Existentialism and Contemporary ApplicationsGod is, or He is not.” But to which side shall we incline? Reason can decide nothing here. Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is… If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is." --Blaise PascalDue to current scientific, psychological and sociological studies and discoveries of the time, many factors led to questions about faith based systems, existence, meaning, purpose, and god. long held belief systems were being questioned and critiqued leading to further inquiries about the nature of existence. Kierkegaard and Nietzsche are two 19th c. philosophers who tried to both express and cope with the human condition in this regard and who are forerunners to the most significant philosophy of the 20th century, namely, Existentialism.Kierkegaard felt that there was a prevailing anxiety brought about by the sneaking suspicion that perhaps there is no grand design, prime mover, ultimate purpose or meaning to existence. This suspicion has a cultural dread and angst, which can only be addressed through a complete fall into despair and loss of faith, only when one has hit this bottom, can they be prepared to make a total and sincere "leap of faith" into god. Kierkegaard's views gave the 20th c. its moniker: "The Age of Anxiety."Nietzsche felt that in some ways Kierkegaard was correct. There was no creator to appeal to for guidance in moral matters. Unlike Kierkegaard, however, Nietzsche felt that since "god was dead", or our faith in this belief system was dead, we can appeal only to ourselves and not to a "nothingness", as such Nietzsche's views are often categorized as "nihilist." Nietzsche stated that the source, guidance, and natural means for dealing with existence and moral/ethical choices is based in oneself and, more particularly, in a kind of "super[wo]man", or "Ubermensch". This is an individual who can make decisions "beyond good and evil", in the sense that the individual acts on their own "triumph of the will"--the ability to act without any artificial moral constraints.Essay Prompt:*After viewing and reading the material below, discuss aspects of both philosophies that you agree with and those with which you disagree. What aspects of these philosophies do you, or do you not incorporate in your outlook on your existence, meaning, and purpose. Do you have a different philosophical outlook on "why we are here"?*This should remain a purely academic approach to a subject that can be a sensitive and highly personal discussion for many, so no denigration of anyone's views and no proselytizing (preaching to convert) is appropriate in your entries and submissions. Approx. 600 words. NO PLAGIARISM.

Your instructor will choose the discussion question and post it as the first response in the discussion forum. The requirements for this discussion are a minimum of four posts on four separate days. The total combined word count for all of your posts for this discussion, counted together, should be at least 400 words. Answer all the questions in the prompt, and read any resources that are required to complete the discussion properly. In order to satisfy the posting requirements for the week, complete your initial post by Day 3 (Thursday) and your other posts by Day 7 (Monday). We recommend that you get into the discussion early and spread out your posts over the course of the week. Reply to your classmates and instructor. Attempt to take the conversation further by examining their claims or arguments in more depth or responding to the posts that they make to you. Keep the discussion on target, and analyze things in as much detail as you can.Week 2, Discussion 2 (Prompt option #1): Present three Deductive ArgumentsWe have learned this week about deductive reasoning, including what it takes for an argument to be deductive. This discussion allows us to practice identifying and evaluating examples of deductive reasoning.Prepare: To prepare to respond to this prompt, read the instructor’s guidance and Chapters 3 and 4 (the required portions) of the textbook, and view required media for this week. Contemplate what it means to for an argument to be deductive.Reflect: Having studied the concept of deductive reasoning, find sources of reasoning, be it a detective novel, a political blog, a newspaper article, a TV broadcast, or some other source, and identify three arguments that you take to be deductive. If you have a hard time finding all three from media sources, you are able to create one or two of your own deductive arguments, on whatever topic you wish.Write: Present each argument in standard form (with the premises listed above the conclusion). After you have presented each argument, provide an explanation of why the reasoning is or is not valid. If the reasoning is valid, explain how the truth of the conclusion follows from the premises; if the reasoning is not valid, show how it would be possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false, and discuss what it might take to make the argument valid.Hardy, J., Foster, C., & Zúñiga y Postigo, G. (2015). With good reason: A guide to critical thinking [Electronic version]. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/*You must properly cite and reference the course text in every discussion. A citation is a parenthetical note within the body of your response. It comes after a direct quote or a paraphrase. A reference comes at the end of your response and refers to the required reading or material. Use in-text citations.

Answer the following question in a one-page paper:Citing specific evidence from Toer's Child of All Nations (not from the course textbook), how did the presence of the Dutch alter/affect Indonesian society?Your paper must follow the following format:typed (font size 10 or 12 only)one-inch marginsdouble-spacedpage number citations for your quoted evidencenot to exceed one (1) pagename at the top leftmust have a brief introduction and conclusion (each not to exceed two sentences)