I HAVE SEPARATED THE QUESTIONS.
PLEASE ANSWER THEM WITH YOUR OWN WORD. DON’T USE ANY RESOURCES.
YOU CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS ONE TO TWO PARAGPARH EACH AND COMPLETE 275 WORDS IN TOTAL BY ANSWERING ALL THE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

1) Please watch the Ted Talk video below and then read the short article I have linked below from Scientific American magazine about political bias in the social sciences.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-social-science-politically-biased/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SOQduoLgRw

Why is it important to have a variety of political perspectives (liberal, conservative, etc.) represented in the social sciences?  Write a paragraph or more of your own critical reflections on this topic. Make use of the material on sources of bias and on principles for guiding belief and doubt.

_____________

2). First, view the video I have attached highlights of the famous debate regarding the existence of God between William Lane Craig (proponent) and Sean Carroll.  You will notice that the presentation contains some scientific details that you might not be able to follow, but don’t worry about that.  Just listen carefully to the two speakers and then comment on the argument in question, called the “Kalam Cosmological Argument.” 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5iiHV4yo7M

How would you respond to the claim “God exists”?  What do you think of Craig’s premises and Carroll’s criticism?  Be sure to also reply to another student, particularly if you disagree, and say why.

____________

3) Please watch the video below and answer the questions with your own word.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuQHSKLXu2c

What is the “blank slate” theory?  What is the political appeal of this theory?

What evidence does Pinker present for rejecting the Blank Slate theory?

Do you agree with what he says about parenting and the arts?  What are your reasons?

______________

4). For this one, you can comment about evolution and creationism.  Try to relate your comments to one or more of the Criteria of Adequacy (particularly Conservatism, Simplicity, Explanatory Scope, Testability, and/or Fruitfulness) for comparing hypotheses.  Here is a link to a short video that you might find helpful (and fun).

The video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIEoO5KdPvg

_________

5) State one moral principle and then identify a counterexample that gives us reason to reject the principle.  Propose an alternative principle that you think is less vulnerable to counterexamples.  As an added challenge, explain how your alternative principle can be used in an argument (try composing an argument).

For example, the principle that “any action that is unnatural is morally wrong” has many obvious counterexamples:  wearing contact lenses, driving a car, and skydiving is all unnatural acts but is not morally wrong.  Perhaps a better alternative principle is “any action that hurts another person is morally wrong.”  But even this principle may need to be refined in order to avoid counterexamples (e.g., boxing, dentistry, and criticism can hurt but they are not morally wrong).  Refinement could be the principle that “any action that produces unwanted or unnecessary harm is morally wrong.”  Here is an argument that uses this principle:

1.  Any action that produces unwanted or unnecessary harm is morally wrong.

2.  Corporal discipline of children produces unnecessary harm (e.g., long-term psychological harm).

Therefore, the corporal discipline of children is morally wrong.

Select 10 scholarly articles (ALL ARTICLES MUST BE WITHIN THE LAST 10 YEARS) that will support your research paper. Write an annotated bibliography. An annotated bibliography takes each article and a short paragraph is written stating how the article supports your research paper. Each scholarly article is listed (in APA format) then the paragraph is written.
This means I will be looking for 3 items for each source:
1. The reference.
2. A summary paragraph.
3. A paragraph that states how the article supports your research paper.
No reference list is needed because you are providing references in the assignment.

Overview

The Simulation Checkpoint Assignment in this course directly supports your success on the course project. You will play the simulation game, create the image file of your simulation report, and discuss learned concepts and experiences in your submission.
Prompt

For this assignment, you will play the first run of the Macroeconomics Simulation: Econland from Harvard Business Review, in which you will act as policy adviser for the fictional country of Econland. Select the Base Case scenario for this practice run. You may play the simulation as many times as you like. This will directly support your success in your course project, due in Module Eight.

In your submission, remember to include the image of your simulation report. For help with this, see How to Submit an Image File of Your Report. Then, reflect on the decisions you made in the simulation and address the following government intervention options in your submission:

    Macroeconomic Indicators: During the simulation, you made decisions concerning government spending. Discuss the impact of your decisions on key macroeconomic indicators such as real GDP growth and unemployment. Refer to the graphs Real GDP Growth and Unemployment Rate from your simulation results to illustrate the impact.

    Interest Rates: Describe how your changes in interest rates impacted inflation and other key macroeconomic indicators used in the simulation. Refer to the Inflation Rate graph from your simulation results.

“Hence, it is necessary to start working on putting an end to racial profiling by constructing definitive solutions to this seemingly vague issue.” This is the thesis of my critique essay but you must make a thesis statement for the antithesis essay basically the opposite or a counterclaim.

For this essay you must:
*Must do an Antithesis version of this essay
*present at least two opposing claims to your thesis
*along with corresponding counterarguments for each
*page must 750 Words or more
*You may use sources, other than the one I provided

The second short essay is a bit longer than the first one and involves a critical reflection upon your first essay. First, read through the questions featured on the weekly schedule of the syllabus. Choose one question to address in a 4 – 5 page essay. Your answer must include both 1) a reflection upon the analysis in your first essay and 2) an analysis of a new passage or scene from a story that was not featured in your first essay.

What you need to do:

Reread your first paper. Pay attention to the way in which you analyzed the scene you chose. Dont forget to read the comments that you were given on your paper. Addressing the major issues specified in your comments is one of the best ways to ensure a successful second essay.

Take notes on your own paper: what did you like about your analysis? What didnt you like? What did you not do enough of? What would you do differently if you were to write it again?

Reread the questions featured under each week on the weekly schedule on the syllabus. Pay close attention to the questions. Is there one question that helps you to think about your first essay and that you would like to explore more? Choose one question only. 

Once you have identified a question that relates to problems or interesting issues with your first essay, choose a scene or passage from another story that you might be able to analyze in order to reflect upon the problems you encountered in your first essay. This scene might be dealing with a similar literary problem (eg. an opening paragraph, a landscape description, a dialogue, a character type) or a similar functioning of time as a category in the story, or it might be a contrasting depiction, where either time or the literary problem serves a different function. The key is to CHOOSE CAREFULLY.

[NB By scene we mean something rather short. It might be a dialogue, a paragraph or two of description, or a page or two of an event. It should NOT be the whole story or a plot summary. You do need to contextualize your scene within the whole story, but do not analyze the whole story or begin your paper with a synopsis of the entire plot.]

This paper has two goals: it should perform a new analysis of a scene whilst also reflecting upon your previous analysis, identifying problems in that previous analysis and showing how you can improve them in this new essay. Another way to think of this assignment is: what have you learned from your first essay that enables you to write a better second essay? Give a brief summary of what you wrote in your first essay and how you would like to improve it, and then show us in a reading of your second scene how you would improve it.  Essentially you will be using your own first essay as a source for your second paper, which means analyzing your thinking and writing and referring to it in the context of your new argument, which necessarily means being critical of your own previous work.

Please remember the following:

You should consider the scene in terms of the question you have selected from the syllabus.
As last time you should look closely at what is happening in your chosen scenefocus on details in the scene itself, not big general concepts. After youve looked closely at the scene youre analyzing, then you can consider the bigger implications and dynamics at work in it.
Remember to pay attention to questions, for instance, of how things are described and what characters thought processes are. Make sure youre able to support your ideas with the text itself. Avoid guessing, speculating, or hypothesizing about what might have happened in the story, but focus rather on the details of what is actually happening and what kind of meaning you can infer from those details.

This is not a research paper, and you should use no sources other than your chosen passage and your own first essay to make your argument. This is your chance to demonstrate that you can read literature carefully, closely, and thoughtfully.

Lastly, since you will only be using at most a few pages of two sources, there is no need to have a full bibliography or formal citations. Make it clear in the beginning of your essay which story and passage youre discussing and when you refer to specific moments in your passage, include the page number at the end of the sentence in parenthesis. For instance, this is what it would look like if the last part of this sentence is a quote from page 20 of the text (20).

Your analysis should be 4-5 pages long, double-spaced and in font size 12.

Please write a critical review for each paper, that:
– Summarizes the papers in about 10 sentences
– Evaluate the author’s work in good aspect(in bullet points), for example “Summarizing figure is very clear and useful.” I have provided some examples. Please read the examples.
– Lists the potential improvements this paper can do(in bullet points), for example “The authors didnt provide meaningful conclusions for the reviewed works. No gaps in previous research or possible directions for future research were mentioned”. I have provided some examples. Please read the examples.
– Expanded arguments based on the positives and negatives

And you don’t need to write reference or citation, because the paper itself it’s the only reference.

A 5-7 page paper on an approved topic, using Times New Roman, 12 pt. font.  Bibliography to include one primary source and five secondary sources.  No encyclopedias may be used as a source.  Footnotes and bibliography should be in accordance with Turabian, 8th edition.  Citation and bibliography examples are shown at:

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/books/turabian/turabian_citationguide.html

Below is the link  for the  TED TALK ”  The world needs all kinds of mind- Temple Grandin”
Summarize what the talk was about. Connect this Ted Talk to Developmental psychology and/ or intelligence theory.  Does this ted talk relate to intelligence theory, especially multiple intelligence? Does this agree with the theory? Do you agree or disagree?
Use “I believe or I disagree”
No references needed.

Below is the link  for the  TED TALK ”  The world needs all kinds of mind- Temple Grandin”

Homework 1
Please summarize, in your own words, the facts and the decision of the court in the case mentioned below:

romasanta v. mitton case, available on p. 212, Cheeseman, Contemporary Business Law, 8th ed.

Your homework should include, especially, the following:
      the nature of and the parties to the contract

      the facts that underlie the dispute

      a summary of the respective arguments of the Plaintiff and the Defendant

      the decision and reasoning of the Courts

Please, do not exceed half a page.

1. You probably have had several opportunities to work as part of a team. What have you noticed as the most important aspect to team success?

2. Based on your group experiences, do you generally view conflict on teams as good or bad? Have you been on teams with too much or too little conflict? How should a team leader handle conflict?

Answer 2 questions above and reply one classmate’s commend