One aim of this assignment is to have you engage with diversity by having you analyze differences such as race, gender and class. It also aims to have you critically evaluate our times by analyzing, in writing, a variety of texts together that contribute to larger historical conversations, debates, and traditions while at the same time are resources for understanding and appreciating our present situation. In light of these ends you will read closely and critically a variety of primary texts, together, from multiple perspectives.You will critically evaluate two texts that are in an explicit one-way conversation between a dead person and a living person; a 17th century text by the Western European modern philosopher Rene Descartes and a contemporary text by U.S. feminist philosopher Eve Browning Cole. Descartes body may dead and buried—bones, dirt and worms—but his thoughts are alive and with us today as you hold his writings in your dear hands. This first part of the paper assignment will try to make Cole and Descartes texts into a two-way conversation by having you imagine Cartesian rejoinders to Cole’s objections.Part of what is involved in synthesizing a variety of texts is putting different views in conversation with each other. In order to do this you need to understand how an author’s argument is an explicit and direct response to another author’s argument. When an author is offering a critique of another philosopher’s argument you need to be able to identify which parts of a philosopher’s whole argument is the author criticizing; the premises, the conclusion, the assumptions, the methodology or some combination of these. This skill in synthesizing is helpful because then you can be in a position to see how a conversation advances or not. Plus, in our reading assignments you are witnessing a variety of philosophers engaging in the practice of critically evaluating arguments and constructing their own arguments. By seeing a lot of models you can begin to learn to construct your own arguments.This second paper assignment is different from and builds on the former because you are not simply, as in the first paper, identifying the author’s argument and the various parts of two author’s arguments, in addition, now you are synthesizing texts that are explicitly and indirectly in conversation with each other. Your assignment is in two parts a vocabulary section and short writing section.Part I Vocabulary (40 Points)Briefly define the following technical terms used in philosophy. Each definition is worth 3 points max.PhysicalismIdealismInteractionismParallelismEpiphenomenalismThe problem of other mindsCorrespondence Theory of TruthCoherence Theory of TruthPhenomenology of Human ExperiencePhenomenology of Gendered Experience1. What is 1 reason why Eve Browning Cole’s theory of the embodied self does not clearly fit under the various theories of mind such as physicalism, idealism, double aspect theory, interactionism, parallelism, epiphenomenalism? This question is worth 10 points max.Part II Short Writing Assignment (60 Points)On a new clean sheet of paper write a 2 pg. double-spaced paper following the standard format of 12 pt. font, Times New Roman, and one inch margins (no extra spacing between paragraphs, don’t enlarge your margins to take up space or increase the font size to make it seem as if you wrote a lot, I am aware of these tricks). For this part of the midterm do not go over 2 pgs. Part of the aim of the exercise is for you to sort out what is relevant within a large chunk of information and to be concise. Please write clear, non-repetitive, succinct, dense answers to the questions below. Make sure you answer every part of a question so you do not lose points. Also break up your answer into digestible paragraphs that are organized into clear chunks with smooth logical transitions and not one long single spaced paragraph. You want to give your reader a breather. When you answer these questions try and answer them in your own words, with clear examples, and in such a way that someone who never read these philosophers could get a feel for the question and understand an answer to it. Good luck!If you have written beyond the 2 pg. limit for the short writing assignment section there are some things you can do to trim it: (a) read it aloud (i.e. yourself or someone else) (b) delete extra words/phrases that do not work to help express what you want to say (c) look for repetitive sentences and delete them. The maximum points you can earn on the midterm is 100 points. Here are the questions:Answer questions 1-5 in the order they are given.What does it mean to really be a human being according to Descartes? What is his argument? How does he know this?What does it mean to really be a human being according to Eve Browning Cole? What is her argument? How does she know this?Eve Browning Cole is in explicit conversation with Descartes. What are 2 objections Cole raises against Descartes argument? Descartes is not in conversation with Eve Browning Cole because he is dead and she is alive. However, imagine Descartes soul was floating around in our class and over your shoulder as you walk on campus and we all could hear his voice. What are 2 responses Descartes could offer to try to minimize the force of each of her 2 objections?How is Eve Browning Cole’s methodology different than Descartes? You must give 2 features of each of their methods.What is the fundamental difference between Cole’s and Descartes’ conceptions of knowledge assumed in each of their views?

Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.