MUST USE CHICAGO FOOTNOTING STYLE 16th EDITION
Use the perspective of Virtue Ethics, and place the controversy of a ‘just war’ and create a thesis based around this.
In so doing, critically develop a philosophical thesis on that moral issue from the perspective of your chosen ethical theory, also relating to christian context.
Please include a minimum of 4 sources, and create a definitive argument.
I need polished writing, with no errors.
What is your favorite work of fiction, and how is the social contract expressed therein? state the social contract in a sentence that relates the individual to the group.. What does this work of fiction seem to want you to learn or remember (through laughter, horror, tears, or introspection) about the human condition via this social contract?
You MUST USE evidence from John Locke and/or Thomas Hobbes, to support your ideas about the social contract in the work of fiction. Their ideas may or may not dovetail with the social contract as expressed in the fiction you’re covering. You can use them as a comparison, contrast, or both. You MUST CITE their works where you refer to them.
The focus here should be explaining your favorite work of fiction in the context of the social contract. You don’t have to convince your audience that this is the best work of art of all time, just that it holds specific ideas about how individuals do or should interact in a given group.
The final paper needs to have 3 components (see attached for the full instructions): Computation and CTM (1 page), Sub-project of our choosing (4 pages), and the Conclusion (1 page). In regards to the sub-project, I was leaning towards either Question 3, 4, or 5 because they seem to be the simplest ones, but do feel free to tackle another question if you’d like.
For all the 3 components, you will have to refer to the textbook that I have also attached. However, please bear in mind that my professor did mention not to merely copy the explanations straight out of the book or else, no credits will be granted to us.
Thank you.
1500 Words (not including bibliography)
INSTRUCTIONS
This consists of two questions total: one short and one long-answer questions. You must answer each question separately.
The short answers should be no less than 500 words, while the long response should be no less than 1000 words (1500 words minimum for the assignment, but you may go over without penalty). Standard formatting applies; double-spaced, in a regular font. You may use MLA or APA, but please, no cover sheet required. Also, you must include a bibliography or works cited at the end of your midterm exam. Always be sure to cite your sources.
Please include the question at the top of each response.
Be sure to include a word count at the end of each response.
Please answer clearly and completely.
GUIDELINES
In your responses, be sure to refer to the readings for guidance in providing a framework for your thinking. You’re welcome to draw upon research of your own, but you must do so in addition to demonstrating your familiarity with what the required readings have said, and with accuracy about the views expressed there.
As always, define your terms and give examples that illustrate what you think to be true. And, take seriously those who would object to your views.
For this assignment, please be sure to have read the papers by Moor, Cook, Johnson, Hillis, Feenberg, Winner, and the ethical theorists. Then, answer the following questions:
Short-answer questions (pick one; 500 words each):
1. What does Johnson mean by claiming that computer technologies create new instrumentations of human action? Explain, defend your answer, and give an example.
2. According to Hillis, what is a universal computer? Explain and give an example.
3. Which of Feenbergs views about technology and its relationship to values do you think best explain computer technologies? Explain, defend your answer, and give an example.
Long-answer question (1000 words):
1. Are some computer technologies inherently political? Drawing from the writings of Winner, Feenberg, Moor, Johnson, and Cook: explain, defend your answer, and give an example not used in the text.
ON FORMATTING
I will accept both APA or MLA styles, however do not include a cover sheet. When doing research, you may use sources from any periodical from the internet or other written sources, but DO NOT use Wikipedia as a source. The sources may be from peer-reviewed journals or popular blogs. For example, check the Science and Technology sections from NPR, or The New York Times, etc. Other popular Tech based sites and blogs, such as Ars-Technica or Tech Crunch, are perfectly acceptable. If you have any questions about a specific source, please ask before using it. Please be sure to include a bibliography or works cited for all relevant information. Always be sure to cite your sources.
Present a brief report of your research on both sides of the issue. This should include the following:
Citation of your sources
Links to the sources where available
Brief description of the content of each of the sources (50 to 80 words for each source)
Your research review should address at least three (3) aspects:
Personal choice
Judgment by a physician
Religion and morality
Ethics
and must present at least one pro and one con article review on each aspect.
Sources should be scholarly or of very high substantive quality.
please answer this 3 questions above
1) Describe an important goal that you recently achieved.
2) Identify the steps you had to take to achieve this goal, in the order in which they were taken, and estimate the amount of time each step took.
3) Describe how you felt when you achieved your goal.
nstructions
Do not write your name in the test itself just your student ID.
The lengths for each answer will d But the total number of words should not exceed 1600.
Footnotes should be used for citations only.
All you need to answer these questions are the texts and your note I discourage you from using any outside sources. But if you do, make sure to cite them.
Though you are free to discuss answers to these questions with your classmates, the written material must be your own and stated in your own words. Any suspected plagiarism will be submitted to the Academic Integrity Office.
Failure to follow all of these directions will result in a penalty.
How to Cite
When citing an author, just quote the text, footnote it, and reference the author and the title of the piece youre quoting from. For example:
1 Buchanan, Allen Theories of Secession, p.35
If the next citation uses the same source and but a different page, just write ibid. followed by the new page number. So, for example, suppose in footnote 2, you again want to cite something Buchanan said in Theories of Secession but this time, from p. 40. Because in footnote 1 you already cited the author and paper, you can just write:
2 ibid., p.40
If after this you cite a different author, do so in full (as in the example of footnote 1). If after that you once again cite Buchanan, you do so in full.
Test Questions
Answer all questions.
1. Robert Fullinwider criticizes Judith Thomsons principle that innocent, involuntary beneficiaries can bear compensatory duties. He does this by arguing that it yields counterintuitive results in his Driveway example. A) Explain this example. B) Describe Daniel Butts strategy for defending that principle against Fullinwiders criticisms. C) What relevance does this exchange have to the ethics of affirmative action?
2. A) Describe what George Hull calls the Wrong People argument against affirmative action. B) Explain how the distinction he draws between compensation and rectification is supposed to address the Wrong People argument. In doing so, be sure to explain what compensation and rectification are.
3. one argument in favor of open borders is that unrestricted immigration will typically yield a net benefit to the economy of the country accepting the immigrants. Chandran Kukathas (in his article The Case for Open Borders’) thinks that this argument is inadequate. A) Explain his reasoning. Kukathas admits that some will end up doing worse economically as a result of open borders. B) Why does he think this fails to provide a decisive reason against open borders? C) Do you agree with him? Why or why not?
The test is answering the questions listed above. No plagiarism please. and you don’t have to write the beginning and conclusion paragraph. Simply just answering the question will be enough. Readings and reading outlines are related to the question by author’s name.
1. Discuss the role that justice Plays in Platos ideal state. What is Platos understanding of virtue and how is it reflected in the ideal states social structure? Explain the kinds of characteristics he feels are essential for rulers of the ideal state to have.
2. What does Aristotle hold the function of a human being to be? How does this function play into his notion of the Highest Good for people? What role does function play in his conception of the kinds of relationships that should hold in the state? Your answer must include:
– An account of the kind of character Aristotle thinks rulers should have.
– Aristotles account of what the goal of a ruler should be.
3. What is Aquinass conception of the law? In your answer you will need to explain how he defines Law, as well as mention each of the different kinds of law he discusses. How does Maimonides conception of the law compare to that of Aquinas?
4. Explain how Hobbes traces the origin of the state and describe his account of a just political society. Do you agree or disagree with his views overall? Why? Your answer must include:
– Hobbes account of the State of Nature.
– What his account says about his vie of human nature.
– His reasons for why we ought to leave the State of Nature.
Note: Please use the readings and the PowerPoint attached as my professor said: using an online resource other than the class notes or assigned readings to answer exam questions WILL RECEIVE A GRADE OF ZERO.
Pay special attention to the powerpoint.
Hi! You did my paper last time and it was phenomenal! I got an A and would love it if you could write my next one due tomorrow! It is an argumentative essay again over one or more of the readings we have discussed in the past 2 weeks. These are the material/readings we were assigned:
1. Topic: Spinoza on religion, superstisition, and freedom. Reading: Theological Political Treatise- Chapter 4-5, & 12-15.
2. Topic: Spinoza on Democracy. Readings: Theological Political Treatise- Chapter 20. And Political Treatise- Chapter 6 & 11.
3. Topic: Religious toleration. Reading: Locke’s letter on toleration
4. Topic: Divine Right Theory and its critics. Reading: Locke’s First Treatise on Government- chapter 1-2 & 8.
I’ve attached the rubric/guidelines she provided for us that I gave you last time, as well as the essay you wrote last time.
1) Research Aristotle’s quote “Happiness is not pleasure, nor is it virtue. It is the exercise of virtue. Happiness cannot be achieved until the end of one’s life. Hence it is a goal and not a temporary state.”
2) Research Aristotle’s views on happiness.
3) Analyze, articulate, and discuss Aristotle’s position on happiness clearly, and why you support it.
4) Provide one reasonable objection that someone could raise on Aristotle’s position on happiness. You may use either Epicurus’s or Socartes’s stance to support your objection (for this part only! You can’t use any other philosopher for the previous parts).
5) Must use ATLEAST 3 reliable secondary sources (no wikipedia or any other source that isn’t reliable)
6) Bibliography in MLA format.
7) Use MLA in-text citations for any paraphrasing or quotes.
