Two Trajectories of Changes of the Foreseen World Discussion
Order ID 53003233773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Two Trajectories of Changes of the Foreseen World Discussion
Description
Instructions for the Inquiry Discussion
NOTE: These instructions are the same as for Week 04 but the Inquiry prompts and terms of art (below) are of course different.
This is an inquiry discussion. What I’m looking for is a series of posts, including replies to others, that show how your understanding of the prompt (several are given below), and your answer to
it, has deepened or changed as a result of your interaction with what others in class have written. It’s likely you’ve never had such a discussion assignment before.
Make your response to one of the prompts about 100 words, and at least one reply to another post also around 100 words. But I’m not counting words. I’m looking for interaction.
Minimum Requirement: Two Posts
At the very least you need to make two posts: (a) A response to one of the inquiry questions and (b) a reply to another post (one which is about the same prompt you’ve chosen) either
explaining how what is written has deepened or changed your original response or asking questions or adding your thoughts to help deepen or change the view of the writer.
The goal through this series of interactions is to
- clarify what the prompt means,
- define key terms in your own words,
- express your tentative “answer,”
- question your own thinking, and
- show how you’ve learned from others in deepening or changing your views.
Do Not Use Outside Research Materials
Because of the nature of this inquiry, DO NOT use outside research materials. We’re using certain key words in special ways and outside research would just be confusing; and if the material
in Common Sense Logic, and Professor Machuga’s lectures, is unclear, the goal is to learn from others to better understand the question and formulate an answer.
How to Proceed
You don’t need to agree with each other. Feel free to ask for help in understanding, but try to say in the post what you think is going on. Don’t just say “I don’t understand any of this. Help!”
Instead, say “I don’t understand any of this. Help! I’m confused because I don’t see any difference between ‘property’ and ‘essence.’ Don’t they both apply to every member of the group?”
Once you are satisfied with your understanding and answer, you’re done. But I hope you’ll be intrigued enough throughout the week to check back in and see if you can learn even more. If so,
make another post, a reply to someone who has helped you deepen or even change your views. The idea is to refine your views as you learn from others (or explain why you’re not persuaded by
what others have said).
Think of this as a dinner conversation around a BIG table in which everyone is respected, listened to, and responded to with the overall intention of making everyone’s thinking better.
When that happens, you’ll be talking like a philosopher and thinking like a philosopher.
Grading
My holistic grading will focus on the learning process expressed in your posts. If you just post a response to one of the prompts, and reply to another that you agree with that person, that’s not
much of an interaction. On the other hand, if you post a response, then get a new perspective from another post, you can reply that you appreciate the new perspective, and say what your
revised answer is.
Here’s an example: Sample Prompt: “Common Sense Logic begins with the claim that ‘Logic books are not philosophically neutral.’ What does that claim mean? Is it likely true or not? Why would that be important to know?”
Student response to prompt: “I think this means that instructors who write logic books, just like other textbooks, all have personal preferences. While that makes sense, I don’t see how that enters into writing a textbook. I took a political science class and even at the end of the semester I couldn’t tell whether my professor was a Republican, Democrat, or something else. It’s the same for textbooks. Those who write them can keep their views out of the book. And isn’t logic like math? I mean, 2+2=4 for Democrats as well as Republicans. So I don’t think the claim is true, and we can have pretty good confidence that our textbooks are pretty neutral.”
Reply (to another post): “Wow. I didn’t think about how materials in textbooks are selected. It can depend on what the writers think is important, and that in turn depends on their own viewpoints. So while materials in a book can be considered in a neutral fashion, what goes into the book in the first place may show some of the biases of the writers.”
Reply (to a second post): “OK, I think I’m ready to change my view. Thank you for helping me see that what Common Sense Logic calls a ‘view from nowhere’ isn’t possible. Even logic books make assumptions about whether logic actually expresses something about reality or whether logic is a made-up mathematical system. Whether there are real truths out there that we can discover is just one of a number of philosophical viewpoints, some of which reject the very idea of truth. Even books that claim to be ‘neutral,’ that give the impression that this is ‘how it is,’ can introduce controversial points of view that we wouldn’t know are controversial (because we’re just starting to learn philosophy). My view is now that we really should be told where a book, even a logic book, is ‘coming from.’”
Terms of Art
You may need to define some of these terms or phrases in your own words during the course of your Inquiry. Some are specialized words and others are common words used in specialized ways.
knowledge as “justified (or justifiable) true belief”; the Divided Line; realm of perceptibles; realm of concepts; “fleeting feelings”; “well-verified observations”; “reasoned conclusions”; “full understanding”; chiliagon; dialectic vs. debate; “saving the appearances”; comprehensive; consistent; coherent; “the cave.”
List of Prompts or Inquiries
IMPORTANT! PLEASE PUT THE INQUIRY NUMBER AT THE START OF EACH RESPONSE OR REPLY YOU POST. THAT WILL ENABLE OTHERS TO FIND THE POSTS THEY’RE LOOKING FOR.
- If several have chosen Inquiry #2, for example, try to choose a different one; or if no one has written on the prompt you’ve chosen, you may want to switch to a different one. The point is not how hard or easy it seems, but whether you are learning to talk and think like a philosopher. But if you DO choose a different prompt, be sure to provide an in-depth reply to someone else writing on the SAME prompt you’ve chosen!
INQUIRIES
#1 – In the “Divided Line,” where do you think Plato would put the Aristotelian Square of Opposition? Why do you think this?
#2 – In “The Allegory of the Cave,” Socrates the philosopher makes the common observation that our physical eyes are “confused” when we go from a dark cave to blazing sunlight. He says the same is true of what he calls the “mind’s eye” (that is, our ability to think conceptually). Why are our minds “confused” when we go from the world of changing images to the unchanging world of concepts?
#3 – According to Plato’s “Dialectic,” why does “dialectical justification” take so long? You may want to contrast the goal of dialectic with the goal of a debate.
Two Trajectories of Changes of the Foreseen World Discussion
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper.
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://gradebasket.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!