Explain the argument from arbitrariness for permissivism. Does this argument show that extraordinary objects exist? Give a response on behalf of the conservative, and evaluate its success.
Read pages 29-32 of Chapter 2 of “Thinking on Screen” by Thomas Wartenberg (provided)
Write 500-600 words (including intro and conclusion) addressing Wartenberg’s three conceptions of philosophy. The book is about philosophy in film, but the essay is not specifically about film (see instructions).
I’ve attached a word doc with the essay instructions and the required chapter pages.
Must we change?
Can we change?
Will we change?
The answer to these three questions can be a personal opinion and not necessarily from any readings or research. We will revisit these questions toward the end of our time together.
Your assignment for this unit involves two parts. In the first part, you will be identifying rhetorical devices used to persuade an audience. In the second part, you will identify premises used to build a logical argument devoid of rhetoric.
Using the Unit VII Assignment Template , review the political speech regarding the construction of the proposed factory. Identify the rhetorical devices, ethos, and pathos in the template. Next, review the additional relevant information that was omitted from the speech. Using this information, identify premises for a logical argument based on relevant information in the template.
View the Unit VII Sample Assignment for an example of how your completed assignment should look. APA Style is not required for this assignment, and no outside resources are required.
Please no plagiarism or paraphrasing without source.
For this journal assignment, briefly answer each of the following prompts:
After reading the required resources for this week and participating in the discussion, how do you define critical thinking? You will want to carry this definition with you, so keep it brief – perhaps 4 to 6 lines. You will find many definitions online – don’t be tempted to just quickly copy one; try to form your own so that it is meaningful to you.
Heart of the Matter
Considering just what you read in Chapter 2.3 “Looking Ahead” why do you think the authors see Chapters 12, 13, and 14 as the “heart of the matter”?
What do you think they mean by that?
What two concepts do the authors say these chapters emphasize?
How do you define these concepts?
Why do you think the authors find these concepts important to critical thinking?
Challenges & Insights
What do you see as your greatest challenge for this session in general? For this class in particular?
How do you think you can use the concepts in these first three chapters to help you meet these challenges as well as challenges in your personal life as a member of your family and your community?
If you include references to outside sources (beyond the textbook), make sure you cite them properly.
Writing Requirements (APA format)
Length: 1 -2 pages (not including prompts, title page or references page)
12-point Times New Roman font
References page (as needed)
I’ve attached the book. This is the assignment that is due
1) A clear and identifiable thesis
2) One or two reasons for holding your thesis
3) Be clear on the passages that you are using
4) Use one example to explain or as an objection
5) Integrate at least one additional passage from one of our readings and cite it
6) Consider a counter-argument to your view and respond to it
7) You may use forum discussions in the essay, but please cite your source
8) Include a bibliography even though you are using the textbook for our class
Think of your peers in the class as your audience. They are familiar with the material. You do not need to explain to them who these philosophers are or when they lived. You have a limited amount of space so focus on your thesis and argument quickly. However, do take a few sentences in the introduction to motivate your thesis.
Summarize the following passage, paying particular attention to Aristotle’s reasoning:
Presumably, however, to say that happiness is the chief good seems a platitude and a clearer account of what is still desired. This might perhaps be given if we could first ascertain the function of man. For just as for a flute-player, a sculptor, or an artist, and, in general, for all things that have a function or activity, the good and the ‘well’ is thought to reside in the function, so would it seem to be for man, if he has a function. Have the carpenter, then, and the tanner certain functions or activities, and has man none? Is he born without a function? Or as eye, hand, foot, and in general each of the parts evidently has a function, may one lay it down that man similarly has a function apart from all these? What then can this be? Life seems to be common even to plants, but we are seeking what is peculiar to man. Let us exclude, therefore, the life of nutrition and growth. Next, there would be a life of perception, but it also seems to be common even to the horse, the ox, and every animal. There remains, then, active life of the element that has a rational principle; of this, one part has such a principle in the sense of being obedient to one, the other in the sense of possessing one and exercising thought. And, as ‘life of the rational element’ also has two meanings, we must state that life in the sense of activity is what we mean; for this seems to be the more proper sense of the term. Now if the function of man is an activity of soul which follows or implies a rational principle, and if we say ‘so-and-so-and ‘a good so-and-so’ have a function which is the same in kind, e.g. a lyre, and a good lyre-player, and so without qualification in all cases, eminence in respect of goodness being added to the name of the function (for the function of a lyre-player is to play the lyre, and that of a good lyre-player is to do so well): if this is the case, and we state the function of man to be a certain kind of life, and this to be an activity or actions of the soul implying a rational principle, and the function of a good man to be the good and noble performance of these, and if any action is well performed when it is performed in accordance with the appropriate excellence: if this is the case, human good turns out to be an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue, and if there are more than one virtue, in accordance with the best and most complete. ( NE Bk. 1, Ch 7)
Write a paper that compares Sebastian Maniscalco with Aristophanes (clouds) using the theories from the previous weeks. Your hypothesis is either way “Comedy (did not) change”… Do not use wikipedia.
I need a 1500-word essay on the above subject. Including primary sources and secondary sources for quotes. Would this be possible? In Chicago full note footnoting
and can I send in my notes to help or not?
Write a paper that compares Georges Carlin with Aristophanes (clouds) using the theories from the previous weeks. The easiest way is to compare Carlin with Aristophanes, as they have both cheesy puns. Your hypothesis is either way “Comedy (did not) change”… Do not use wikipedia.