Category: Philosophy

Read and consider the two philosophical passages below. Gloria Jean Watkins, better known by her pen name bell hooks, was an American author, theorist, educator, and social critic who was a distinguished professor in residence at Berea College.

After reading the following two passages, complete your journal entry by reflecting upon and discussing the questions that follow.

Passage one by hooks (1999):

It is no accident that when we first learn about justice and fair play as children it is usually in a context where the issue is one of telling the truth. The heart of justice is truth telling, seeing ourselves and the world the way it is rather than the way we want it to be. In recent years sociologists and psychologists have documented the fact that we live in a nation where people are lying more and more each day.

Passage two by hooks (2006):

Without an ethic of love shaping the direction of our political vision and our radical aspirations, we are often seduced, in one way or the other, into continued allegiance to systems of dominationimperialism, sexism, racism, classism. It has always puzzled me that women and men who spend a lifetime working to resist and oppose one form of domination can be systematically supporting another. I have been puzzled by powerful visionary black male leaders who can speak and act passionately in resistance to racial domination and accept and embrace sexist domination of women, by feminist white women who work daily to eradicate sexism but who have major blind spots when it comes to acknowledging and resisting racism and white supremacist domination of the planet. Critically examining these blind spots, I conclude that many of us are motivated to move against domination solely when we feel our self-interest directly threatened . . . If we are only committed to an improvement in that politic of domination that we feel leads directly to our individual exploitation or oppression, we not only remain attached to the status quo but act in complicity with it, nurturing and maintaining those very systems of domination. Until we are all able to accept the interlocking, interdependent nature of systems of domination and recognize specific ways each system is maintained, we will continue to act in ways that undermine our individual quest for freedom and our collective liberation struggle.

Answer each of the questions below, supporting your answers by providing details.

• Discuss how truth-telling connects to your own life. Consider personal beliefs or values, past experiences with truth, lies, misinformation, and examples from this course.
• Explain the claim presented about justice and evaluate its reasoning. Then review your own reasoning and critically examine possible influences on your beliefs.
• Does the pursuit of truth relate to a moral life? Does it relate to creating a fair and just society? Explain your answers. How do you see your own personal responsibility in these matters?

The focus of this discussion is misinformation. Ensure you have read the textbook and the other required readings for this module.

In your initial post, locate online content that qualifies as misinformation and provide a link to it. Select content that is not behind a paywall. Address the following prompts:

• Explain the nature of the content and how it contributes to misinformation in terms of it containing misinformation, promoting unfounded conspiracy theories, or promoting hate and violence.
• What are some of the claims in the article or post that can be proven to be false by consulting credible sources? Quote at least one claim from your source that can be proven to be false.
• Provide a second link to a credible source (using the criteria covered in Module Three) on the issue under question in the first link.
• Finally, offer your best critical thinking and reflection on how examples like this might impact public discourse and society.

This is philosophy based rest if u need help please ask me.

Write a precis. A precis is a short description of a reading assignment, much like a book report. It should not contain any interpretation, examples, or objections. It should be limited simply to outlining the positions and arguments as they are found in the reading. Precis should be between 250-300 words (about a page), and should be typed, double spaced, 12pt font, or equivalent. To earn credit, it should be related to the chapter that we read for that module , and turned in during the week that we discuss and cover that chapter in class. It is of no value to write a precis after we have talked about it in class, so late precis will not be accepted for credit. As always your precis should focus on the critical thinking topics from the chapter and not the example essays in the chapter..

A precis should never directly quote any author, or any part of the text. Instead, summarize the main points, and cite your sources. Any precis that includes a direct quote from any author, either attributed or unattributed, will receive no credit.

Reading below

Hide Assignment Information

TurnitinTM

This assignment will be submitted to TurnitinTM.Instructions

and discuss his perspective on free will. Do we have the freedom to act as we please, or are our actions determined by the reinforcements (rewards and punishments) that we have received throughout our lifetimes?

He claims that we believe in free will because we don’t know the actual causes (i.e., reinforcements) of our behavior. In what ways might Pavlov and Bandura agree or disagree with Skinner’s claim?

Do you think that free will exists? If so, is it only because we don’t yet know all the factors that determine what we do? Be sure to discuss the types of reinforcements in your minimum 300-word response.

• answer questions
• What do you think has shaped your personal code of ethics?
• What do you think shapes most peoples’ codes of ethics?
• What kind of moral compass do you think is necessary for your a psychological career path
• How are ethical decisions made similarily and differently when we compare the macro (historical, social), meso (organizational, professional), and micro (individual) levels?

Please follow the Essay Checklist and Essay Topic and Instructions PDFs and the readings Ive uploaded. The essay should be written with the rubric/marking requirements in mind, since thats what it will be graded on.

Make sure the paper:

• Is clearly argumentative (not just a summary)
• Has an explicit thesis in the introduction
• Accurately uses the required readings
• Addresses all the criteria outlined in the instructions

Please stick closely to whats outlined in the provided documents.

let me know if you need any other additional info and thank you 🙂

Is it morally permissible to believe in God just because it is to your practical advantage to believe? Why or why not? Use the material in Vaughn’s book to help you explain how Pascal argues for belief in God. Explain the strengths and weaknesses of other thinkers have identified in his reasoning.

What does the argument against believing in God without sufficient evidence look like? Is it plausible that God would look kindly on atheists and agnostics to because they refuse to believe without evidence? After all, aren’t they simply using God’s gift of reason to arrive at their decision?

This assignment will be submitted to TurnitinTM.Instructions

(feel free to watch the rest of the talk, but it’s not required). How does this affect your view of the accuracy of memory? What are the implications for you personally and for society? Using concepts and strategies from this week’s module reading and lecture, name a way you can and will safeguard your memories.

Responses should be a minimum of 300 words and include:

1. Your personal answers to the prompt
2. Connection of your personal conclusions to the course content
3. Citations in APA format

This assignment follows the AI-P (AI Proofreading) designation. For more information, see the Acceptable & Unacceptable AI Use for Psychology Students located in the syllabus module.

1. How can fallacies affect an argument? Provide at least one specific example of a fallacy in your response.