Watch Rebecca Onie: What if our healthcare system kept us healthy?
User Generated
xryyf482
Humanities
Description
- What are the major current healthcare issues and policies (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - 2010)?
- How do you feel about the new health care policy?
- What, if anything, has changed or is changing, and how does it affect you personally?
- What were your thoughts prior to this week’s readings?
- How has your perspective been either reinforced or changed now that you are more informed?
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.
This question has not been answered.
Create a free account to get help with this and any other question!
24/7 Homework Help
Stuck on a homework question? Our verified tutors can answer all questions, from basic math to advanced rocket science!
Most Popular Content
4 pages
Correspondence Analysis
The format of the memo is excellent. The memo has clearly indicated the sender, intended recipient, and date. The title ha ...
Correspondence Analysis
The format of the memo is excellent. The memo has clearly indicated the sender, intended recipient, and date. The title has been indicated. The body ...
Literature Review Qualitative Research Data Collection & Analysis Help
Discussion: Literature Search, Part IIIn this Discussion, you will conduct a literature review of your topic area, focusin ...
Literature Review Qualitative Research Data Collection & Analysis Help
Discussion: Literature Search, Part IIIn this Discussion, you will conduct a literature review of your topic area, focusing on a research study that uses one of the qualitative approaches covered this week.To prepare for this Discussion:Review the reading materials about the different approaches in this week’s Learning Resources.Conduct your own literature search to find a published study that represents one of the Week 3 approaches. Remember, you may have to broaden your search terms to find an appropriate study.Review the following resources before proceeding with your own article reviewDocument: R8360 Guidelines for Reading and Evaluating Qualitative Research Articles (PDF)Document: Example of How to Read and Evaluate a Qualitative Research Article (PDF)By Day 3Contribute a 3-paragraph Discussion post in which you respond to the following:Summarize the characteristics of the approach of the research article you chose during your literature search.Summarize the research article, including the citation and sufficient information for your classmates and Instructor to locate the article.Present a short critique of that article based on the “R8360 Guidelines for Reading and Evaluating Qualitative Research Articles” document.
PHI 2604 Miami Dade Utilitarianism and Its Applications Argumentative Essay
Write a one-paragraph essay arguing what should be done about Living Wage according to one of the six theories. Make sure ...
PHI 2604 Miami Dade Utilitarianism and Its Applications Argumentative Essay
Write a one-paragraph essay arguing what should be done about Living Wage according to one of the six theories. Make sure to respond to the author's arguments, whether the theory you are using agrees with them or not. Remember, briefly describe the issue, the theory, and what the theory would say about the issue and why.
Southern New Hampshire University Policy Analysis and Application Peer Responses
By Day 5Read a selection of your colleagues' posts.Respond to at least two colleagues by explaining the various costs you ...
Southern New Hampshire University Policy Analysis and Application Peer Responses
By Day 5Read a selection of your colleagues' posts.Respond to at least two colleagues by explaining the various costs you think will be associated with their suggested policy changes. Then, explain whether a consideration of cost when adopting a policy or program contradicts the social workers’ code of ethics.Support your response with specific references to the resources. Be sure to provide full APA citations for your references.Colleague 1: Ieshia Post an explanation of one change you might make to the policies that affect the client in the case. Be sure to reference the case you selected in your post.In the Case of Rita, she is a 22 young Latino woman who was assaulted by a coworker. After her assault she went through a varies of emotions such as guilt, shame, emotional shock, powerlessness, anxiety, fear anger and doubting her judgement (Plummer, Makris, & Brocksen, 2014). Due to all these emotions she didn’t want to file a report. In the state she resides in a victim of sexual assault has 90 days to file a report or the forensic kit will be destroyed. The first change I would make is keeping the forensic kit active until after a client receives therapy and is ready to decide. So many victims of sexual assault blame themselves for it happening and don’t want to file a report. Rita received therapy for 6 months and “after the 5th month, Rita felt strong enough to disclose to her family and file a report with the police” (Plummer, Makris, & Brocksen, p. 65, 2014).Finally, explain how you might evaluate the success of the policy changes.I believe that this policy change will benefit a lot of individuals. 90 days is not enough time for a person to process the event and work through the trauma. Without receiving counseling, a lot of victims of sexual assault fall into a depression that hinders them for making smart decisions. I would evaluate this policy change by assessing the sexual assault victims after receiving therapy. This assessment will help me to gain their perspective of this journey and gain any input they may have with the policy change.ReferencePlummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen, S. M. (Eds.). (2014). Social work case studies:Foundation year. Baltimore: MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing.Colleague 2: Nicole Provide an explanation of one change you might make to the policies that affect the client in the case. A policy I would change in the case of Rita is the 90-day hold policy for the sexual assault forensic evidence. This impacts many survivors of sexual assault and rape. As a social worker working alongside a victim, as the case with Rita, it can be a long journey. Goals can be set, however, each individual responds to the trauma differently. Often times social workers and therapists' treatment involves crisis intervention and stabilization, along with emotional support and validation surrounding their experience. Often times this type of trauma can cause acute stress, guilt, shame, emotional shock, powerlessness, anxiety, fear, anger, and doubting her judgment. This can take time. Explain how you might evaluate the success of the policy changes.I think that specifically in Rita's case and state that she resides in they should do away with the 90-day policy. Instead, follow the same policy and guidelines affiliated with their no statute of limitations in actually reporting sexual assault. The policies should coincide with one another. This would give victims more time to process their trauma and decide what they want to do from a legal standpoint once they have begun the recovery process in a therapeutic setting. Then the forensic evidence that was collected in the rape kit, would still be available for use when the victim is ready to peruse it from a legal standpoint. References:Plummer, S., Makris, S., Brocksen, S. M. (2013-10-21). Social Work Case Studies: Foundation Year. [[VitalSource Bookshelf version]]. Retrieved from vbk://9781624580062
University of California Davis Rene Descartes and The Cogito Discussion
How does Descartes reach the conclusion that “I am, I exist” is necessarily true every time he utters it or conceives ...
University of California Davis Rene Descartes and The Cogito Discussion
How does Descartes reach the conclusion that “I am, I exist” is necessarily true every time he utters it or conceives it? (1 point)What does Descartes determine that he is? How does he reach this conclusion? (2 points)Summarize the wax example, emphasizing the points by which Descartes reaches the conclusion that the wax is perceived “through the mind alone.” What does the wax example ultimately show? (2 pointsMeditation Two: The CogitoDescartes opens Meditation Two by reflecting on how disorienting the doubts of Meditation One have been – something we can relate to if we have been following closely so far! But, he says, there is hope that his project can succeed if he can find “just one thing, however slight, that is certain…” (AT 24)In the third paragraph, Descartes starts considering what he might know for certain, and very quickly he finds something: if he has persuaded himself of anything, then he cannot doubt that he exists. This is true even if there is an evil genius who directs his entire effort at deceiving him, since he must exist in order to be deceived. This insight is sometimes referred to as “the Cogito,” since, in his Discourse on Method (AT 32), he stated it as “I think, therefore, I am” (“Cogito, ergo, sum” in Latin). The wording in the Discourse has (understandably) been misunderstood as saying that one exists because one thinks – a statement about what makes one real. In Meditation Two, he is more careful, saying, “this pronouncement ‘I am, I exist’ is necessarily true every time I utter it or conceive it in my mind” – a statement about what one can know. Already, Descartes has found one thing that is certain.It can take several passes to get a firm grasp on what Descartes is actually trying to convey. This short video gives a great thumbnail sketch of his line of thought in the First Meditation and the beginning of the Second. Watch it before you read to give you the lay of the land, so to speak. I recommend watching it after you read as well, to see if it seems like the video is saying the same thing you read. If it doesn’t seem like it is, reread the First Meditation. (Captions are available by hovering over the bottom of the screen and then clicking on the three dots.)Over the next four paragraphs, Descartes explores the nature of the Cogito. The general drift of this exploration is that none of the ways he would have understood himself before beginning the meditations are certain given all that was called into doubt in Meditation One. He lists all that can be known for sure about the Cogito in a short paragraph in AT 28: “But what then am I? A thing that thinks. What is that? A thing that doubts, understands, affirms, denies, wills, refuses, and that also imagines and senses.”At this point, Descartes has accomplished two things: (1) he has found one thing that is certain (the Cogito); and (2) he has determined its nature. A consequence of these accomplishments is that one’s existence as a thinking thing is known better than corporeal things. (‘Corporeal’ comes from the Latin word corpus, meaning “body.” Corporeal things are things which have a body – in other words, material or physical things.) This means that we know our minds more certainly than we do our bodies. (Does this match your pre-philosophical viewpoint?)Meditation Two: The Wax ExampleThe last half of Meditation Two develops the idea that we know our minds more certainly than we do our bodies in a different way. Admitting that even he is still inclined to believe that corporeal things are better known than the Cogito, he proposes to “just this once allow [my mind] completely free rein” (AT 30) so that it will later permit itself to be controlled. While he’s not saying it as clearly as he could, Descartes means that he’s going to step outside of the careful mediating that he’s been doing and look at things as though he wasn’t concerned about an evil genius.Descartes considers an example of a corporeal thing – a piece of wax. This is the kind of thing that seems to be better known than the Cogito. So, Descartes gives it a close inspection with his senses. He finds that each of the five sense modalities offers distinct information about the wax: it smells like flowers (smell), it tastes like honey (taste), its color shape and size are evident (sight), it is hard and cold (touch), and if you rap on it with a knuckle, it will make a sound (hearing).Next, Descartes brings the wax close to the fire, and each of the five sense modalities now gives different information about the wax: the scent of flowers disappears (smell), the trace of honey flavor disappears (taste), the size increases (sight), it’s hot (touch), and it won’t emit a sound when he raps on it (hearing).At this point, Descartes asks whether the same wax remains, and admits that it does. He even says, “no one doubts it; no one thinks otherwise.” (AT 30) But how do we know this? It can’t be because of what our senses tell us, because our senses tell us totally different things before and after the wax is brought near the fire. They can’t tell us that it’s the same wax. So, he thinks, none of these sensory characteristics actually belong to the wax. What’s left over if we strip them all away? Something that exists in three dimensions, that’s flexible, and that’s prone to change. (Does this seem right to you?) But how is this essence known? Could it be through the imagination? Descartes thinks not, because he understands that the wax is capable of taking on more shapes than he’s capable of imagining. What’s left? Descartes says, “I perceive it through the mind alone.” (AT 31) Later he says more fully, “when I distinguish the wax from its external forms, as if stripping it of its clothing, and look at the wax in its nakedness, then, even though there can still be an error in my judgment, nevertheless I cannot perceive it thus without a human mind” (AT 32).What does all of this mean? Well, if Descartes’ reasoning sound, it shows that we know our minds better than we know corporeal things. Because, when we stop to consider who it is that perceives the wax so distinctly (after all of this reasoning), we find that we know ourselves as thinking beings much more evidently than we know the wax. (AT 33) So, Descartes has come to the same place that he had in the first part of Meditation Two, but he’s done it by a different route – one that doesn’t require us to work inside of all of the doubt that the evil genius supposition requires.All of this may seem kind of subtle and abstract, but there’s something pretty interesting going on here. At AT 32, Descartes emphasizes the idea that what seems to be grasped by the senses is “actually grasped solely with the faculty of judgment, which is in my mind.” He says he looks out his window and observes men crossing the square. But, if he thinks about it carefully, all he really sees is hats and clothes – which could hide automata. An automaton is a mechanical device that appears to move on its own initiative. Descartes is writing 400 years ago, but you can see that he might have been a good science fiction writer. He sees hats and clothes and judges that they cover humans. However, they could cover clever machines. (In which case, his judgment would be wrong.)Today, we don’t talk about automata. We talk about androids (or AI robots, or something like that). If we update it to our contemporary point of reference, the same insight follows: We might look out on the school quad, see clothed objects moving about, and judge that humans were walking on the quad. However, we could be wrong. Perhaps one (or more) of them are actually very well-designed androids. The fact that it’s possible for our judgment to be wrong in this way shows that our senses aren’t the primary source of our understanding of corporeal objects. Our judgment gets involved. And that’s why our minds are the primary source of our understanding of corporeal objects. If you think of how often we jump to erroneous conclusions about people – which often happens in first impressions, for instance – you can see that Descartes is pointing to something very real here. Our understanding of the world is not just about what we sense, it’s also about how we interpret what we sense.PreviousNext
Test Item Reliability
Test item reliability indicates how consistent the results produced from items on a test are. Consistency can refer to the ...
Test Item Reliability
Test item reliability indicates how consistent the results produced from items on a test are. Consistency can refer to the items’ stability over time or the consistency of the items with each other. If an item is unreliable, statistical relationships will appear weaker than they really are and inappropriate conclusions may be drawn regarding the relationships between variables.A measurement of reliability consists of the extent to which an observed score (which is the true score plus or minus error) accurately reflects the true score. Returning to the example in this week’s Introduction, if your true weight were 150 pounds and you stepped on the scale hundreds of times, it would sometimes show 149, sometimes 151, and sometimes 150. If you averaged all of those weights, you would come close to your true score. If you looked at how much the weights varied, you would have a good measure of the scale’s error. The situation is similar with a psychological test—a score on an IQ test represents an estimate of the theoretical “true” IQ; however, that observed score also includes error.Researchers or test developers measure a test’s reliability with a reliability coefficient, generally a positive correlation coefficient that is less than 1.00. (A correlation of 1.00 would indicate perfect correlation, which is theoretically impossible due to inherent error in measurement.) Acceptable reliability coefficients for psychological tests or test items are generally at least .70. If you know a test’s reliability, you can calculate its margin of error, a “plus or minus” band that indicates an interval likely to contain the true score.A test item is reliable if its variations over time primarily reflect variations in what you are measuring. An unreliable item would show changes over periods that are not possible or are theoretically unexpected depending on the construct you are measuring. For instance, personality is a construct that is believed to be constant over a period of years or decades. An item that stated, “I feel happier than usual today” would be unreliable for measuring personality, because the construct of mood easily changes from day to day, much more quickly than the construct of personality.For this week’s Discussion, think of a specific testing scenario. Then consider a reliable test item for that testing scenario and an unreliable item for that same testing scenario. Consider how you might know if these items are reliable or unreliable.With these thoughts in mind:Post by Day 4 a brief description of a specific testing scenario. Then describe one reliable test item and one unreliable test item for that testing scenario. Finally, explain what determines whether an item is reliable or unreliable within the scenario you presented.Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources. Zero plagiarizing, APA formatting, Quote work , No.coms
Similar Content
Research Paper Outline/Rough draft
I have the bibliography and the information somewhat needed to draft a outline and a rough draft kinda Example outline i n...
Complete English Assignment NO PLAGIARISM
Topic SelectionDirectionsRead and respond to the following writing prompt: This assignment should be helpful in generating...
Psyc 301 Assignment
Wk 5 Emotions and Stress This conference asks for you to post two main topics by responding to the below main topics on P...
Cypress College Online Harassment of Female Gamers Sociology Discussion
http://www.everydaysociologyblog.com/2012/10/women-gaming-violence.html
What was your reaction to the online harassment of...
Life of Jean-Francois Champollion Essay
1. Life of Jean-Francois Champollion. Using the online biographies as principal sources, give a brief but clear summary of...
WU Application of Psychological Approaches Essay
Coaches quite often encourage clients to reflect on specific situations, the options or solutions that might be available,...
Abortion In Rape And Incest.edited 1
Americans have, for so long, opposed the act of abortion. However, there is an exception. In cases of rape and abortion, t...
Topic Analysis Henry V
Act five and three present Henry V as two different characters with a varying opinion about France. In the third act, Henr...
The Tragedy Of Hamlet.edited Fin
The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, is the full title of the play written between 1599 and 1602 in London, England. ...
Related Tags
Book Guides
The Curious Case of the Dog in the Night Time
by Mark Haddon
Twelve Years A Slave
by Solomon Northrup
The Elegant Universe
by Brian Greene
Othello
by Wiliam Shakespeare
Brave New World
by Aldous Huxley
Crippled America
by Donald J Trump
Murder on the Orient Express
by Agatha Christie
The Lost Man
by Jane Harper
Get 24/7
Homework help
Our tutors provide high quality explanations & answers.
Post question
Most Popular Content
4 pages
Correspondence Analysis
The format of the memo is excellent. The memo has clearly indicated the sender, intended recipient, and date. The title ha ...
Correspondence Analysis
The format of the memo is excellent. The memo has clearly indicated the sender, intended recipient, and date. The title has been indicated. The body ...
Literature Review Qualitative Research Data Collection & Analysis Help
Discussion: Literature Search, Part IIIn this Discussion, you will conduct a literature review of your topic area, focusin ...
Literature Review Qualitative Research Data Collection & Analysis Help
Discussion: Literature Search, Part IIIn this Discussion, you will conduct a literature review of your topic area, focusing on a research study that uses one of the qualitative approaches covered this week.To prepare for this Discussion:Review the reading materials about the different approaches in this week’s Learning Resources.Conduct your own literature search to find a published study that represents one of the Week 3 approaches. Remember, you may have to broaden your search terms to find an appropriate study.Review the following resources before proceeding with your own article reviewDocument: R8360 Guidelines for Reading and Evaluating Qualitative Research Articles (PDF)Document: Example of How to Read and Evaluate a Qualitative Research Article (PDF)By Day 3Contribute a 3-paragraph Discussion post in which you respond to the following:Summarize the characteristics of the approach of the research article you chose during your literature search.Summarize the research article, including the citation and sufficient information for your classmates and Instructor to locate the article.Present a short critique of that article based on the “R8360 Guidelines for Reading and Evaluating Qualitative Research Articles” document.
PHI 2604 Miami Dade Utilitarianism and Its Applications Argumentative Essay
Write a one-paragraph essay arguing what should be done about Living Wage according to one of the six theories. Make sure ...
PHI 2604 Miami Dade Utilitarianism and Its Applications Argumentative Essay
Write a one-paragraph essay arguing what should be done about Living Wage according to one of the six theories. Make sure to respond to the author's arguments, whether the theory you are using agrees with them or not. Remember, briefly describe the issue, the theory, and what the theory would say about the issue and why.
Southern New Hampshire University Policy Analysis and Application Peer Responses
By Day 5Read a selection of your colleagues' posts.Respond to at least two colleagues by explaining the various costs you ...
Southern New Hampshire University Policy Analysis and Application Peer Responses
By Day 5Read a selection of your colleagues' posts.Respond to at least two colleagues by explaining the various costs you think will be associated with their suggested policy changes. Then, explain whether a consideration of cost when adopting a policy or program contradicts the social workers’ code of ethics.Support your response with specific references to the resources. Be sure to provide full APA citations for your references.Colleague 1: Ieshia Post an explanation of one change you might make to the policies that affect the client in the case. Be sure to reference the case you selected in your post.In the Case of Rita, she is a 22 young Latino woman who was assaulted by a coworker. After her assault she went through a varies of emotions such as guilt, shame, emotional shock, powerlessness, anxiety, fear anger and doubting her judgement (Plummer, Makris, & Brocksen, 2014). Due to all these emotions she didn’t want to file a report. In the state she resides in a victim of sexual assault has 90 days to file a report or the forensic kit will be destroyed. The first change I would make is keeping the forensic kit active until after a client receives therapy and is ready to decide. So many victims of sexual assault blame themselves for it happening and don’t want to file a report. Rita received therapy for 6 months and “after the 5th month, Rita felt strong enough to disclose to her family and file a report with the police” (Plummer, Makris, & Brocksen, p. 65, 2014).Finally, explain how you might evaluate the success of the policy changes.I believe that this policy change will benefit a lot of individuals. 90 days is not enough time for a person to process the event and work through the trauma. Without receiving counseling, a lot of victims of sexual assault fall into a depression that hinders them for making smart decisions. I would evaluate this policy change by assessing the sexual assault victims after receiving therapy. This assessment will help me to gain their perspective of this journey and gain any input they may have with the policy change.ReferencePlummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen, S. M. (Eds.). (2014). Social work case studies:Foundation year. Baltimore: MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing.Colleague 2: Nicole Provide an explanation of one change you might make to the policies that affect the client in the case. A policy I would change in the case of Rita is the 90-day hold policy for the sexual assault forensic evidence. This impacts many survivors of sexual assault and rape. As a social worker working alongside a victim, as the case with Rita, it can be a long journey. Goals can be set, however, each individual responds to the trauma differently. Often times social workers and therapists' treatment involves crisis intervention and stabilization, along with emotional support and validation surrounding their experience. Often times this type of trauma can cause acute stress, guilt, shame, emotional shock, powerlessness, anxiety, fear, anger, and doubting her judgment. This can take time. Explain how you might evaluate the success of the policy changes.I think that specifically in Rita's case and state that she resides in they should do away with the 90-day policy. Instead, follow the same policy and guidelines affiliated with their no statute of limitations in actually reporting sexual assault. The policies should coincide with one another. This would give victims more time to process their trauma and decide what they want to do from a legal standpoint once they have begun the recovery process in a therapeutic setting. Then the forensic evidence that was collected in the rape kit, would still be available for use when the victim is ready to peruse it from a legal standpoint. References:Plummer, S., Makris, S., Brocksen, S. M. (2013-10-21). Social Work Case Studies: Foundation Year. [[VitalSource Bookshelf version]]. Retrieved from vbk://9781624580062
University of California Davis Rene Descartes and The Cogito Discussion
How does Descartes reach the conclusion that “I am, I exist” is necessarily true every time he utters it or conceives ...
University of California Davis Rene Descartes and The Cogito Discussion
How does Descartes reach the conclusion that “I am, I exist” is necessarily true every time he utters it or conceives it? (1 point)What does Descartes determine that he is? How does he reach this conclusion? (2 points)Summarize the wax example, emphasizing the points by which Descartes reaches the conclusion that the wax is perceived “through the mind alone.” What does the wax example ultimately show? (2 pointsMeditation Two: The CogitoDescartes opens Meditation Two by reflecting on how disorienting the doubts of Meditation One have been – something we can relate to if we have been following closely so far! But, he says, there is hope that his project can succeed if he can find “just one thing, however slight, that is certain…” (AT 24)In the third paragraph, Descartes starts considering what he might know for certain, and very quickly he finds something: if he has persuaded himself of anything, then he cannot doubt that he exists. This is true even if there is an evil genius who directs his entire effort at deceiving him, since he must exist in order to be deceived. This insight is sometimes referred to as “the Cogito,” since, in his Discourse on Method (AT 32), he stated it as “I think, therefore, I am” (“Cogito, ergo, sum” in Latin). The wording in the Discourse has (understandably) been misunderstood as saying that one exists because one thinks – a statement about what makes one real. In Meditation Two, he is more careful, saying, “this pronouncement ‘I am, I exist’ is necessarily true every time I utter it or conceive it in my mind” – a statement about what one can know. Already, Descartes has found one thing that is certain.It can take several passes to get a firm grasp on what Descartes is actually trying to convey. This short video gives a great thumbnail sketch of his line of thought in the First Meditation and the beginning of the Second. Watch it before you read to give you the lay of the land, so to speak. I recommend watching it after you read as well, to see if it seems like the video is saying the same thing you read. If it doesn’t seem like it is, reread the First Meditation. (Captions are available by hovering over the bottom of the screen and then clicking on the three dots.)Over the next four paragraphs, Descartes explores the nature of the Cogito. The general drift of this exploration is that none of the ways he would have understood himself before beginning the meditations are certain given all that was called into doubt in Meditation One. He lists all that can be known for sure about the Cogito in a short paragraph in AT 28: “But what then am I? A thing that thinks. What is that? A thing that doubts, understands, affirms, denies, wills, refuses, and that also imagines and senses.”At this point, Descartes has accomplished two things: (1) he has found one thing that is certain (the Cogito); and (2) he has determined its nature. A consequence of these accomplishments is that one’s existence as a thinking thing is known better than corporeal things. (‘Corporeal’ comes from the Latin word corpus, meaning “body.” Corporeal things are things which have a body – in other words, material or physical things.) This means that we know our minds more certainly than we do our bodies. (Does this match your pre-philosophical viewpoint?)Meditation Two: The Wax ExampleThe last half of Meditation Two develops the idea that we know our minds more certainly than we do our bodies in a different way. Admitting that even he is still inclined to believe that corporeal things are better known than the Cogito, he proposes to “just this once allow [my mind] completely free rein” (AT 30) so that it will later permit itself to be controlled. While he’s not saying it as clearly as he could, Descartes means that he’s going to step outside of the careful mediating that he’s been doing and look at things as though he wasn’t concerned about an evil genius.Descartes considers an example of a corporeal thing – a piece of wax. This is the kind of thing that seems to be better known than the Cogito. So, Descartes gives it a close inspection with his senses. He finds that each of the five sense modalities offers distinct information about the wax: it smells like flowers (smell), it tastes like honey (taste), its color shape and size are evident (sight), it is hard and cold (touch), and if you rap on it with a knuckle, it will make a sound (hearing).Next, Descartes brings the wax close to the fire, and each of the five sense modalities now gives different information about the wax: the scent of flowers disappears (smell), the trace of honey flavor disappears (taste), the size increases (sight), it’s hot (touch), and it won’t emit a sound when he raps on it (hearing).At this point, Descartes asks whether the same wax remains, and admits that it does. He even says, “no one doubts it; no one thinks otherwise.” (AT 30) But how do we know this? It can’t be because of what our senses tell us, because our senses tell us totally different things before and after the wax is brought near the fire. They can’t tell us that it’s the same wax. So, he thinks, none of these sensory characteristics actually belong to the wax. What’s left over if we strip them all away? Something that exists in three dimensions, that’s flexible, and that’s prone to change. (Does this seem right to you?) But how is this essence known? Could it be through the imagination? Descartes thinks not, because he understands that the wax is capable of taking on more shapes than he’s capable of imagining. What’s left? Descartes says, “I perceive it through the mind alone.” (AT 31) Later he says more fully, “when I distinguish the wax from its external forms, as if stripping it of its clothing, and look at the wax in its nakedness, then, even though there can still be an error in my judgment, nevertheless I cannot perceive it thus without a human mind” (AT 32).What does all of this mean? Well, if Descartes’ reasoning sound, it shows that we know our minds better than we know corporeal things. Because, when we stop to consider who it is that perceives the wax so distinctly (after all of this reasoning), we find that we know ourselves as thinking beings much more evidently than we know the wax. (AT 33) So, Descartes has come to the same place that he had in the first part of Meditation Two, but he’s done it by a different route – one that doesn’t require us to work inside of all of the doubt that the evil genius supposition requires.All of this may seem kind of subtle and abstract, but there’s something pretty interesting going on here. At AT 32, Descartes emphasizes the idea that what seems to be grasped by the senses is “actually grasped solely with the faculty of judgment, which is in my mind.” He says he looks out his window and observes men crossing the square. But, if he thinks about it carefully, all he really sees is hats and clothes – which could hide automata. An automaton is a mechanical device that appears to move on its own initiative. Descartes is writing 400 years ago, but you can see that he might have been a good science fiction writer. He sees hats and clothes and judges that they cover humans. However, they could cover clever machines. (In which case, his judgment would be wrong.)Today, we don’t talk about automata. We talk about androids (or AI robots, or something like that). If we update it to our contemporary point of reference, the same insight follows: We might look out on the school quad, see clothed objects moving about, and judge that humans were walking on the quad. However, we could be wrong. Perhaps one (or more) of them are actually very well-designed androids. The fact that it’s possible for our judgment to be wrong in this way shows that our senses aren’t the primary source of our understanding of corporeal objects. Our judgment gets involved. And that’s why our minds are the primary source of our understanding of corporeal objects. If you think of how often we jump to erroneous conclusions about people – which often happens in first impressions, for instance – you can see that Descartes is pointing to something very real here. Our understanding of the world is not just about what we sense, it’s also about how we interpret what we sense.PreviousNext
Test Item Reliability
Test item reliability indicates how consistent the results produced from items on a test are. Consistency can refer to the ...
Test Item Reliability
Test item reliability indicates how consistent the results produced from items on a test are. Consistency can refer to the items’ stability over time or the consistency of the items with each other. If an item is unreliable, statistical relationships will appear weaker than they really are and inappropriate conclusions may be drawn regarding the relationships between variables.A measurement of reliability consists of the extent to which an observed score (which is the true score plus or minus error) accurately reflects the true score. Returning to the example in this week’s Introduction, if your true weight were 150 pounds and you stepped on the scale hundreds of times, it would sometimes show 149, sometimes 151, and sometimes 150. If you averaged all of those weights, you would come close to your true score. If you looked at how much the weights varied, you would have a good measure of the scale’s error. The situation is similar with a psychological test—a score on an IQ test represents an estimate of the theoretical “true” IQ; however, that observed score also includes error.Researchers or test developers measure a test’s reliability with a reliability coefficient, generally a positive correlation coefficient that is less than 1.00. (A correlation of 1.00 would indicate perfect correlation, which is theoretically impossible due to inherent error in measurement.) Acceptable reliability coefficients for psychological tests or test items are generally at least .70. If you know a test’s reliability, you can calculate its margin of error, a “plus or minus” band that indicates an interval likely to contain the true score.A test item is reliable if its variations over time primarily reflect variations in what you are measuring. An unreliable item would show changes over periods that are not possible or are theoretically unexpected depending on the construct you are measuring. For instance, personality is a construct that is believed to be constant over a period of years or decades. An item that stated, “I feel happier than usual today” would be unreliable for measuring personality, because the construct of mood easily changes from day to day, much more quickly than the construct of personality.For this week’s Discussion, think of a specific testing scenario. Then consider a reliable test item for that testing scenario and an unreliable item for that same testing scenario. Consider how you might know if these items are reliable or unreliable.With these thoughts in mind:Post by Day 4 a brief description of a specific testing scenario. Then describe one reliable test item and one unreliable test item for that testing scenario. Finally, explain what determines whether an item is reliable or unreliable within the scenario you presented.Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources. Zero plagiarizing, APA formatting, Quote work , No.coms
Earn money selling
your Study Documents