Epistemic Peerdom

1.) Explain what the author thinks an epistemic peer is. (Explaining Feldman’s notion of an epistemic peer may take a bit of interpretive work since Feldman doesn’t spell it out as explicitly as Kelly does.) 2.) Explain the paper’s thesis (what is the author claiming about disagreement) and reconstruct the argument for the thesis. As you do so, explain how the idea of an epistemic peer is supposed to fit into that argument (it may help to think about why this argument needs to draw on the idea of epistemic peerdom). 3.) In the last paragraph or two of the paper, briefly evaluate the both the idea of epistemic peerdom that this author is using and how the author is appealing to it in the argument. (As you do so, it might help to ask yourself one or more of the following questions: Do I agree with this idea of an epistemic peer? Would I add or subtract anything from the author’s criteria for peerdom? Do I agree that this kind of peer is possible? What are the upshots of my evaluation of this idea of epistemic peerdom on the argument this author is trying to make? Of course, you might have your own preferred questions in mind that will help your evaluation along, and that’s fine.)

Read more

Six Step Problem Solving Process

When faced with a problem, what do you do to solve it? This assignment asks you to apply a six-step to problem solving process to a specific problem scenario. You will write a paper that presents a synthesis of your ideas about solving the problem using this systematic approach. As Voltaire said, “No problem can withstand the assault of sustained thinking.” http://www.gdrc.org/decision/problem-solve.html: Choose one (1) of the problem scenarios as a topic choice for your paper (Note: Your professor must approve your topic choice before you begin work on the assignment.) Scenario 1: You have worked at your company for eleven (11) years. You have returned to college to earn a Bachelor’s degree in order to increase your chances for a promotion. You are nearly finished with your degree, when a supervisor’s position in a competing company becomes available in another state. The start date is in two (2) weeks, during your final exam period for your courses. The position offers a $15,000 per year salary increase, a car allowance, and relocation expenses. Your former supervisor works for the company and is recommending you for the position based on your outstanding job performance; if you want the job, it’s yours. All of the other supervisors at this level in the company have Master’s degrees, so you know that you would be expected to earn your Bachelor’s degree and continue on to a Master’s degree. Your present company offers tuition reimbursement, but the new company does not. Step One: Define the problem Step Two: Analyze the problem Step Three: Generate options Step Four: Evaluate options Step Five: Make your decision Step Six: Implement and reflect Write a four to five (4-5) page paper in which you: Define the problem in the scenario that you have chosen. Analyze the problem in the scenario. Generate options for solving the problem in the scenario. Evaluate the options for solving the problem. Decide on the best option for solving the problem. Explain how you will implement the decision made and reflect on whether this option was the most effective. The paper should follow guidelines for clear and organized writing: Include an introductory paragraph and concluding paragraph. Address main ideas in body paragraphs with a topic sentence and supporting sentences. Adhere to standard rules of English grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and spelling. Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements: This course requires use of Strayer Writing Standards (SWS). The format is different than other Strayer University courses. Please take a moment to review the SWS documentation for details. Based on the guidelines in SWS, “A well-researched assignment has at least as many sources as pages.” Therefore, since this assignment requires you to write at least 4-5 pages, you should include at least 4-5 references. The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are: Recognize the hindrances to the decision-making process in order to apply problem-solving skills to a variety of situations. Create written work utilizing the concepts of critical thinking. Use technology and information resources to research issues in critical thinking skills and informal logic.

Read more

Master and Slave Morality

Topic: Explain/discuss Nietzsche’s distinction between ‘master and slave morality’, and how it relates to his critique of traditional morality? Do you find it convincing? Why or why not?

Read more

Schelling Philosophical Investigations

1. Choose a topic from Schelling’s Philosophical Investigations, something that interests you, which you can write 5-7 pages on. Your topic should be represented by an argument selected from the text. An argument consists of a main claim, or a conclusion, and several reasons supporting that conclusion, which are called premises.  2.  Write an analysis paper that consists of (I) a thesis, (II) an analysis of the chosen argument as it appears in the text, and (III) a set of reasons supporting the main claim made during your analysis.  Your thesis statement should be one sentence, in the first paragraph of your paper, and it should express the main claim you intend to make and support throughout your writing.  The claim you make should tell me about the significance of your analysis. Here is an example: “According to Schelling, evil is not merely a privation of good, but is a positive feature of reality and a fundamental aspect of human freedom; this is significant because it means we are completely responsible for our actions as I will attempt to show throughout the following analysis.” Your analysis should break down all of the important aspects of the argument you have selected from Schelling’s text. Your argument should be organized into the standard format: list the conclusion (i.e. the main claim supported) and the premises or reasons used to support that conclusion Explain the meaning of each reason and how it connects to the other reasons and to the conclusion Key words and technical terms should be identified and explained The overarching importance of the previous information should be clarified; restate your thesis, supported throughout your analysis Provide all of the reasons you can think of that would support the analysis you offered and the claim you have made in a concise and systematic way. Make sure each of your premises is clearly stated and explained Provide any counter evidence that you can think of and explain why you think that counter evidence fails to undermine your thesis  Make sure you conclude your paper with a summarizing paragraph that ties everything together, and provides one last statement of your thesis    3. Your paper should be formatted according to the following standards: 12 pt., Times New Romans font Double Spaced Paragraphs indented Cite your source and all pages referenced Include an original title that introduces your topic

Read more

Vitalism as a Philosophical Concept

essay topic: Vitalism is a philosophical concept that underpins the naturopathic clinical principle Vis Medicatrix Naturae (VMN). This differs from biomedicines healthcare philosophy of mechanism. How are they different and how are they similar?

Read more

Voting in America

Can democracy be sustained when so few people are involved in the political system? Voter turnout in a local election can run less than 10 percent, yet local governments are the ones that affect people more closely on a daily basis. Why do more people not vote in America? Explain.

Read more

Are Prisons Obsolete

1500 word (Times New Roman 12pt Font) long paper that is a deep analysis of  “are prison obsolete” (can refer to Angela davids book)  1)    Introduce the Topic:  The introduction should reflect that fact and introduce the reader to what is at stake whether you do or do not accept this.  2)    State your thesis: Explicitly make clear what position you are arguing for or against 3)    Reconstruct the Argument: Put the argument in proper premise and conclusion form. Make sure it accurately captures how the argument works.  4)    Assess the Validity: Do not just say the premises lead to the conclusion. Explicitly say what about the premises make it such that if they are true then the conclusion must follow 5)    Assess the Soundness: Explicitly say why it is the premises are true or false. This is the bulk of the assignment. Give reasons as to why someone should also be convinced that these premises are true or false. It is not enough to say they are true.  Everything that is said must be defended with reason. 6)    Consider an Objection: Imagine what someone who disagrees with you will say. Give this objection and respond to it. Say why the objection raised does not defeat the argument. Do not give an objection that is easily refuted. 7)    Conclusion: Here you will sum up your work. Remind the reader of the conclusions you have drawn and the reasoning you used to get there.

Read more

Love and Sex

Please answer all the questions below 400 words for each of the question and please put the reference below each question so i can be able to know easily. 1. Based on the course lecture and readings, explain and assess Heloise’s reasons for not wanting to marry Abelard.   2. Describe the types of imperfect friendship Aristotle identifies in his book Nicomachean Ethics. Contrast these types with what he calls perfect friendship and explain why he considers the latter to be the finest type of friendship.   3. Nygren analyzes and compares eros (Greek) and agape (Christian) love. Explain his account, highlight the differences between these two types of love, and indicate whether you think Nygren’s account is satisfactory based on your own reading of Greek and Christian texts.

Read more

Aesthetic Principle

The goal of this assignment is to demonstrate that you can use aesthetic principles in your own reasoning, and to look at an object in a new, perhaps more open-minded, way. Ideally you should learn something about what you value, and gain some insight into how others might perceive the world a bit differently. First, find an object THAT YOU HAVE PHYSICALLY ENCOUNTERED (do not use things from online) that you do not normally consider art, or even aesthetically valuable. You may have encountered this item in a normal daily setting, or in a museum, art store, or other venue. Examine the object for a while, and then write out a brief description of the object (if necessary, take a picture of the object and include that with your assignment, pasting the picture into the submission text box.). Second, indicate (in approximately one or two paragraphs) why you normally would not consider the object art or aesthetically valuable. You should include what your original definition of art is (what do you normally consider art, and why), and you should clearly explain why this object does not meet your preconceived notions about art. Next, try to examine the object in a new way, using the principles of aesthetic reasoning (either functionalist or formalist, but not both). Give an argument, which integrates facts about the object and the aesthetic principles, for why someone could consider the object art or aesthetically valuable. The aesthetic principles you use must be true of the object. You must choose to use either functionalist principles or formalism, but NOT BOTH since functionalism and formalism are incompatible. YOU CANNOT USE, OR EVEN MENTION, THE LAST PRINCIPLE ABOUT “NO ARGUMENT CAN BE GIVEN TO ESTABLISH AESTHETIC VALUE” (since the assignment REQUIRES YOU TO PROVIDE AN ARGUMENT, this last principle is not compatible with the assignment). The more reasoning and depth to your analysis, the better. You should submit an essay of 1000 to 2000 words in order to ensure you have developed your ideas adequately. Don’t forget to include your in-text citations and a Works cited section at the end of your essay.

Read more

PHI Questions

What is dualism?  (1-2 sentences) What is physicalism?  (1-2 sentences) Explain ONE of the arguments for dualism or physicalism that we discussed in class: the Mary argument, the Princess Elizabeth argument, OR the what-it’s-made-of argument (not all three).  Hint: be clear about what the argument you choose is an argument for – dualism or physicalism.  (100-300 words  What is determinism?  (1-2 sentences) If determinism is true, how does that undermine the possibility of free will?  (100-250 words) Note: I do not expect you to talk about compatibilism – we did not get a chance to cover that in sufficient detail DOESNT HAVE TO BE FANCY more references  https://youtu.be/nsHmKYGpNoc https://mdc.blackboard.com/bbcswebdav/pid-9072669-dt-content-rid-133524500_1/xid-133524500_1

Read more
OUR GIFT TO YOU
15% OFF your first order
Use a coupon FIRST15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Claim my 15% OFF Order in Chat

Order your essay today and save 15% with the discount code ESSAYHELP