In previous weeks you have engaged with a variety of resources related to self-report inventories and performance-based, projective assessments, including the Rorschach. As you reflect on the readings, what topics generate strong opinions from you or spark your interest to learn more? Why do those resources elicit such a response?For this Discussion, review this week’s Learning Resources. Select two topics from the readings on the Rorschach about which you have strong opinions or are curious.With these thoughts in mind:Post by Day 4 a description of at least two topics from the Rorschach readings about which you have strong opinions or are curious.Be sure to support your post with specific references to the Learning Resources.

Sartre's "No Exit " concludes with the characters accepting that: "Hell is other people."So this is hell. I'd never have believed it. You remember all we were told about the torture-chambers, the fire and brimstone, the "burning marl." Old wives' tales! There's no need for red-hot pokers. HELL IS-OTHER PEOPLE! --No ExitEssay Prompt: how do the characters ultimately come to this conclusion? How is their predicament in Sartre's view, an Existential Hell? How is it opposed to the conventional Christian depiction and view, and how might it reflect on our own lives, social, religious, and psychological perceptions? ******************Approx. 750--1000 words*******************Key Existential ConceptsAbsurdity: What human beings encounter when they come into contact with the world. Absurdity is brought about because the human instinct to seek order and meaning is frustrated by the refusal of the world to be orderly or meaningful.Anxiety: Kierkegaard said, “Anxiety is the dizziness of freedom.” You feel anxiety because you recognize that you and you alone are responsible for your actions. This produces the two-sided feeling of simultaneous dread and exhilaration.Alienation: The sense that you’re a stranger in the world, or a stranger to yourself. Many aspects of existence can be alienating. One of the primary sources is absurdity. Ironically, the stories and systems developed by philosophy and religion to address that absurdity can be just as alienating.Existence precedes essence: Sartre’s phrase to describe the existential situation humans find themselves in. It refers to the fact that when you’re born, you have no meaning, no purpose, no definition. Human beings exist first, and only later define themselves.The Übermensch: The word Nietzsche uses to refer to his ideal human being. Literally “overman,” the word reflects the importance in his philosophy of overcoming — overcoming traditional values, overcoming the herd mentality, and, most importantly, overcoming yourself. You overcome these things so that you might attain something greater. Nietzsche’s Übermensch is an unconventional creator of values, a joyous free spirit, and one who embraces the earth instead of pining away for heaven.The death of God: The death of the notion that belief in God alone, or belief in any religious or philosophical system, is sufficient to provide human beings with the meaning, purpose, and definition they crave. It’s the recognition that, because no external system can provide you with the answers, you must take responsibility for providing them yourself.Subjectivity: Your first-person perspective on the world, including the needs, desires, and emotions that accompany that perspective. The existentialists take this as a valid and important starting point for genuinely human endeavors. This can be contrasted with the scientific mindset, which always starts with objectivity — seeing people in impersonal, objective terms without emotion or appreciation for their individual point of view.https://archive.org/stream/NoExit/NoExit_djvu.txt

Part of scientific research includes conveying knowledge (about theory, research, etc.) to others in an ethical manner, avoiding plagiarim for more). This is a key professional skill to develop. In this activity, you will practice using your own and applying in-text citations.Review the following original and plagiarized passages:ORIGINAL AUTHOR’S THOUGHTSThe correlational method can be very useful, but it must be used with caution. If knowledge of one variable (age) helps predict another (buying), does that mean that one causes the other? Not necessarily. It is possible that the first variable caused the second, or that the second variable caused the first, or that some other variable caused both variables. Without further research we cannot know which possibility is true. For example, a researcher might find a negative correlation in schools between the number of teachers monitoring hallway behavior and the number of acts of aggression in the hallway. It is possible that more teachers in the hallway caused lower aggression, but it is also possible that there were fewer teachers in the hallway in the face of aggression because they had left to avoid it. Knowing that there is a correlation between two events does not tell us which, if either, is the cause. In fact, it is quite common to have a third variable cause a correlation between two other variables. For example, sunburn and outdoor temperature are correlated. Does this mean that hot weather causes sunburn or that sunburn causes hot weather? Of course not. The summer sun causes both sunburn and hot weather. Cum hoc propter hoc—correlation does not imply causation.ReferenceFeenstra, J. (2020). Social psychology (2nd ed.). Zovio.REWRITE BY SOMEONE WANTING TO WRITE ABOUT THE ARTICLE AND ITS FINDINGS“The correlational method can be very useful, but it must be used with caution.” If knowledge of one variable (height) helps predict another (weight), does that mean that one causes the other? Not necessarily. It is possible that the primary variable caused the secondary, or that the secondary variable caused the primary, or that some additional variable caused both variables. We cannot understand what chance is true without further studies. For example, ice cream consumption and violent crime are correlated. Does this mean eating ice cream causes violent crime? Or, does a spike in violent crime cause consumption of ice cream? Probably neither... rather, a common factor (e.g., heat) may be to blame for both. “Cum hoc propter hoc—correlation does not imply causation.”Define academic voice and plagiaris.Apply your knowledge of academic voice and plagiaris to the rewritten passage, locating and identifying errors.Rewrite the passage appropriately using your own wordsBe sure to utilize strategies for Quoting, Paraphrasing & summarizing avoiding direct quotes and appropriately utilizing in-text citations.Demonstrate the importance of developing a strong academic voice for both your education and career.What are some key features of academic writing that might be particularly relevant within your own program/intended career?What types of plagiaris do you find most difficult to avoid?What methods/strategies can you use to ensure that you avoid these errors in your own work?