Compare and contrast seven different views (and the arguments to support them) on the nature/source of moral goodness.
Create your own argument for a position on the nature/source of moral goodness.


Robert Nozick's "Experience Machine" example is designed to undermine the Utilitarian claim that the only thing humans really care about is pleasure. If you were a Utilitarian, how would you try to respond to Nozick?

Structure:
Thesis Statement (one short paragraph)
CQ (Critical Question) - Response (at least one full page)
Thesis Defense (3 pages, supporting your thesis)

Each paper must respond to a critical question (CQ) or the paper will not receive full credit. A critical question is an objection from an opponent. For each of the following strategies, the particular critical question will be given. *When providing evidence in support of your thesis, please avoid anecdotal evidence (personal evidence).

Strategy 3: Dawkins is correct; religion is both viral and harmful.

CQ: Critics will claim that millions of people gain comfort through their religious faith, particularly during times of suffering and tragedy. They maintain that secularism and science have nothing equivalent to offer to comfort people during, especially difficult times, in other words, science is not comforting when dealing with death.



Also, do not turn your paper into a creation/evo

I need 2 more pages of content and another couple references (academic resources) that addresses the following information.  Please add the new references to the annotated bibliography and reference page. Need 5-7 pages of content.

I need a thesis statement as well.  That is usually at the end of the introductory paragraph.

Please explore in depth "what could be done to rectify the situation".

Please keep in mind research paper minimum requirements as you develop your paper: 
-    Your paper must offer an argument
-    Incorporate a minimum of three references from outside the class that relate to your subject. These should help substantiate your claims.
-    These three references must be academic resources.

As long as the conditions are met then you can expand on anything else in the paper. 

Read the article attached and answer the following questions:
1. What is the main question/problem (or central questions/problem) that the text addresses?
2. What is the author's answer to these questions/solutions to these problems?
            i.e, what is the author's thesis?
3. What are the standout concepts and/or distinctions that are invoked in the course of the author's discussion?
            . explain them, and the role that they play in the discussion.
4. What are (at least some of) the reasons that the author offers in support of their thesis?
            i.e, what is a sketch the author's argument?
5. What is a specific critical question of your own about some aspect of the text?

DGD is a reaction to a drug that cured most forms of cancer. Thinking about this society from behind a veil of ignorance, where you dont know whether you will have DGD if the cure is introduced, or cancer if it isnt, would you want to be in a society that had the cure or not?in other words, which society would have a fairer or more just distribution of benefits and harms? What institutional and social factors influence your choicefor example, prejudice and discrimination against DGD people, forced sterilization, or different approaches to the care and quarantine of symptomatic DGD sufferers?

Think about Lynns position. She didnt ask to have her rare pheromones, and, for that matter, she didnt ask to have DGD at all. If she didnt know whether she was in her position, or in Alans or Naomis, or in her parents, would she want to have the Dilg center there, run by DGD people like her? On a contractarian basis, it seems like she should conclude that, even though she wouldnt personall

Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:

Textbook: Chapters 9, 10(THE ELEMENTS OF MORAL PHILOSOPHY
Lesson
Minimum of 5 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook)
Instructions
First, return to your topic chosen in the week three assignment.

Answer this question: What are the personal and/or communal ethical factors that may be involved in determining the moral position of either side in that debate?
Next, articulate and then evaluate the ethical positions  using Kantian ethics (that is, the categorical imperative) relative to the long standing debate (that is your topic chosen in the week three assignment).
Finally, create a complete annotated bibliography for 5 academic scholarly sources. You will annotate each source. The sources should be relevant to your topic chosen in the week three assignment.
Include the following:

Publication details
Annotation (a detailed reading of the source)
Each an

Is the Wal-Mart case study (Links to an external site.) a problem of American values or Mexican values? Please give three specific examples of behaviors and decisions made to support your position.

After reading the article, be sure to look at the satellite images of the site yourself using Google Earth (Links to an external site.) so you can judge the impact of the Bodega Aurrera store in relation to its neighboring community and the historic pyramids.

Google Earth - https://www.google.com/maps/place/Bodega+Aurrera,+San+Juan+Teotihuacan/@19.6813937,-98.8647074,15z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x4f40f8e1806ccaa8!8m2!3d19.6813937!4d-98.8647074

Wal-Mart case study -
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/business/walmart-bribes-teotihuacan.html?_r=0

In the additional materials there will be two documents. One labeled "life is goo" and the other is "Dialect essay". Dialect essay is how the paper needs to be written and in that format. Life is good is what the paper needs to be about.

You try to live strictly by the moral rules contained in your religion's moral code. The two most important rules are "Be merciful" (don't give people what they deserve) and "Be just" (give people exactly what they deserve). Now suppose a man is arrested for stealing food from your house, and the police leave it up to you whether he should be prosecuted for his crime or set free. Should you be merciful and set him free, or be just and make sure he is appropriately punished? How do you resolve this conflict of rules? Can your moral code resolve it? To what moral principles or theories do you appeal?

*This paper would have to be cited correctly and writing in philosophy style.
*Base off the book Mere Christianity
Your paper should be divided into two parts. In the first part (which should be 2-3 pages), you will provide a summary of the book's contents. To do this well, you will have to not only present Lewis' views accurately and clearly but also make editorial decisions about which parts to discuss: you can't mention everything, so focus on the most important elements. In the second part of your paper (which should be 3-4 pages) you will offer your own critical reflections on the book, appealing to concepts, issues, and arguments we have discussed throughout the semester to inform your discussion. This portion of your paper should be focused in the sense that you should discuss only two or three issues from the book. Limiting your coverage in this way will enable you to discuss the topics you select with a good deal of depth. While you have a great deal of latitude in the