Category: Philosophy : Philosophy

The final project is on BLAME. For any 2-3 day stretch over the next 8 days I want you to keep track of how many times you blame. 
How many times do you blame yourself, others, your favorite sports players, some random person you heard about in the news, a friend who is late; count them all. 
Take the average amount of times you blame per day and write a 3 page reflection (single or 1.5 spacing with 12 point font of your choosing) on what that may say about you and whether or not you’d like to scale back the blame or ramp it up a bit. 
Please utilize the SEP on Blame and touch on what theory of blame you are appealing to in your own self assessment of your blaming practices. 
Are you appealing more to the emotional theories of blame? 
How much of the blame you counted was appropriate? All of it? Nearly none of it? 
Again, appeal to the SEP on blame to help you put into words what you are thinking about your own blaming practices. 
Are you harder on yourself or are you harder on others?
Is most of your blame silent and in your head, or do you outwardly blame a high % of the time? 
Use this assignment to self-reflect on your own blaming tendencies and habits while also showing that you understood at least some of the work we read on blame this semester.
Link to article:
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fplato.stanford.edu%2Fentries%2Fblame%2F&data=05%7C02%7C%7C62b3ebe2822e4126a74608dd2080cbc7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638702459723230551%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Jy7MOsNN1pq2y%2F1beb4LDWZfVsVWdDyEzrowiVtjDcQ%3D&reserved=0

Compare the moral reasoning and visions for achieving a peaceful, moral society proposed by three philosophers: Thomas Hobbes, Immanuel Kant, and John Stuart Mill.
Evaluate which philosopher’s ideas would be most effective in creating a fair and just world for everyone, especially marginalized groups – contemporary problem/topic of the paper. Include what must individuals, social groups, and institutions do to resolve the contemporary problem? Thesis restatement must highlight the need for individuals, social groups, and institutions to act in ways that resolve one (or more) of these current problems. The action should suggest “first steps” for individuals, social groups, and institutions to achieve these ends.
Readings + further paper guidelines are attached below.

Compare the moral reasoning and visions for achieving a peaceful, moral society proposed by three philosophers: Thomas Hobbes, Immanuel Kant, and John Stuart Mill.
Evaluate which philosopher’s ideas would be most effective in creating a fair and just world for everyone, especially marginalized groups – contemporary problem/topic of the paper. Include what must individuals, social groups, and institutions do to resolve the contemporary problem? Thesis restatement must highlight the need for individuals, social groups, and institutions to act in ways that resolve one (or more) of these current problems. The action should suggest “first steps” for individuals, social groups, and institutions to achieve these ends.
Readings + further paper guidelines are attached below.

Compare the moral reasoning and visions for achieving a peaceful, moral society proposed by three philosophers: Thomas Hobbes, Immanuel Kant, and John Stuart Mill.
Evaluate which philosopher’s ideas would be most effective in creating a fair and just world for everyone, especially marginalized groups – contemporary problem/topic of the paper. Include what must individuals, social groups, and institutions do to resolve the contemporary problem? Thesis restatement must highlight the need for individuals, social groups, and institutions to act in ways that resolve one (or more) of these current problems. The action should suggest “first steps” for individuals, social groups, and institutions to achieve these ends.
Readings + further paper guidelines are attached below.

What is due?Please choose one of the prompts and write a short paper, 600 to 800 words long. Write it as a text entry: do not attach files. Write the prompt number at the top. There is no need to include the text of the prompt in your submission (if you do, please keep in mind that it won’t count towards the word count). The prompts are below. 
PromptsGiven what you have read of the Apology, why do you think Socrates was accused of corruption of the youth? In what sense “corruption”? Was the accusation justified, and why?
In front of an unjust verdict, like in the case of Socrates, is it right to obey the law and accept it, even if it means facing death? Why?
What is the most important lesson of theAllegory of the Cave in your view? Why is it important?
Should the hypothesis that we are constantly dreaming make us doubt the possibility of attaining knowledge? Why?
Explain how Descartes passes from radical skepticism to the foundation of the “cogito”. Identify a weak point in his reasoning and argue against him.
Propose and defend an argument for or against skepticism about other minds.
Do you think that Elisabeth of Bohemia’s criticism of Descartes is convincing? Why?
Do you think that Ryle’s criticism of Descartes is convincing? Why?
Why?This assignment is meant to assess your critical understanding of the contents of the class, your capacity to reflect autonomously on them, and your capacity to formulate and defend a philosophical argument in a written text.
How?In a philosophy paper, you are expected to propose and defend a thesis (a major claim), offering good objective reasons in support of it. Address the prompt completely. Write a text that demonstrates you studied and understood the contents and formed your independent opinion on them. Explain key concepts with your own words. Engage with the class materials, referring directly to them and/or quoting from them. Use short sentences and a clear argumentative strategy.  Always credit your sources and avoid plagiarism, including the use of ChatGPT and similar AI text generators. Don’t forget to check out the rubric!
How not?This is not like the written version of a video-journal. You are not supposed to express your subjective opinion or to write about your own experience or feelings. You will defend your view, but this must be a philosophical thesis supported by an argument, not a subjective thought inspired by the readings or class materials.
TipsAddress the prompt completely. If the prompt includes more than one question or aspect, your paper should address all of them.
State your thesis at the very beginning of your paper.
Make your argumentative steps explicit: announce them in the first paragraph, and then follow them thoroughly.
Use short sentences and a straightforward style.
Do not take it for granted that your reader already knows the topics that you are dealing with. You are expected to define explicitly the main concepts that you are using.
Make sure your paper shows that you studied and understood the materials.
Use your own words and possibly your own examples. This demonstrates autonomy and capacity for reflection, and helps the reader better understand what you have in mind.
Connect the conclusion of the paper to the thesis that you stated at the beginning.
Plagiarism (passing off as your own the ideas or words of someone else) is not allowed in any form. Always credit your sources. Remember that papers are automatically checked for plagiarism.
QuestionsWhat exactly are references and quotes? How should I format them? Are they required? 
At least one reference to, or quote from, one of the required readings, and/or video-lectures, and/or slides, is mandatory.
You are referring to (for instance) an article when you mention it, for instance when you say: According to Fricker (2023: 5), epistemic injustice is the consequence of prejudice. You are quoting from an article when you cite a passage from it, for instance: As Fricker (2023: 5) argues, “epistemic injustice is the consequence of prejudice”. In both cases, you need to mention the author’s name and possibly the date of publication and page number in parenthesis. If you omit the year or the page, it is less precise, although still acceptable in the short paper. When you refer to or quote text from a slide or a passage from a video-lecture, you can refer to them as (for instance) “minilecture 2.1”, or “week 2 slides”. 
References or quotes to additional resources or external sources are also welcome, but not required. If you use external sources, you should NOT focus PRIMARILY on them.
If you use quotes, remember to avoid long quotes. Your paper must show your own work, not that of others. So, quotes and references may only be used to support your paper’s main points, not to replace your own explanations.
Are footnotes allowed?
Yes, but keep in mind that footnotes are secondary additions. If you use them, do not use them to explain major points.
Does the word count include the prompt and the bibliography (if any)?
No. It includes quotes and footnotes.
Samples of good papersThese are two A+ papers submitted in another class (added here with the students’ permission): I uploaded below.Please note that they are slightly longer than allowed here because the length requirements were different.
Please do not use AI, there is a no AI policy!! Thank you so much!

explain Lache’s definition of courage, and at least one of Socrates objections to that definition. Secondly, offer your own original philosophical response to this debate and argue for your position.

Objective
In this research paper, students will delve into the realm of AI-generated art, examining it through the perspectives of three major philosophers who have extensively commented on aesthetics and moral aspects of art. These philosophers are likely to predate the phenomenon of AI-generated art. Thus, your task will be to thoughtfully surmise and extrapolate what these philosophers might have thought about AI-generated art, had they been aware of it. The aim is to contextualize the implications of AI in the fields of creativity, originality, artistic value, and the intertwined moral questions.
Essay Prompt
The advent of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has led to a distinctive artistic movement: art generated without direct human creation. As AI technology infiltrates the world of aesthetics, it introduces a range of moral and ethical dilemmas. These dilemmas necessitate a philosophical discussion about the nature and value of such artworks.
Your task is to critically analyze the questions and implications surrounding AI-generated art, guided by the hypothetical perspectives of three prominent philosophers from Chapter 10 who have tackled aesthetics and the ethical dimensions of art. You are expected to infer and articulate what these philosophers, who predate the AI art era, might have thought about this new form of art creation.
Instructions
Introduction: Begin by outlining the essay’s objectives. Provide a brief overview of how AI facilitates the creation of art.
Philosophical Foundations: Dive into the aesthetics and moral philosophies as defined by your chosen three philosophers. Discuss their foundational concepts, ideas about art, and surmise how they might interpret AI-created art.
Personal Reflection: Share your standpoint on the issue. Predict the future trajectory of art in the context of advancing AI technologies. Evaluate the distinction, if any, in value and ethical considerations between human-crafted and AI-produced art.
Conclusion: Summarize your findings, highlighting the broader consequences and ethical considerations of AI’s involvement in art for both contemporary society and the future of creativity.
Citations: Ensure all references are accurately cited in MLA 9th edition format.
Requirements:
Word Count: 1000-1500 words.
Citations: All information derived from external sources must be properly cited in MLA (Modern Language Association) 9th edition format. MLA citations include both in-text citations and a “Works Cited” page at the end of the document. Engaging in plagiarism will result in receiving an F for the course, as stated in the syllabus.
Anonymity: To ensure impartial grading, please do not include your name anywhere in your essay, including the filename. This exclusion should be the only deviation from standard MLA formatting. 
Sources: Minimum of 5 sources, with thorough interpretation and evaluation.
Suggested Resources
The Big Questions Chapter 10: Beauty
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (SEP) has 1800 entries as of Summer 2023. Entries are managed by field experts and reviewed by an Editorial Board.
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP), founded in 1995, is a free, peer-reviewed resource on philosophy topics. Run by volunteers, it has 30 editors and 300 authors with doctorates.
Dallas College Philosophy & Religion Lib Guide The Dallas College Philosophy Lib Guide is designed for efficient academic research, offering access to philosophy databases and news publications. Consider using news articles as real-life examples. The ‘How to Research’ section provides librarians’ contact information for early assistance in your study. If you need citation help, the ‘Citation Help’ section has MLA reference tools.
Dallas College Tutoring Services: You have access to free tutoring. Our writing tutors are available to assist you with the writing and citation process.

QUESTION: Having considered the arguments from Hester and Steinberg (really study the authors’ conclusions and supporting premises), what do you think would be a medically effective and ethical way of solving the organ-scarcity problem? Why?
Please respond in full sentences with standard punctuation (not informal or chat/text punctuation), citing relevant quotes/passages from the texts we are studying (no need to conduct extra research, just consider the texts themselves).

Sources: https://academic.oup.com/jcmc/article/17/3/319/4067682
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13278-012-0079-3
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id＝10.1257/aer.20190658
Word Count: 2,000
Connect to plato and Socrates philosophy

I have chosen essay prompt number 3 (“On pages 21 – 23, Shaw argues that it is possible to objectively assess the merits of competing moral systems/principles by reference to their ability to fulfil the function of moral systems/principles, i.e., the promotion of human flourishing. Write an essay in which you articulate at least one good reason for thinking Shaw’s argument is not well-supported.”), in the “essay1instructions.pdf” document. My working thesis for this prompt is: “In this essay, I will argue that Shaw’s method of objectively evaluating the merits of competing moral principles by examining their purpose and effectiveness in achieving that purpose is overly general and ambitious. ” Edit this thesis if needed.
I ask the writer to carefully follow all instructions and formats provided, and please refer to the sample essays written in the “3. how to Write an Essay.pdf” document to write an essay in this same tone/style. I have attached specific pages from assigned readings in the text that we are allowed to use, and have also attached a document that includes all viewpoints that can be used to make arguments. I ask for the use of 2-3 quotations to help support the points being made (do not worry about citing specific quotes, I can do that as I have access to all texts.) If any more information is required, do not hesitate to reach out. Please do try your best to write the best piece of work you can produce. Update me with every paragraph you finish for me to have a look through so that I can ensure this is what I want.
Thank you and good luck!