the entire physical universe in this unified way provides a conceptually simple and logically coherent theoretical foundation…’
If so, how do we identify these games? And what consequences does this have on our understanding of empiricism, quantum mechanics, and consciousness as a shared/fragmented construct? There are significant ontological and epistemological challenges created by such an interpretation.

Categories
Philosophy

Here is a simplified version of the classical argument for the incorruptibility

Here is a simplified version of the classical argument for the incorruptibility (that is, for the immortality) of the human soul presented by St. Thomas:

M. What is capable of an operation per se immaterial cannot be corrupted.
m. The human soul is capable of an operation per se immaterial.
C. Therefore, the human soul cannot be corrupted.
(Where “operation per se immaterial” means “an operation that cannot be effected through the body” and “to be corrupted” means “to cease to be what it is, to pass away.”)

This is a CESARE syllogism. Thus, if the premises are true the conclusion follows necessarily.

For our second paper, we will focus on the minor premise (namely, “the human soul is capable of an operation per se immaterial”). Two of St. Thomas’s arguments for that minor premise can be found in Summa Theologiae I, q. 75, a. 2 and Summa Theologiae I, q. 75, a. 5. (See the ‘Philosophy of the Human Person’ manual for these texts.)

You must write a paper about three pages long in which you explain at least one of the arguments presented by St. Thomas in favor of the minor premise in question, namely, that the human soul is capable of an operation per se immaterial (that is, an operation which cannot be effected through the body/matter).

To do that well, I strongly recommend reading not only the relevant passages from the Summa but also the “auxiliary texts” available on BB (see “Course Materials => Philosophy of Human Person”) and the “supplements” to ST I.75.2 and ST I.75.5 in the manual. If you think the argument is flawed or have any sort of objections against it, you can include these objections in your last paragraph(s), but your paper must be primarily about explaining at least one of the arguments.

Papers must be submitted through Blackboard (.pdf or .docx), not through email. Late papers will not be accepted without a justified reason. Your paper will be verified with an anti-plagiarism tool. Plagiarism will result in failing the assignment or the course.

Format: 12-pt Times New Roman font, one-inch margins, double-spaced, Chicago style, a title is not

Categories
Philosophy

What you’re reviewing is plato 1.docx. The feedback I got was… “If you want t

What you’re reviewing is plato 1.docx.
The feedback I got was…
“If you want to improve, add a separate introductory paragraph first.
Then, I would suggest revising especially by paying attention to language. I cant fix all your grammatical mistakes for you, so you have to try to improve your writing on your own. You can spend more time explaining your points, making it easier for the reader.”
You must identify an argument by referring to its conclusion. You must state how many premises it contains. You must explain each premise, step-by-step. Each premise should be quoted, not just summarized. No more than 1 premise per paragraph. Then, you must apply the terminology from chapters 1-3 from the textbook to the argument. Please before everything else read ESSAY OUTLINE. CHAPTER 1-3 are vocabulary that you have to use and apply.

Categories
Philosophy

Premise: Language games alter our perception of reality (and consciousness), and

Premise:
Language games alter our perception of reality (and consciousness), and therefore could have a causal connection to quantum interference and the collapse of the wave function.
Summary
Quantum-events (collapse of the wave function) are potentially affected by conscious observation and consciousness (Von Neumann-Wigner etc ref). – quantum interference.
Language makes up a large part of our consciousness.
Examples (like recursion) show how important language is to what it means to be human (and therefore a part of consciousness):
‘Recursion, in sum, allows language to become an infinite system. The Chomskyan view is that this ability is quite special, unique to humans. It is, in essence, what distinguishes us from other animals – the source of complex thought and communication, and thus complex mathematical, artistic and linguistic ability.
Wittgenstein’s language game theory suggests that meaning is a result of rules that underpin the ‘games’. Do these rules impact our appreciation/shape of our reality, or do they stop at meaning? What impact does meaning have on the different metaphysical layers of reality? (counter arguments/non-wittgenstein/minds theory)
Is it therefore possible that language games, shaping at least part of our reality and conscious experience, can have a measurable effect (projection?) on quantum level events (i.e. different games producing different realities, producing different consciousnesses, creating variations in the same quantum experiments and results)?
‘Henry Stapp has argued for the concept as follows:[4]
From the point of view of the mathematics of quantum theory it makes no sense to treat a measuring device as intrinsically different from the collection of atomic constituents that make it up. A device is just another part of the physical universe… Moreover, the conscious thoughts of a human observer ought to be causally connected most directly and immediately to what is happening in his brain, not to what is happening out at some measuring device… Our bodies and brains thus become … parts of the quantum mechanically described physical universe. Treating the entire physical universe in this unified way provides a conceptually simple and logically coherent theoretical foundation…’
If so, how do we identify these games? And what consequences does this have on our understanding of empiricism, quantum mechanics, and consciousness as a shared/fragmented construct? There are significant ontological and epistemological challenges created by such an interpretation.

Categories
Philosophy

The article you need to read about is plato2.pdf Read every material before star

The article you need to read about is plato2.pdf
Read every material before starting the essay.
You must identify an argument by referring to its conclusion. You must state how many premises it contains. You must explain each premise, step-by-step. Each premise should be quoted, not just summarized. No more than 1 premise per paragraph. Then, you must apply the terminology from chapters 1-3 from the textbook to the argument. Please before everything else read “ESSAY OUTLINE” CHAPTER 1-3 are vocabulary that you have to use and apply.

Categories
Philosophy

ESSAY QUESTION: At one point in the Euthyphro, piety is defined as what is loved

ESSAY QUESTION: At one point in the Euthyphro, piety is defined as what is loved by all of the gods. Socrates objects to this definition by presenting a dilemma. First, characterize this dilemma, explaining why Socrates thinks that neither option provides an adequate account of piety. Then, briefly discuss one way in which you might object to (or otherwise respond critically to) Socrates’ argument, carefully explaining the nature of the objection and why it poses a problem for Socrates’ argument.
COMPONENTS OF ESSAY:
1. INTRODUCTION
Have you succinctly, clearly, and accurately provided a descriiption of what it is that you will address in your paper in its first paragraph?
2. ACCURACY
Have you engaged in a thoughtful way with the primary sources that are relevant to your topic? Do you offer accurate exposition of the relevant definitions/arguments/objections?
3. CLARITY, SUCCINCTNESS
Do you offer a thorough but compressed exposition/discussion in response to your chosen prompt? Do you make clear the connection to your main topic of any references, thought
experiments, analogies, etc? Do you avoid unnecessary jargon, defining any theoretical or technical terms you need to use? Do you avoid overly ornate prose?
4. GRAMMAR, ORGANIZATION
Is the paper generally well written? Have you avoided basic mistakes of spelling, diction, and grammar? Have you included clear transitions/signposts that indicate to your reader how
different parts of your exposition and discussion link up with each other?
Please use the euthyphro notes attached for you for this essay, you must include stuff learned from class which is in the notes!!!

Categories
Philosophy

ESSAY QUESTION: At one point in the Euthyphro, piety is defined as what is loved

ESSAY QUESTION: At one point in the Euthyphro, piety is defined as what is loved by all of the gods. Socrates objects to this definition by presenting a dilemma. First, characterize this dilemma, explaining why Socrates thinks that neither option provides an adequate account of piety. Then, briefly discuss one way in which you might object to (or otherwise respond critically to) Socrates’ argument, carefully explaining the nature of the objection and why it poses a problem for Socrates’ argument.
COMPONENTS OF ESSAY:
1. INTRODUCTION
Have you succinctly, clearly, and accurately provided a descriiption of what it is that you will address in your paper in its first paragraph?
2. ACCURACY
Have you engaged in a thoughtful way with the primary sources that are relevant to your topic? Do you offer accurate exposition of the relevant definitions/arguments/objections?
3. CLARITY, SUCCINCTNESS
Do you offer a thorough but compressed exposition/discussion in response to your chosen prompt? Do you make clear the connection to your main topic of any references, thought
experiments, analogies, etc? Do you avoid unnecessary jargon, defining any theoretical or technical terms you need to use? Do you avoid overly ornate prose?
4. GRAMMAR, ORGANIZATION
Is the paper generally well written? Have you avoided basic mistakes of spelling, diction, and grammar? Have you included clear transitions/signposts that indicate to your reader how
different parts of your exposition and discussion link up with each other?
Please use the euthyphro notes attached for you for this essay, you must include stuff learned from class which is in the notes!!!