Minimum word count: 750+ words (Note: quotations and headings do not count toward overall word count)(Double-spaced, 12-point font, and in one of the following formats: DOC DOCX or RTF, do not submit .pages files)Suggested completion date: Sunday, Oct. 25th. Final Due Deadline: Last day of class 11:55pm (No submissions are accepted after this date for any reason. Plan and pace your work accordingly.) For this journal, you may pick any section from the assigned readings already covered in class. You will explain a central theory/argument from that reading (that you have not written on yet), then write your own philosophical response.As a general rule, do not include additional research beyond the course material. These journals are meant for you to personally explore the readings and content from this course.Your journal should have 3 sections; clearly label when each section begins in your journal (you may do this simply with section number or section title):i. Intro: Introduction and a brief summary of your journal. (In the intro, make sure to briefly and clearly state the main points you will address in the journal; for example, could look something like “Philosopher A claimed B. I will claim C, for reasons D, E, F”)ii. Exposition: Briefly, but clearly describe a key argument or theory from the chosen reading (which you will respond to in section 3). This section should primarily be in your own words but include at least one short key quote from the chosen reading. Make sure to quote and cite any words that are not your own, even if they are from the text or lectures. It should be clear from this section that you actually completed the reading (not just based on the lectures). iii. Your Philosophical Response: (Main section, spend most of the journal on this). Give your philosophical response. Make sure you stay on topic. Do so in one of the following formats (do only one of these options): Give rational objections to the argument/theory, state why it is faultyDefend the argument from possible objectionsExplain how the argument can be improved, how you would change it and whyDiscuss the strengths and weaknesses, then your overall position(Do only one of the above options!)

Write a brief response (200 words) to the following prompt: How does Titon’s “music culture model” (pg. 15) relate to Kirshenblatt-Gimblett’s theory of heritage and the “five propositions” (pg. 369) of her argument? (Start by giving a brief description of each, and then think particularly about the dimensions of time and space, of performers and audiences, of music and memory as they are used by each author in similar and distinct ways).

InstructionsThe Lexical Decision ExperimentUsing the CogLab CD accompanying your course textbook, complete the lexical decision experiment and create a report on the experiment.In your report, write a brief introduction explaining the organization of lexicons. In addition, include some representative researches on lexical decision. Next, in the Methods section, describe the process that you followed to complete the experiment, including a description of the materials used and the stimuli. Make sure to include enough information so that others can also perform the same experiment successfully.Finally, describe the experimental results. In addition, determine whether your results showed semantic priming. Provide a rationale to support your answer. Summarize your report, including answers to the following questions:Were the results in accordance with your expectations? Provide a rationale to support your answer.Did anything about the experiment surprise you? If yes, what? Did you respond faster to words or nonwords?In your opinion, what factors would influence the results of the lexical decision experiment?From your course textbook, Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research and Everyday Experience, (4th ed.), read the following chapters:Chapter 11: LanguageFrom your course textbook, CogLab on a CD, read the following experiment:Lexical decision The Lexical Decision ExperimentUnderstanding Metaphors