In Chapter 3, you read about Logical Arguments, and in Chapter 6, you read about Counterarguments. In this post, we will explore an argument for or against a contemporary issue. Write a brief but reasoned argument for or against the following. The goal is to be logical, but recognize that I am forcing your classmates to disagree with you.
CHAPTER 3:
https://learn-us-east-1-prod-fleet01-xythos.s3.amazonaws.com/5deadc6d1e61f/16962339?response-cache-control=private%2C%20max-age%3D21600&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%2A%3DUTF-8%27%27DowdenCh3%25281%2529.pdf&response-content-type=application%2Fpdf&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Date=20201026T000000Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=21600&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAZH6WM4PL5SJBSTP6%2F20201026%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Signature=0bf19a293994824a949cffdcfd7f3db250345040ecacf189dec845c4ef6164f5

CHAPTER 6:
https://learn-us-east-1-prod-fleet01-xythos.s3.amazo

Reading:

Immanuel Kant, extracts from Groundwork (in response to "Hume's guillotine") November 5John Stuart Mill, extracts from Utilitarianism (also from On Liberty, and The Subjugation of Women)

The assignment question:

      The debate over the morality of abortion has been waged between the proponents of a woman's right to choose and those people who are against all abortion procedures.  Each side can give reasons to justify or support their particular viewpoint. 
    Now imagine the Kantian is engaged in this debate.  Based on what we've said about Kant's view of morality, what do you think he would say about the morality of abortion?  What do you think Mill (or any Utilitarian) would say?  Explain how each one would justify his position. 

Due Week 3 and worth 30 points

When looking for information about a particular issue, how often do you try to resist biases toward your own point of view? This assignment asks you to engage in this aspect of critical thinking by playing the "Believing Game." The Believing Game is about making the effort to "believe" - or at least consider - the reasons for an opposing view on an issue.

The assignment is divided into two (2) parts.
In Part I of the assignment (due Week 3), you will first read a book excerpt about critical thinking processes: "The Believing Game and How to Make Conflicting Opinions More Fruitful" by Peter Elbow. Next, you will review the Procon.org Website in order to gather information. Then, you will engage in prewriting to examine your thoughts.

Note: In Part II of the assignment (due Week 5), you will write an essay geared towards synthesizing your ideas.

Part I - Prewriting: Follow the instructions below for this prewriting activity. U

What are the divisions or branches of academic philosophy as Manuel Velasquez understands them? How does he describe said divisions? Does Velasquez believe that the study of philosophy is beneficial? If he does, what are his reasons for claiming that it is beneficial? Considering what you have learned so far, what do you think about Velasquezs view in Chapter 1 of the advantages of studying philosophy? Please give evidence that you have read the assigned readings carefully and that you have sought to understand them. Also, please develop your answer clearly and thoroughly.

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.

Just follow the instructions on the doc and do not copy anything from the internet, use up to 3 sources from a reliable source. do not use any above undergrad level words. Please let me know if you have any questions. Will tip good if receive a good point.

What is the Silicon Chip Replacement thought experiment? What, according to our text This is Philosophy of Mind, is the thought experiment supposed to show? Schneider also talks about the Chip Test. How is Schneiders test different from the original thought experiment? Why does Schneider think that we should really try to do the Chip Test? What could this help us figure out?

Make sure that you dont start off the paper with an unnecessary grandiose introduction. Stay on track, i.e., dont go on tangents in the paper. Answer all questions in the prompt. Write as simple and clear as possible: a friend or relative who reads your paper should be able to understand the entire thing because you explain everything so clearly.

1.Summarize 2 of Craig's arguments for the existence of God
2.Summarize 2 of Hitchens' arguments for the non-existence of God
3.Describe what you think the strongest point, or argument, is that Craig makes in the debate
4.Describe what you think the strongest point, or argument, is that Hitchens makes in the debate
5.Finally, after watching the debate, which position, theism, atheism, or agnosticism, seems most reasonable and why?  Explain your thoughts in at least 2 paragraphs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tYm41hb48o&feature=youtu.be&ab_channel=BiolaUniversity

In his R  epublic,  Plato offers a philosophical argument against the realism and cynicism of the sophists (represented in the person of Thrasymachus). This philosophical position - realism/cynicism - is presented by Plato as a corrupting influence in ancient Athens, and is summarized in Thrasymachuss belief that the unjust life lived in secret goes best.
You are to write an essay for or against Platos famous conclusion that the just or moral life  always  is the best life, even if lived in secret. First, explain what sophists such as Thrasymachus and Protagoras meant by such a provocative statement that the unjust life lived in secret is the best life. Second, drawing on specific examples from our chapter in Soccio on the archetype The Philosopher-King, carefully explain what you take to be the central points of Platos argument against the sophists. In other words, why does Plato think it is false that the unjust life is the best life, and how does he think he c

Prompt II
What is the Silicon Chip Replacement thought experiment? What, according to our text This is Philosophy of Mind, is the thought experiment supposed to show? Schneider also talks about the Chip Test. How is Schneiders test different from the original thought experiment? Why does Schneider think that we should really try to do the Chip Test? What could this help us figure out?