Philosophy homework help
Directions: The essay has two prompts. You must answer both prompts fully. Submit a 6-page paper (1450-word count, 12-inch font, double spaced, 1- inch margins – no more than 7 pages) addressing both prompts. Utilize the reading materials and class discussions. Demonstrate that you understand the arguments presented by the authors. Throughout your paper, cite your sources systematically. Be mindful of the following: There is no need to plagiarize. You are capable of completing the assignment without plagiarizing. However, if you do plagiarize, you will receive a zero. Suppress the inclination to google fish. Exercise your ability to think about the subject matter.
To receive full credit: ▪Both prompts addressed ▪ Clearly stated the answer to the problem/question ▪ Clearly laid out arguments of the authors ▪ Applicable concepts indicated and explained in own words ▪ Evidence from texts cited properly ▪ Minor errors with grammar and punctuation ▪ Cogent conclusion provided
As you write your paper, pose the following questions: ▪ Did I clearly lay out the arguments? ▪ Have I shown the way(s) they function and relate to the topic under examination? ▪ Have I strayed from the problem/question? ▪ Have I cited the sources systematically within my paper (author, text title, and page number)?
Prompt 1 – Violence: Analysis and Comparison What is the problem? The world is saturated with violence. Angela Davis and Michael Fleming discuss the nature of violence. In your own words, explain the scope of their discussions, the ways in which their arguments are similar and/or different and the impact of their arguments upon your understanding of violence. *As signposts to help you develop your analysis and comparative framework, think through and include the following: a) Clearly lay out the arguments of Davis and Fleming separately b) What are the reasons for their claims? c) Are their arguments similar? If yes, how so – specifically? If no, how? d) Are their arguments different? If yes, how so – specifically? If no, how? e) Given the scale of violence, what does each author say about a solution (or lack of a solution) to the problem? f) If a solution was presented, what is it? Why is it viable? If the author indicated that there is no solution to the problem of violence, what is the ground for her/his assertion? g) What contemporary examples can you draw from to highlight their viewpoints about the problem?
Prompt 2 – Death, Dying and Living: Analysis and Comparison What is the problem? Death awaits everyone. Bob Plant and Claire Wineland discuss the nature of death. In your own words, explain the scope of their discussions, the ways in which their arguments are similar and/or different and the impact of their arguments upon your understanding of death and dying. *As signpoststo help you develop your analysis and comparative framework, think through and include the following: a) Clearly lay out Plant’s arguments about the problem he intends to address b) What does Plant mean by the banality of death? Why does he think ‘this’ distinction is key to talking about death? c) What does Wineland say about death and dying? How does she support her articulations? d) Although Plant and Wineland base their views from different stances, do they have similar viewpoints? If yes, what are they specifically? If no, how are the perspectives different? e) Given the inevitability and imminence of death, what does each say about living/life? Why is this important to grasping the nature of death and dying? f) What contemporary examples can you draw from to highlight their viewpoints about the problem?
To receive full credit: ▪Both prompts addressed ▪ Clearly stated the answer to the problem/question ▪ Clearly laid out arguments of the authors ▪ Applicable concepts indicated and explained in own words ▪ Evidence from texts cited properly ▪ Minor errors with grammar and punctuation ▪ Cogent conclusion provided
As you write your paper, pose the following questions: ▪ Did I clearly lay out the arguments? ▪ Have I shown the way(s) they function and relate to the topic under examination? ▪ Have I strayed from the problem/question? ▪ Have I cited the sources systematically within my paper (author, text title, and page number)?
Prompt 1 – Violence: Analysis and Comparison What is the problem? The world is saturated with violence. Angela Davis and Michael Fleming discuss the nature of violence. In your own words, explain the scope of their discussions, the ways in which their arguments are similar and/or different and the impact of their arguments upon your understanding of violence. *As signposts to help you develop your analysis and comparative framework, think through and include the following: a) Clearly lay out the arguments of Davis and Fleming separately b) What are the reasons for their claims? c) Are their arguments similar? If yes, how so – specifically? If no, how? d) Are their arguments different? If yes, how so – specifically? If no, how? e) Given the scale of violence, what does each author say about a solution (or lack of a solution) to the problem? f) If a solution was presented, what is it? Why is it viable? If the author indicated that there is no solution to the problem of violence, what is the ground for her/his assertion? g) What contemporary examples can you draw from to highlight their viewpoints about the problem?
Prompt 2 – Death, Dying and Living: Analysis and Comparison What is the problem? Death awaits everyone. Bob Plant and Claire Wineland discuss the nature of death. In your own words, explain the scope of their discussions, the ways in which their arguments are similar and/or different and the impact of their arguments upon your understanding of death and dying. *As signpoststo help you develop your analysis and comparative framework, think through and include the following: a) Clearly lay out Plant’s arguments about the problem he intends to address b) What does Plant mean by the banality of death? Why does he think ‘this’ distinction is key to talking about death? c) What does Wineland say about death and dying? How does she support her articulations? d) Although Plant and Wineland base their views from different stances, do they have similar viewpoints? If yes, what are they specifically? If no, how are the perspectives different? e) Given the inevitability and imminence of death, what does each say about living/life? Why is this important to grasping the nature of death and dying? f) What contemporary examples can you draw from to highlight their viewpoints about the problem?
Talk to us support@bestqualitywriters.com