Philosophy paper

Anonymous
timer Asked: Dec 12th, 2018
account_balance_wallet $35

Question description

Paper Prompts (Choose ONE of the below prompts to respond to)

  • Was Robert Harris Morally Responsible for the murders of the two teenage boys?
  • It turns out that, instead of a brain, your parent (or guardian) has a complicated computer built from transistors, circuits, and so on. The inner workings of their computer “brain” are functionally indistinguishable from the workings of a normal human brain (leading to behaviorally indistinguishable external behavior). Does your parent or guardian have a mind?
  • Consider this slight modification to The Trolley Problem: the trolley is heading down the track towards five people who will be killed by it. Again, you are standing by a lever that, if flipped, will switch the trolley to an alternate track where there is one person who will be killed by the trolley. However, in this version, the track that the one person is on loops back around to the track where the five people are. If the trolley hits the one person, it will stop (and the five people will be safe). Basically, like before, throwing the switch will result in the one person's death, and the five will be saved, but in this case, the one person's body (and thus their death) is required to save the five. Is it morally permissible to throw the switch?
  • Consider the following conversation:A: I'm an atheist.B: Interesting. Why is that?A: There's no evidence for God's existence.B: Is the absence of evidence for God's existence a reason to think that he doesn't exist? Shouldn't you just be on the fence in that case -- i.e., an agnostic?A: Well, actually, not only do I lack evidence for God's existence, I think there are a lot of things in the world that don't make sense if God exists -- like suffering, to pick just one example. Various things are best explained by God's non-existence.B: I see it the other way around: there seem to be more things in the world that are best explained by the existence of God -- fine-tuning, to pick one example.Pick a side from the above conversation and defend the position.

Paper Elements

  1. An introduction
  2. A valid argument
  3. A defense of each individual premise of that argument
  4. Two distinct (and well developed) objections to the argument and a (well developed) response to each objection
  5. A conclusion

Miscellaneous Content Issues

I am not looking for a summary of the relevant literature. The argument you present in this paper should be your own. What do YOU think about the above questions? However, in your paper, you should be critically engaging with our class material, whether in the course of defending your argument, or in the course of developing and responding to objections. You will not be able to earn a good grade on this assignment if you ignore our class material.

For this assignment, ditch the snazzy headings I’ve asked you to do in your CAs. Not much will change with respect to content as a result of this, except that I now expect you to include more explicit transition elements between the sections of your paper. Explain to the reader what you’ve just established. Explain to the reader what you’re about to do.

I expect inline citations throughout the paper, and a bibliography at the end. Note that citations aren’t just for direct quotes. If you’ve just articulated someone’s position, explained an example they use, etc., you should include a citation. I don’t care which format style you use (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.), just pick one and be consistent.

Miscellaneous Format Issues

Font size: 10-12
Font: Something legible
Spacing: Double spaced
Citations: Inline Citations & Bibliography

Length: 1800-2300 Words

Date Content HW Due Assigned Reading Suggestions Russell, “The Value of Philosophy” Examined Life: Cornel West Barker, “Improving Your Thinking” & Aikin & Talisse, “Pushover Arguments” Logical Fallacies Hempel, “Scientific Inquiry” Crash Course: Science and Pseudoscience September 5th September 7th September 10th September 12th September 14th Introduction to Philosophy and Philosophical Methodology “What is philosophy and why should I care about it?” “How do I think clearly about difficult problems?” Wi-Phi: Deductive Arguments & Implicit Premises September 17th September 19th Collingwood, “Philosophy as a Branch of Literature” (L@UW) Descartes, “Meditations on First Philosophy: First Meditation” Descartes, “Meditations on First Philosophy: Second Meditation” Locke, “An Essay Concerning Human Understanding” September 21st September 24 th September 26th September 28th Epistemology “What is knowledge?” “What can we know and how can we know it?” October 1st CA1 October 3rd October 5th Philosophy of Mind October 8th “What is the mind? Is the mind a physical thing?” October 10th “What kinds of things have minds? Could a robot have a mind?” October 12th Blackburn, “The World” (L@UW) Wi-Phi: Theory of Knowledge & The Value of Knowledge Crash Course: Cartesian Skepticism Crash Course: Empiricism Radiolab: Colors Smullyen, “An Epistemological Nightmare” (L@UW) Descartes, “Meditations on First Philosophy: Sixth Meditation” (L@UW) Ryle, “The Ghost in the Machine” Churchland, “The MindBody Problem” Philosophy Bites: David Papineau on Physicalism Turing, “Computing Machinery and Intelligence” Radiolab: The Turing Problem October 15th Searle, “Do Computers Think?” They’re Made out of Meat October 17th Nagel, “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?” & Chalmers on Consciousness Philosophy Bites: Tim Crane on Mind and Body October 19th Freedom of the Will and Moral Responsibility Nagel, “Free will” Waking Life: Free Will October 22nd “What is free will?” Stace, “Free Will and Determinism” Crash Course: Compatibilism October 24th “Can our actions be free if all events are predetermined?” October 26th “Can we ever hold people morally responsible for their actions?” CA2 Strawson, “Luck Swallows Everything” (L@UW) Applies Ethics Thomson, “A Defense of Abortion” Duties to Unborn Humans November 2nd Crash Course: Moral Luck & The Atlantic: Why Luck Matters Radiolab: Forget About Blame & Philosophy Bites: Gregg Caruso on Free Will October 29th October 31st Frankfurt, “The Principle of Alternative Possibilities” Thomson, “A Defense of Abortion” “Is abortion morally permissible? When is a killing unjust?” Duties to Non-Human Animals Marquis, “Why Abortion is Immoral” November 7th “Is it morally permissible to eat met?” Norcross, “Puppies, Pigs, and People” (L@UW) Crash Course: NonHuman Animals November 9th Duties to Distant Humans Singer, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” Examined Life: Peter Singer November 12th “Do we have any obligations to strangers?” Arthur, “The Case Against Singer” Crash Course: Poverty & Our Response To It Anselm and Gaunilo, “The Ontological Argument” Crash Course: Anselm White, “Argument from Cosmological Fine Tuning” & Paley, “Natural Theology” WiPhi – Cosmological Argument: Part 1 & Part 2 McCord Adams, “The Problem of Hell” Crash Course: The Problem of Evil November 5th November 14th November 16th November 19th November 21 st November 23rd November 26th Philosophy of Religion “Does God exist?” “How can God be all good and yet allow such evil in the world?” “What is the relationship between God and Morality?” CA3 Swinburne, “Why God Allows Evil” THANKSGIVING Rachels, “Must God’s Commands Conform to Moral Standards?”(L@UW) Crash Course: Divine Command Theory November 28th Shafer-Landau, “Ethical Relativism” (L@UW) th Vitrano, “Happiness and Morality” & Nagel, “The Objective Basis of Morality” (L@UW) November 30 December 3rd Meta and Normative Ethics “Is morality objective?” “Why should I be moral?” December 5 th December 7th “Who or what determines what is right and what is wrong?” Mill, “Utilitarianism” Wi-Phi – Utilitarianism: Part 1 & Part 2 Pojman, “Assessing Utilitarianism” SMBC: Utility Monster Kant, “Groundwork of the Metaphysis of Morals” December 10th O’Neill, “Kant’s Ethics” December 12th Sartre, “Existentialism” David Foster Wallace: This is Water FINAL PAPERS DUE ON LEARN@UW BY 11:59PM ON DECEMBER 17TH

Tutor Answer

DrAtticus
School: Carnegie Mellon University

I sent the wrong file, kindly find the correct one

Running head: OPPOSING ATHEIST VIEW THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST

Opposing an Atheist view that God does not exist
Student’s Name
Institution Affiliation

1

OPPOSING ATHEIST VIEW THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST

2

God exists and Atheism is unfounded and a mockery to religious beliefs
I support the believer in this conversation since am a Christian and Christianity teaches us
to believe in God’s existence. An atheist does not believe in the fact that God exists. People
suffer because of original sin, and any form of suffering cannot justify that He does not exist.
The blessings people receive come from God and the evidence of fine-tuning explains His
presence (Cahn, 2015). An atheist support religion without God, which is morally and spiritually
wrong as per Christians. The evidence of some atheists opposing their pat believes and
converting to be atheists is as after realization that supreme deities exist and need to be
worshipped.
In most of the countries in the world, the constitution provides for the freedom of
worship and people cannot be forced to invent deities for them to have a deeper impulse needed
in religious attitude. However, Christians make the right choices of worshipping God and
reading the Bible to increase religious experience in their lives (Cahn, 2015). The course
readings explain the problem of evil and help many students who doubt the existence of God to
realize that the presence of evil is a way of testing the faith of believers. The concept of God
should be introduced to children in their early age to avoid growing as atheists. Most atheists
describe religion as an interpretive concept but liberty endorsed in religion help youths to act as
responsible individuals in the future. Therefore, the paper argues on the existence of God and
opposes the atheists’ views.
A Valid Argument
It is true that God exists and atheists should convert to start worshipping God. He adds
value to the universe, and the help of God can only improve human life. The religious attitude
adopted by Christians help explain the transcendental beauty in the world; hence, no form of

OPPOSING ATHEIST VIEW THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST

3

suffering should make human beings think that God does not exist. God created the universe and
atheists who argue no evidence for his existence do so for their self-contradiction. Through
creation, God has fully revealed himself to humanity and should be respected by all human
beings. An atheist should recognize the Bible as God's word and the claim that human beings
evolved but not created is an attempt to deny the existence of God. In the conversation, the
atheist should know that the Bible has no mistakes and contains an inspirational message that has
no faultless. Bible is infallible and am in support of the believer who supports the existence of
God because atheist's claims are biased because God does not exist, there could be no universe
(Cahn, 2015).
Atheists easily change what they believe in consideration of the existence of God, and
this is different from atheism who have complex conversions and never doubt His existence.
Christians can easily defeat an atheist when they argue on the existence of God because the Bible
instructs them to be truthful and faithful in their day-to-day lives. It is rare to find atheism having
fake claims on the existence of God (Cahn, 2015). Some people who converted from being
atheists have deistic belief in God and in their ideas they know that He is an impersonal being
who has unforeseen horizons to be recognized by all human beings. In every religion, there are
unique combinations of factors that make believers direct their faith to God, and this makes the
atheist wrong in the claim that God does not exist. All atheists change their beliefs towards God
because they lack good literature and reasoning power to help them recognize His existence. For
instance, reasonable atheists later become honest, believe in God after realizing their life path is
inappropriate, and will eventually influence them to commit evil in the society.
Atheists after referring to philosophical quotes and religious literature become unhappy
of their experiences. The writings of believers help atheists to recognize God and end up being

OPPOSING ATHEIST VIEW THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST

4

baptized to become Christians. Christianity becomes sensible to atheists whenever intelligent
Christian writers become conceptualized in atheists' minds. If atheists interact with literature
from men and women with deep Christian faith, they could change their perspectives on the
existence of God and agree that faith in Him results in radical changes in human life. The best
way to come up with a reasoned approach concerning God’s existence is to refer to the Bible
regularly and ensure as an atheist the truth of God’s existence is explained and demonstrated in
individuals’ deeds (Cahn, 2015).
The argument by the non-believer in the conversation on the existence of God reveals
that he lacks experimentation with God's wor...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Posted this and got four bids within 15 minutes. Clearly lots of tutors on the platform, quality was pretty legit too.

Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors