Category: Writing

How would you describe the tone of “Humanity 101”? Provide some examples and consider why the author might have chosen to construct the poem in this way. (What picture of the speaker emerges from the voice that the author has created? Do you like the speaker? Do you relate to her?)

Take the quiz “Should you kill the fatman” and “Philosophy Health Check.” Report on your results and what do you feel you have learned about yourself and your morals? How can this information be used to help build a better compass?
http://www.philosophyexperiments.com/fatman/
https://www.philosophyexperiments.com/health/Default.aspx
Be sure to apply at least one ethical system in depth, including application of at least 4 specific aspects of that system in your posts.

Image transcription text
curen Suitcase Lady When Christie Mclaren wrote “Suitcase Lady – she was a student at the Univer sity of Waterloo, reporting for the Toronto Globe and Mail as a part of her En- glish co-op work experience. After graduation she spent a year and a half at the Winnipeg Free Press, then returned to the port on a variety of issues. An n returned to the Globe, where she continued to re- nelled her love of the out sues. An avid hiker , skier and can of the outdoors into several years of reporting on forestry, energy and other environmental issues. Another of Mclaren’s interests is photography (she took the portrait used at the beginning of this chapter). Though a professional journalist, she says that “writing is nothing but pain while you’re doing it and when it’s done. Any joy or satisfaction, I think, is a bit of fleeting luck. ” Mclaren spent several nights with “the Vicomtesse” before hearing the story she reports in this selection. The article and photograph first appeared in 1981 in the Globe. Tight after night, the woman with the red hair and the purple dress sits in the harsh light of a 24-hour doughnut shop on Queen Street West. Somewhere in her bleary eyes and in the deep lines of her face is a story that probably no one will ever really know. She is taking pains to write something on a notepad and crying steadily. She calls herself Vicomtesse Antonia The Lindsays. She’s the suitcase lady of Queen Street. No one knows how many women there are like her in Toronto. They carry their belongings in shopping bags and spend their days and nights scroungeng for food. They have no one and nowhere to go. This night, in a warm corner with a pot of tea and a pack of Player’s, the Vicomtesse is in a mood to talk. Out of her past come a few scraps: a mother named Savaria; the child of a poor family in Montreal; a brief marriage when she was 20; a son in Toronto who is now 40. “We never got along well because I didn’t bring ‘concerto” has a French name – Tresor, La Tempete, Le Retour – and each one bears the signature of the Vicomtesse. She smiles and him up. I was too poor. He never call me mama.” She looks out the window. She’s 60 years old. points to one. “A very lovely piece of music. I like it.” With her words she spins herself a cocoon. She talks about drapes and carpets, castles and kings. She often lapses into French. She lets She digs in her suitcase again, almost shyly, and produces a round her tea get cold. Her hands are big, rough, farmer’s hands. How she plastic box. Out of it emerges a tiara. Like a little girl, she smooths back ended up in the doughnut shop remains a mystery, maybe even to her. her dirty hair and proudly puts it on. No one in the doughnut shop “Before, I had a kitchen and a room and my own furniture. I had to seems to notice. 10 leave everything and go.” She cares passionately about the young, the old and the ones who It’s two years that she’s been on the go, since the rooming houses stopped taking her. “I don’t have no place to stay.” suffer. So who takes care of the suitcase lady? 11 So she walks. A sturdy coat covers her dress and worn leather boots “God takes care of me, that’s for sure,” she says, nodding thoughtfully. are on her feet. But her big legs are bare and chapped and she has a But I’m not what you call crazy about religion. I believe always try to agged cough. do the best to help people – the elderly, and kids, and my country, 12 Yes, she says, her legs get tired. She has swollen ankles and, with no socks in her boots, she has blisters. She says she has socks – in the and my city of Toronto, Ontario.” suitcase – but they make her feet itch. AAAAAAAAAAA As for money, “I bum on the street. I don’t like it, but I have to. I have to survive. The only pleasure I got is my cigaret.” She lights another Further Reading: one. “It’s not a life.” She recalls the Saturday, a long time ago, when she made $27, and 14 Ian Adams, The Poverty Wall laughs when she tells about how she h ake the money last through Sunday, too. Now she gets “maybe $7 or $8,” and eats “very poor.” George Orwell, Down and Out in Paris and London When she is asked how people treat her, the answer is very matter-of- Things I Cannot Change (NFB documentary, 55 minutes) fact: “Some give money 15 In warm weather, she pass ude.” big square in front of City 16 Structure: Hall. When it’s cold she takes her suitcase west to the doughnut shop. The waitresses who bring food to the won compassion. They per upon her with 1. “Suitcase Lady” was a feature article in the Toronto Globe and Mail As oss that her sitting does no harm. newspaper journalism, how does it differ from a typical ESSAY? Where does she sleep? “Any place I can find a place to sleep. In the park, in stores – like here I stay and sit, on Yon 18 2 What does the opening description achieve? Sometimes she goes into an underground parking garage. Yonge Street.” She shrugs. 3 What do the many quotations do for the description? She doesn’t look like she knows what sleep i “This week I sleep three hours in four days. I feel tired but I wash my face with cold water 19 4. Mclaren’s own photograph of “the Vicomtesse” appeared with the and I feel okay.” Some questions make her eyes turn from the window article in The Globe. What does her photograph do that the descrip and stare hard. Then they well over with tears. Like the one about tive article cannot do? What does the article do that the photograph loneliness. “I don’t talk much to people,” she answers. “Just the elderly, cannot do? sometimes, in the park.” Explain the IRONY of the closing. Her suitcase is full of dreams. Carefully, she unzips it and pulls out a sheaf of papers – “my 20 concertos.” Style: Each page is crammed with neatly written musical notes – the careful 22 Why is the vocabulary of “Suitcase Lady” so easy? writing she does on the doughnut shop table – but the bar lines “With her words she spins herself a cocoon,” states Mclaren in para- are missing. Questions about missing bar lines she tosses aside. Each graph 8. How appropriate is this METAPHOR? Which of the many concrete details most strongly convey the flavour of this suitcase lady’s life?
Show less

Refer to Philosophy: Asking Questions–Seeking Answers
Chapter 6
In
The Assayer
, Galileo wrote: “If living creature were removed, [tastes, odors, and colors] would be wiped away and annihilated.” Galileo is suggesting that if there weren’t any animals or people with senses such as tasting, smelling and seeing, then there would be no such thing as tastes, odors, or colors. These properties or qualities are wholly dependent on there being creatures to perceive them.
Questions: 1. What would John Locke say about this? Would he agree with Galileo? Why or Why not? 2. Would George Berkeley agree? Why or Why not?  3. Do you agree? why or why not?
(1) In your introductory paragraph explain the Galileo’s idea briefly to your reader who does not know the case. [Focus on relevant details you will need to support your position.]
(2) At the end of your introductory paragraph state your thesis. I ________, because ________.  [Fill in the blank with   (1) “agree with Galileo that without living creatures tastes, odors, and colors would not exist”  or (2) “Disagree with Galileo. Tastes, odors, and colors would exist without any living creatures to perceive them.”
(3) In your next paragraph introduce John Locke to your reader. Then write, John Locke would  ______ .  Fill in the blank with (a) “agree with Galileo because…” or (b) “disagree with Galileo because…”  [Explain why Locke would agree or disagree with Galileo. You should include a definition and explanation of indirect realism. It should also include definitions and an explanation of Locke’s primary vs secondary quality distinction. You will probably need at least two paragraphs for this part of the paper. If you explain Locke’s theory you also should define and explain indirect realism as well as Primary and Secondary qualities. Use examples.]
(4) In the next section introduce George Berkeley to your reader. Then write, George Berkeley would ______. Fill in the blank with (a) “agree with Galileo because…” or (b) “disagree with Galileo because…” [explain why Berkeley would agree or disagree with Galileo. You should include definitions of materialism and idealism, and an explanation of how these ideas apply to Galileo’s claim.
(5) In the last section of your paper explain why you agree or disagree with Galileo. You must support your view with an argument. You could use ideas from Locke or Berkeley or explain why you think they are mistaken. Start this section by reminding the reader what your view is, then offer supporting reasons for why your reader should accept your view.

Reference: search internet, Satire Is Dying Because the Internet Is Killing It Editorial by Arwa Mahdawi
Image transcription text
Analyze the Text Support your responses with evidence from the text. @ ANALYZE Reread paragraphs 1 and 2. What tone does the author establish at the beginning of the editorial through her word choices and syntax? Cite evidence in the chart to support your ideas. How does this tone contribute toward the persuasiveness of the text? e (2) IDENTIFY What details in paragraph 3 support the author’s main idea?
Show less

Who are you? What do you believe? What cognitive biases do you have? These are big questions to answer, but necessary to consider before moving forward in your professional life.
In a one- to two-page paper, consider the people and experiences that have shaped how you see yourself, how you see life, and, most importantly, how they have shaped your biases.
?      List and then describe a minimum of three things you believe to be true, such as the existence of God, right vs. wrong, morality, and what it means to be a “good” person.
?      Explain, in detail, how you acquired these beliefs (including the other people or experiences that have influenced you most), why these beliefs are important and how these beliefs will influence how you engage with people and policies in your future career. Do not simply say something like, “I believe in doing the right thing because it is the right thing.” You must really dig deep into your psyche and analyze your own perspective of the world; make your brain hurt!
?      Most importantly, discuss at least two cognitive biases discussed in Chapter 1 that you might be most subject to and why. Integrate these into your three beliefs and analyze the ways in which they shape you.

Read the short story “Sweat” by Zora Neale Hurston and review the background information below. Here is the link to the story:
http://wwwi.mcpherson.edu/~claryb/en255/handouts/sweat.pdf
For the discussion board, provide your commentary on Zora Neale Hurston’s short story “Sweat.” You may address any aspect of the story, but here are some suggestions:
How do you understand the choices that Delia Jones makes in her marriage and her life generally?
Analyze Delia’s relationship with Sykes.
How does the way the story is written and the use of language affect the meaning of the story?
What symbols do you see in the story and how do they enrich the meaning of the story?
How can you compare and contrast Delia’s story to Hedda Gabler’s (from last?

What are the advantages of cutting brick in half to build Trajan’s Markets?
A.reduced construction costs
B.reduced loads that allowed for a taller structure
C.the use of halved bricks allowed for a more diverse decorative pattern on the exterior wall surfaces
D.helped maintain structural integrity during seismic events
E.the space between the halved bricks allowed for terracotta pipes to carry heated air
There can be more than one answer.

Medium Paragraph
Question : In your own view, is Smith’s conduct morally worse than Jones’s conduct? Or is the conduct of Smith and Jones morally equivalent (that is, equally immoral)? Explain the reasoning behind your view. Also, do you agree with Rachels that there is no moral difference between killing and letting die? Again, explain the reasoning behind your view.
Reading Source : https://cherish-wisdom.blogspot.com/2011/12/euthanasia-rachels-smith-and-jones.html
Euthanasia: The Smith and Jones Thought Experiment The American Medical
?Association (AMA) prohibits active euthanasia but condones passive euthanasia under the right circumstances. Active euthanasia occurs when a physician commits an action that directly ends the patient’s life, such as administering a lethal dosage of morphine. According to the AMA, physicians should never deliberately act in a manner that kills a patient. However, the AMA claims that there are times in which passive euthanasia may be morally acceptable. If a patient is near death, has little or no chance of recovery, and will spend their remaining time either unconscious or in extreme pain, then, with the consent of the patient and/or the appropriate family members or legal guardian, the medical staff may simply withhold all forms of life-prolonging treatment in order to allow the patient to die naturally. The claim that active euthanasia is morally wrong but passive euthanasia can be morally acceptable rests upon the distinction between “killing” and “letting die. “Active euthanasia is viewed as a form of killing, while passive euthanasia is viewed as a form of letting die; and killing someone is viewed by many to immoral in a way that letting someone die is not. But is it really true that killing is always worse than letting die? And, is it really true that active euthanasia is always worse than passive euthanasia? The philosopher James Rachels argues that there really is no moral distinction between killing and letting die. To make this point, he asks us to compare the hypothetical cases of Smith and Jones: So, let us consider this pair of cases: In the first, Smith stands to gain a large inheritance if anything should happen to his six-year-old cousin. One evening while the child is taking his bath, Smith sneaks into the bathroom and drowns the child, and then arranges things so that it will look like an accident. In the second, Jones also stands to gain if anything should happen to his six-year-old cousin. Like Smith, Jones sneaks in planning to drown the child 4 in his bath. However, just as he enters the bathroom Jones sees the child slip and hit his head, and fall face down in the water. Jones is delighted; he stands by, ready to push the child’s head back under if it is necessary, but it is not necessary. With only a little thrashing about, the child drowns all by himself, “accidentally,” as Jones watches and does nothing. Smith killed his cousin. Jones, however, did not kill his cousin. Instead, Jones simply allowed his cousin to die. But does this mean that Smith’s conduct was morally worse than Jones’s? Well, if we think that killing is worse than letting die, then it seems that we should judge Smith more harshly than Jones.
2However, many people argue that the behavior of Smith and Jones are both equally immoral.  Jones’s conduct is just as bad as Smith’s. But, if we think that both people’s actions are equally bad, then does this mean that killing is not really worse than letting die after all? Is it actually the case that killing and letting die are morally equivalent to each other? Indeed, after considering the cases of Smith and Jones, Rachels concludes that killing is not worse than letting die. In fact, Rachels goes even further: he argues that, sometimes, killing may actually be morally better than letting die. If someone is going to die very soon from a terminal medical condition, and will spend the rest of their remaining time suffering from extreme pain, then is it really better to passively allow them to die? Or would it actually be morally better to put that person out of their misery by deliberately ending their life in a humane and painless manner? Rachels argues that, since killing and letting die are morally equivalent, we must conclude that active and passive euthanasia are also morally equivalent. So, the AMA, Rachels claims, should rethink its policy towards euthanasia.

~ (A • C) and ~A • ~C
In comparing the two main operator columns, row by row, we see that the truth-values on each of the rows are
?      a) identical
?      b) opposite
?      c) at least one line where both are True
?      d) no lines where both are True
?      Thus, these two statements are __________