I did the first 3 research examples (research study, case study, and appeal to authority) can you do the 4 more: testimony and testimonials, personal experience and observation, intuition, and analogy? The same exact format that I have done so far, for every research example. Issue: Should recreational drugs be legal in U.S
My conclusion is that recreational drugs should not be legal in U.S.
assignment is based on my conclusion
Review each of the following quotations. For each quote, choose one foundational thinker we have read, whose theory you think speaks best to the themes raised by the quotation, and discuss why in 2-3 paragraphs. Students should consider a different foundational thinker for each quotation.:
Thinkers: Socrates, Aristotle, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Tocqueville
Be sure to:
(a) identify the thinker
(b) identify their texts
(c) clearly explain how their theories relate to the particular quotation
(d) discuss the insights you think they provide on the themes raised in the quotation.
Quotes
1. Great men, great nations, have not been boasters and buffoons, but perceivers of the terror of life, and have manned themselves to face it. Ralph Waldo Emerson
2. Only when we are no longer afraid do we begin to live. Dorothy Thompson
3. "A mature society understands that at t
Read ch. 5 on Kant and watch Sandels Episode 6 (both halves), on Kants Groundwork. (Optional: watch Sandels Episode 7, Part One (first half of episode 7); it's on lying, but we can skip this part of Kant). In your short essay, answer the following. Also, respond to a peer post.
Explain how Kants moral law is like, and unlike, the Golden Rule ("Do unto others as you would have done unto you.") How is it similar and how is it different? What does it mean? What does it imply or entail? What conclusions can you draw from this? Feel free to use examples from real life or imagined ones.
Explain, reconstruct, and evaluate The Ontological Argument for Gods Existence. Your paper should minimally discuss (a) the distinction between a prior and a posteriori propositions;(b) the distinction between existence and essence; and the criticism discussed in the class. Finally, you need to assess the theory by arguing either that the criticism of the theory is sound or cogent; or that there are good ways to respond to the criticism. Use Sobers discussion of this as the basis of your evaluation. Use plenty of concrete examples!
*Sober is the author of the book for the class which is attached*
These writing assignments are not intended as research papers, but rather as analytic papers in which you argue for a position. From these provided topic/question you must pick a position with which you disagree, present it accurately and charitably, including identifying its premises and unstated assumptions. After this, you should clearly present your own position, and argue wh
Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:
Textbook: Chapter 13
Lesson
Introduction
In this session, you have been considering moral-ethical dilemmas you yourself faced or that you know of that you either resolved or failed to resolve, but hopefully learned from. You may never have given much thought to ethical theory nor what ethical premises/paradigms you have unconsciously held.
You will be focusing on this case for this assignment:
Jane Doe is a nursing student at University X. Jane is in week eight of a course entitled: "Introduction to Ethics".
For the week one discussion, Jane copied work done by her friend John Doe in the same class two months ago (with a different professor). John told Jane it was okay to use his work as John's professor never checked any work in the class using Turnitin.com. John claimed to have earned an A on the work also.
In week two, Jane went to StudentPapering.com and paid ten
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investing/personal-finance/household-finances/article-menu-science-the-subtle-ways-restaurant-get-you-to-spend-more/
Analyze the following questions associated with the above article and discuss them.
o What ideals, effects, and consequences are at stake?
o Have any moral rights been violated?
o What would a Utilitarian recommend?
o What would a Kantian recommend?
Explain your rationale for each of your answers for your chosen article, with supporting evidence.
Read Chapters 3 and 4 of the Steneck text. Prepare 2-3 paragraphs total that answer the following questions:
1. What was the most interesting thing you learned from the reading assignment?
2. Answer the questions that accompany the short case studies linked to the introduction pages of each chapter.
Answer the questions bellow. Answer each question separately.
1)Institutes of Oratory Book 1: Chapter 1
What is important in education? (What are some important points in educating the orator ?)
2) Guide for the Perplexed
What are 5 reasons one cannot begin learning with metaphysical topics? How can you translate that to the classroom?
a six-part exercise comprised of the following sections:
1. Ethical Question
2. Introduction
3. Position Statement
4. Reasons in Support of Your Position
5. Opposing Position Statement
6. Reasons in Support of the Opposing Position
500 words, written in essay form, with six clearly labeled sections as indicated below, and include a title page and reference page.
Part 1: Ethical Question
Is it moral to use animals in medical experiments designed to treat or cure diseases that are devastating to humans?
Part 2: Introduction
In this section, introduce the topic and question at issue by doing the following (not necessarily in this exact order):
Explain its relevance and importance.
Define any key terms and concepts.
Provide any relevant context and background
Explain and evaluate The Naturalistic View. In the process, consider discussing Feldmans distinction between a priori knowledge, armchair knowledge, and scientific knowledge. At the end of the day, what do you think about The Naturalistic View. Is it true? And if not true, does it contain a kernel of truth? no sources are needed
