Thursday, March 4, 2021

HOW TO VIRTUALLY PEER-REVIEW OUR PHILOSOPHY PAPER VIA BLACKBOARD GROUPS

it dawned on me that we can do peer-review of our existing drafts with the help of our STUDENT ASSISTANTS,

instead of doing this challenging task on your own, I ask you to send each other your drafts and review them via the groups that we have instituted in BLACKBOARD ULTRA.

(please, check your recent announcement with the specifics)

you're going to follow the same instructions here.

the challenge is how to do it. I know you are as close a  family as it can be. so, we could rely on your already preexisting family-ties developed within the Honors College.

we don't want this exercise to fall into attrition bias! let's begin with first come first served, which is always good. 

ask whomever you trust in your group to revise your draft.

caveat: what to do in the case of a lucky/unfortunate😆 ðŸ˜†ðŸ˜† student who gets 3 requests for revision! I propose that either he/she accepts the challenge or he/she recommends someone else (if the recommended has 3 requests themselves, he/she will do the same and so on).

if someone is left out without a peer, send me an email and I'll do it (warning: get your ego protected by a nuclear-firewall)😆 ðŸ˜†ðŸ˜† 

deal? 

Wednesday, February 24, 2021

foodstuff talk to illustrate the libertarian point of the "feel" of choosing + bedeutung of wine taste


nam pri kapï,
the stinky thai shrimp paste i told you about.

this is not a bad introduction to herbs,

list of student assistants (regular classes), spring 2021

#5059

Victoria Chierico
Amanda Linares
Joshua Barona

#9535 (no confirmation so far)

#5074

Jorge Landa
Talia Fragoso

#5112

Ana Grajales
Ashleigh Kindred
Linyer Rosales

Friday, February 12, 2021

our mdc wolfson, honors philosophy-club is ready!



Sebastian Maseri, president,

Alexia Fernandez, vicepresident,

Ana di Tano, secretary,

Milagros Ortola, treasurer

Click here for our Philosopy Club Constitution.

Thursday, February 11, 2021

food for you skeptics: all models are approximations, assumptions, whether implied or clearly stated. models are wrong, but some models are useful

yes, am generalizing, but not hastily!

actually all models are wrong is george box's quote.

what box means is this:

a model is not real. quite the opposite: we get a model by inputting data, but the gathering is ITSELF a process, a tweaking. scientists tweak data to fit the model. it means overelaboration and overparameterization, the mark of average, i.e., mediocrity!

how to fix the wrong? be on the alert for what's importantly wrong!

Wednesday, January 27, 2021

Thursday, January 14, 2021

Wednesday, December 2, 2020

Friday, October 9, 2020

Wednesday, September 23, 2020

homework 4 (fall 2021)

questions 1-4 pertain to this post,

1. is there moral knowledge from the evolutionary stand point? explain.

2. explain how does the fact of killing becomes the moral fact "killing is wrong"?  

3. is "killing is wrong" a soft fact? explain.

4. what is the difference between consensus and best consensus.

5. provide one proposition of your own that represents a hard fact and one that represent a soft fact (remember a proposition is presented as a regular sentence within quotes). 

Explain requires at least 40 words.

From our textbook Philosophy Here & Now, go to page 148 section 3.1 and answer questions 1 & 2. 

Tuesday, September 15, 2020

homework, fall 2021

1. Knowing what you know about validity,  try to write down at least one premise that would provide support for the following conclusions (try to be as succinct as possible):  

a. It is morally permissible to experiment on nonhuman animals.

b. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

2. Tell whether these arguments are valid or invalid.

a. Alvin likes Jane. Jane likes Chris. So, Alvin likes Chris.

b. Trees are plants. Oaks are plants. Therefore, Oaks are trees.

c. If Lincoln was killed in an automobile accident, then Lincoln is dead. Lincoln was killed in an automobile accident. Hence, Lincoln is dead. 

3. Tell whether these arguments are sound.

a. Cats are mammals. Mammals are animals. So, cats are animals. 

b. If the Taj Mahal is in Kentucky, then the Taj Mahal is in the USA. But the Taj Mahal is not in the USA. So, the Taj Mahal is not in Kentucky. 

4. Tell whether these inductive arguments are strong or weak.  

a.. The last twenty-two lottery tickets that Francis purchased have been losers. Therefore, the next one he buys will almost certainly be a winner.

b. Both Dorothy and Olivia have trouble seeing distant objects clearly. After purchasing a pair of prescription glasses, however, Dorothy reports that she can see perfectly. Therefore, chances are that if Olivia purchases a pair of glasses identical to Dorothy's, her vision should be as good as Dorothy's is now. 

5. identify the right cause (based on this lecture)

Paul is 79 years of age and has just been diagnosed with COVID-19. He's a smoker and has diabetes (smoking is a risk and diabetes a pre existing condition). After surviving COVID-19, Paul develops hypertension (see the possible link between COVID-19 and hypertension). 

a. Identify what kind of a cause COVID-19 is to Paul's newly developed condition of hypertension. 

b. If Paul had died, is COVID-19 a direct cause of Paul's death? Explain. 

7. Identify the following fallacies: 

a. Thomas Elder's attack on social welfare should not be taken seriously. He is said to have been a degenerate. 

b. You will get pregnant if you have sex. Sally had sex once, and now she is pregnant. 

c. Your honor, the defendant must be guilty because no one can prove his innocence. 

d. Rare taste: you either have taste or you don't. 

e. Men are all alike: selfish creatures who spend every weekend glued to a television tube. 

f. I am sure that you will agree that we should all work together to increase this company's profit. Anyone who does not agree with this policy will be fired immediately. 

Friday, September 11, 2020

Thursday, September 10, 2020

Wednesday, September 2, 2020

Thursday, June 4, 2020

Philosophy paper sample (summer 2021)

PHI 2010, #6065, John Doe, 

Summer 2021

Final Paper 

How to make virtue win over vice

        Many interesting topics were discussed during this awkward semester of controls, safe distance, where I only met half of my classmates. I learned how to make tomato sauce and hummus, but most importantly I learned about the different ways philosophical masterminds think. 

            Philosophers have the objective of finding “the truth”, but being the truth so absolute, they come up with different theories through which they hope we accomplish true living. The one theory that stuck the most with me was Aristotle’s moral virtue. 

    According to Aristotle, moral virtue is a disposition to behave in the right manner and having the ability to do so by creating habits and a positive mindset that allows you to make the best out of yourself during any sort of situation. A virtuous person is the one that can find the golden mean in all of their actions. The golden mean is the perfect balance between excess and defect. A person of virtue is courageous without being rash, generous without extravagance, and ambitious without being greedy. 

    I, personally, have always been a person that lacks discipline in most aspects of life. I am always able to convince myself to take the easiest path, the shortest road, and the less tiring way. While I have never been a lazy person in the sense that I am almost hyperactive, I procrastinate a lot by pushing on the things that present difficulties even if I understand that the end result is very rewarding. 

            I started this semester with the personal goal of quitting cigarettes. After several fights with many loved ones in which I proposed that not only did I have a strong addiction to nicotine I also very much enjoyed smoking cigarettes. I finally convinced myself to not quit but to diminish the number of cigarettes I would smoke in a day. This way I would control my addiction and my addiction wouldn’t control me anymore. 

            I was able to find a golden mean of nicotine that allowed me to get by with my day without cravings but that also did not cost me too much money nor time. My plan was that once I was able to find Aristotle’s “Golden mean” and control my addiction. It would only take effort to fully quit and exploit the virtue of self-discipline for the first time in my life. 

    Guess what? I’m doing it! 

            By quitting cigarettes (even for the time being), I was able to understand myself in a completely different way. I was able to push myself and find the strength of character I have needed in order to grow and improve for the greater being that is my overall health and happiness. 

            I must confess that my win also relates to other things that I don’t mention for the sake of brevity. I feel that if I’m able to win this battle, that will be a model for other problems that are part of my character. 

            The idea is that fighting bad habits should be in the same bracket as creating new ones. So far, the purification of my body through the act of not smoking has helped me improve my mind. I’m happier about being a person that was able to draw mental strength to eliminate a vice that impeded me from flourishing. 

Before this course I didn’t have these tools. I feel that if I take Aristotle as a model, there is going to be a point in which I will find happiness through being an overall virtuous person. It’s not easy, but it’s worthy!