1000-word research paper. MLA style extra words is for the works cited page. no cover page required.
VERY IMPORTANT: PLEASE FOLLOW HIS REQUIREMENTS AND DOUBLE CHECK SOURCES! my professor will check for plagiarism.

details are listed in the attachments. there's a site listed that will provide some topics to write about. you can choose whatever topic you wish (except human cloning) as long as you follow the requirements listed.

In the Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes claims that humans are responsible for error based on the interaction between free will and the understanding. Please thoroughly explain Descartes position on this interaction.
Using the Nagel essay, how might somebody reject Descartes claim that somebody is responsible for error?
Section 2 Title: (CSLO2) Apology, Euthyphro and King on the Gadfly

In Platos Apology, Socrates discussed his wisdom in relation to other supposedly wise people. In the same book, he also made the famous gadfly analogy.  Using the discussion in Platos Euthyphro as an example, please thoroughly explain Socrates concept of wisdom and the gadfly analogy.
Please explain Kings use of the gadfly analogy in the Letter from a Birmingham Jail.
Section 3 Title: This section has two parts (*If you chose to revisit one of the issues from section one or two in this third section, please be sure to revisit the material in a substantially new way).

For Essay Two, you are required to engage, in five pages, AT LEAST one of the readings from the course. You are permitted, however, to engage as many as you like. For example, you could spend the entire five pages summarizing/representing only Kant's Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. Or, you could spend the entire five pages summarizing/representing Kant, Nozick, and Rawls.

Additionally, you are permitted to go beyond summary/representation of the theories. You are permitted to evaluate and/or critique the theory and/or theories you choose to engage. If you decide to critique, however, you should take care to communicate that you actually understand the theory you are critiquing. In other words, you do not want to be arguing against a "straw man."

This is a 3 pages essay that include reference page, and cite/acknowledge learning material used

1. I want the first page to state about John T. Noonan argument about abortion
2. I want the second page to state about Mary Anne Warren argument about abortion
3. I want to third page to give my opinion of both either side and also have the references/cite/acknowledge material  used.

This is a argumentative essay please raise the argument between both parties
The learning material is the moral life on page 758-774. I send it and please this is my last paper for this class and this paper worst 10pts and I want to get 10pts. So please do all of your best. Anything please email

The essay is intended to be a review of an article.  It should begin with full bibliographical information (This is in place of a title) and then address the following points:

What does the researcher want to find out?
How is the researcher investigating this? What sources are used?  Are they adequate to the task?
What does the research contribute to our knowledge of the field?
How does it compare with what you learned in class and textbook reading?  (What did you learn that was new?)
Who is the intended audience (an academic audience with background knowledge or a general audience with little knowledge of the topic, etc)?
Is the writing clear? Does it use direct, straightforward, and unambiguous words and phrases?

Review the discourse on Abortion by John T. Noonan and Mary Anne Warren. Ensure to demonstrate your meaningfully contribute to the discourse.

This is a three pages paper including reference page, cite/acknowledge learning material
I send the reading material moral life on page 758-774
I need one page talking about John T. Noonan argument about abortion and  the second page talking about the argument Mary Anne Warren about abortion. And the last page give my opinion and references.

written analysis of Hesiods Theogony. The paper should (i) clearly articulate the question asked by the author, (ii) articulate the authors conclusion, and most importantly (iii) explicate the authors argument. The purpose is not to interpret or criticize the text, but only to outline the logical structure of the authors argument.

    I would suggest that you write 2-3 paragraphs for your answer (though you can wrote more if youd like). The first paragraph should explain the material. The second paragraph should state your own opinion about it and give some good reason for your opinion.
    You will be graded on the basis of two considerations: First, did you understand, and could you clearly explain, in detail and in your own words, the material that was presented to you in class and in the readings? You will lose points if you pretty much just re-state the lecture notes. Second, did you express an opinion and give a reason for your opinion? Was your reason just a repetition of the ideas that I presented to you in the lecture or in the book? Was it just an unsupported assertion? Or was it an original idea? You will lose points if I cannot find an original idea in your paper, or if you state an idea but do not give any reason for it.

Topic: Present Humes case for compatib

Hello again! For this paper, the instructions are included in the picture! I do believe that there is a higher being out there that challenges us to be a better person, however, I'm not religious. Just like last time, we should talk about what the textbook (Rachels and Rachels) have to say about this topic and bring in a source or two (from the Encyclopedia of Philosopy) that expand this topic and also support my belief.  We have to incorporate the answer to this question too "Do you believe that God created evil for human good or do you believe that evil is due to human free will ?"!! A few short sentences should be enough, i think.

1.    Watch the webinar "What Is Professional Responsibility in Engineering?" by Dr. Michael Loui found at https://www.onlineethics.org/bringing-ethics-conversation-professional-responsibility-engineering-webinar

2.    You should watch until the ~28min mark which concludes the main webinar

3.    Write about the one thing that you learned during the webinar that surprised you or that you will carry with you in your engineering career?