Philosophy

1. Finding Fallacies 2.For this discussion, you will need to identify fallacies in a real life situation. 1) Identify two informal fallacies. It can be from a newspaper, radio talk show, cable news channel, or even from a conversation with a friend. You should not have to look very hard to find them. You cannot use the same fallacy twice. You must find two different fallacies. And you cannot use appeal to pity, emotion, or the person. These are too easy and common. You will have to find some other ones. 2) Write out a discussion post that is at least 250 words. First, tell us what is the name of the fallacy you identified, give us a general definition of the fallacy, and where you found it. Second, share with us the example that you found. Third, tell us why it is a fallacy.  You are not required to do a response post for this discussion. Here are some ideas to help you get started. ? Locate the letters to the editor section of a newspaper or magazine and select a letter containing what you believe is a logical fallacy. Critically evaluate the author’s argument, and share with us the fallacy. ? Find a newspaper editorial or an op-ed piece that you believe commits a logical fallacy. Critically evaluate the author’s argument, and share with us the fallacy.? Listen to a talk radio show or a TV pundit on cable news. Evaluate the argument given, and share with us the fallacy.? Describe a scene in a movie in which a character gives an argument that is a logical fallacy. Which fallacy is it? 2. Conspiracy Theories For this discussion, you will need to do the following. 1) Read chapter 8 of Concise Guide to Critical Thinking, paying close attention to the criteria of adequacy (pages 157-166). 2) Select a paranormal claim or conspiracy theory that interests you from this website. Here is the link: http://skepdic.com/tifraud.html (Links to an external site.) 3) Apply the criteria of adequacy to the paranormal claim or conspiracy theory that you selected. This means that you are going to attempt to offer a more rational explanation to the claim. The goal is for you to come up with a more logical explanation for the event than the one proposed by the paranormal claim or conspiracy theory. Make sure you apply each part of the criteria of adequacy (testability, simplicity, scope, fruitfulness, and conservatism) to the claim you selected.

Squares, Triangles, Circles, and Hearts: After reading the assigned chapters in Everyday Bible Study (Chapters 1-5), identify the following items: Squares: 4 ideas that, in general, square (fit) with your thinking Triangles: 3 angles you have never considered before Circles: 2 questions that are circling in your mind Hearts: 1 idea that you loved. Once you have identified these 10 items, list and explain them in a thread. Your full thread should contain at least one quote from Everyday Bible Study to support the thoughts and ideas you are presenting. Your thread should be at least 400 words in length. For an example of this type of thread, please see the provided example in the Course Content folder. Week Two Discussion Board Response Post Instructions Once you have completed the assigned text readings (Everyday Bible Study Chapters 1-11), select two threads you wish to reply to and address your classmates’ thoughts and ideas. The goal of these two posts is to build on the material provided by your classmates. Thus, responses that simply affirm the thread material are not sufficient. The content of each reply must reflect an excellent knowledge of the textbook reading and interact with both the thread and relevant chapter material. You must support your thoughts and ideas by implementing at least one significant quote from Everyday Bible Study. Each response post should be at least 200 words in length.

For this assignment, you are going to create your own advertisement in which you employ deception. Yes, you read that correctly! You are going to come up with an ad that makes use of all the shady techniques we learned about in this chapter. Here’s what you need to do: 1) Select a product, service, or something to sell. For example, you could select Pepsi, Chevy trucks, the Ring Doorbell, plumbing services, or whatever you so desire). 2) Create an advertisement in which you employ all the deceptive techniques of advertising. This means I want you to use weasel words, misleading comparisons, expectation, slogans, fallacious appeal to authority, or whatever it takes to sell your product or service. You don’t have to use every trick in the book, but your ad should include many of them. You are going to have to get a little creative in this assignment. It might even be a good idea to select a celebrity to have them sell your product (just a thought). 3) Describe to me your product or service and all the deception you used in an essay. Essays should be at least two pages, double-spaced, with 12-point font. 4) It is optional to include a visual. You are not required to include, but it will help you sell your product to me.

You will be required to complete a personal playlist that encompasses your life up until this point. You will choose 12-15 songs that have a significant and personal meaning to you. Maybe these songs inspire you, maybe they motivate you, maybe they bring you back to a very specific and influential time in your life, maybe they remind you of something or someone, or maybe it is another reason that is not listed. This is worth 200 points which accounts for 20% of your final grade in this course.

I have to identify the moral issue and the parties involved. Involving a balanced moral position offerings recommendation or a policy resolution. I have to draw from any of the 3 approaches to ethics from the utility, duty, rights, virtue, or care. The question  is, “Some countries, notably Great Britain, have initiated maintenance programs fro drug addicts. Merely signing up an addict becomes entitled to free drugs in a dose sufficient to stabilize and maintain his or her habit. Such into the phenomenon of addiction. Some critics, however, claim that these programs are immoral because they approve and support physically and emotionally harmful behavior. Is this criticism ethically valid? “

Do we have a moral obligation to be vaccinated?

Thesis: Do we have a moral obligation to be vaccinated? I want to focus on an individual moral obligation to be vaccinated in order to both minimize the risk of harming others (through direct infection) and to contribute to the realization of a collective, public good: ‘herd immunity’. The second reason is based on a principle of fairness in the distribution of the burdens required to realize the collective good, that is, herd immunity. I want to argue that there is an individual moral obligation to be vaccinated regardless of whether herd immunity is realized or not, based on a principle of fairness in the distribution of risks and burdens. Moreover, there is a moral obligation to be vaccinated regardless of whether an individual’s vaccination makes a significant difference /contribution to the realisation of herd immunity. 

Introduction Each person owes a duty to himself or herself and to the world to study ethics and to engage in thoughtful debate about what is right, and what is wrong. It is this habit of thinking about and reflecting on ethics that will help you determine the right choices when faced with an ethical dilemma. Initial Post Instructions Articulate a moral dilemma wherein one has to show a specific virtue or virtues (it can be any virtue or virtues including honesty, courage, charity/generosity, compassion, etc.) What is the moral dilemma about? What virtue or virtues should be shown? (You are here selecting the best course of action) Why is that virtue or those virtues to be shown? How should the virtue or virtues be expressed, and why in that manner? Apply Aristotle’s golden mean to the dilemma. Tell us how the dilemma involves conflict moral duties (loyalty to community versus to self, professional versus familial duties, national or personal obligations). The dilemma must be a situation in which a choice has to be made. Be sure you told us why your chosen course of action was best.

Explain the different theoretical perspectives that would be taken by Kant versus the Utilitarians on the question of What is right? What standard or standards would each use for defining what is right versus what is wrong? Provide an example to illustrate the differences. (What would each say about the morality of lying, for example?) With which perspective do you agree, if either, and why? If you agree with neither perspective, explain your perspective, and why you believe this

Essays:Answer both fully and directly. Answer the question that is asked and answer in sufficient detail (i.e., in full sentences and developed into a paragraph/s). Each section, both 1 and 2, must be explained. Word count should not be under 250 words per section. More is fine less is not. 1.  St. Thomas Aquinas argues for God’s existence in his famous “Five Ways.” Give a detailed summary for one of the five arguments for God’s existence.  Do you agree or disagree, and if so, why or why not? (Explain your position) . 2. What are Descartes’ arguments for Cartesian dualism? In your answer, make sure you consider that Descartes divides reality (Dualism) into two fundamental and distinct types of things. What does this division consist of, and how does he arrive at his answer? How and why does Descartes make this distinction? (Make sure you answer thoroughly and in detail) Do you find them persuasive (it might help to consider here what Descartes is trying to preserve)?