I need help with a Philosophy question. All explanations and answers will be used to help me learn.
Select one of the prompts listed below and construct a thoughtful, well-reasoned analysis of the issue.
1. What is the value of philosophy?
In the United States of America many philosophy programs (and humanities programs more broadly) have seen their funding cut because it is not perceived to provide any concrete value. Drawing on specific points from the course readings, construct an argument defending the value of philosophy. (If you choose this option, please be sure to be specific – that means avoiding platitudes such as, “philosophy makes people critical thinkers,” without offering specific ways in which that happens).
2. Evaluate an argument from the media (speech, article, op-ed, documentary)
Choose a speech or article on a sociopolitical topic, and then analyze and evaluate the argument being made according to the principles outlined in your Critical Thinking module. This means doing the following:
- Find an argument in media
- Summarize the argument being made – what is their thesis (the point they’re making)?
- State and explain the reasons provided in defense of the position
- Identify any fallacies being committed
- Give you overall assessment of the position
(For #2, there is no requirement regarding the topic being discussed; the only requirement is that the source (article, speech, campaign commercial, etc.) is making an argument, which therefore allows you to analyze and evaluate that argument)
3. What are the Forms and how does Aristotle critique the theory of the Forms?
Plato famously set forth his theory of the Forms when attempting to explain the nature of both reality and knowledge. Integrating evidence from the course content, provide a detailed account of what the Forms are, what purpose they serve, and why Plato placed such a high value on them. Then, provide a detailed account of how and why Aristotle critiqued the theory of the Forms.
4. Is there sufficient evidence to prove God’s existence?
Since the inception of philosophy, philosophers have spent a considerable amount of time thinking about God/the Gods, and whether we can know anything about It/Them. During the middle ages, this occupied a central place in the philosophical tradition, as philosophers explored the question of whether there is sufficient evidence to prove the existence of God. To explore this question, some thinkers constructed deductive arguments, others attempted inductive arguments; in response, others adopted a more skeptical outlook, claiming belief requires a “leap of faith;” and, of course, others challenged the existence of God by referring to what they thought to be various contradictions of creation, such as the problem of evil. Referring to the content covered in your learning module, construct an argument in response to the question: Is there sufficient evidence to prove God’s existence?
5. Who offers a more accurate theory regarding how human knowledge is acquired, the rationalists or the empiricists?
In your learning module on Rationalism and Empiricism, you were given the chance to explore one of the most contentious philosophical debates of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment periods in the Western tradition. Recognizing that neither theory is conclusive regarding the question of how we acquire knowledge, construct an argument in favor of either rationalism or empiricism. To do this you’ll have to state and explain the main reasons provided in defense of each theory, incorporating some of the key thinkers and ideas into your paper. Additionally, you will have to construct an argument defending which of the two theories provides better reasons.
6. How does Kant attempt to resolve the rationalist-empiricist debate?
Upon reading David Hume, Immanuel Kant famously declared, “Hume awoke me from my dogmatic slumber,” and from that point on he set out to address the problems posed by Hume’s skepticism. Specifically, Kant sought to resolve the rationalist-empiricist debate by combining certain elements of each. Incorporating evidence from the readings, explain in your own words how Kant attempts to resolve this debate through the concept of “synthetic a priori faculties.”
Length: 750 – 1,000 words (this should amount to roughly 3-4 pages, double-spaced, Time New Roman font, with 1-inch margins)
Format: MLA or APA (I am familiar with both, so either is fine; for whichever you choose, be sure to maintain consistency and accuracy in abiding by the standards)
Sources: Papers must include at least 3 academic sources
In-Text Quotations: Your paper must include at least 3 quotations from either your module readings or from other academic sources