Answer this question for yourself and give some examples of artworks that meet your definition.The format is 3 pages, double-spaced, 12-point Times or Times New Roman font.
American dependence on technology creates a greater threat to homeland security.
• Focuses a topic of inquiry with
clear and narrow parameters,
which are addressed through
the method and the
conclusion.
Explicitly connects a topic of
inquiry to relevant scholarly
works of varying perspectives
AND logically explains how the
topic of inquiry addresses a
gap
Logically defends the
alignment of a detailed,
replicable research method to
the purpose of the inquiry.
Supports a new understanding
or conclusion through a
logically organized line of
reasoning AND sufficient
evidence. The limitations
and/or implications, if present,
of the new understanding or
conclusion are oversimplified.
• Competently communicates
the student’s ideas, although
there may be some errors in
grammar, discipline-specific
style, and organization.
• Cites AND attributes sources,
with a consistent use of an
appropriate discipline-specific
style (in both
bibliography/works cited AND
in-text), with few to no errors
Montante article REFLECTION essay
Read Montante article.
Observe. Describe the week’s content and resources to a person who has not seen/heard or observed it.
Process. Answer the question: “What does this content/topic mean?”
Reflect. Answer the question: “What is the value in understanding this?”
risks and liabilities of tort law
BCA has scheduled another meeting with the PI owners to further discuss the risks and liabilities of tort law. This meeting will focus on product liability.
Pat and Gale asked you to participate in the PI meeting and to be prepared to discuss specific product liability risks related to PI’s use and resale of Naturals products. To prepare, research product liability law, product liability claims, and parties who can be sued in product liability cases.
Write a summary to the following questions to use as a basis for discussion in the PI meeting with BCA and to help educate PI owners about potential risks and liabilities under product liability law.
Label answer parts.
A. How and why could PI face risks under product liability for reselling Naturals paint products to clients for whom PI is completing a residential painting job?
B. How and why could PI face risks under product liability for reselling Naturals paint products over the internet?
McDill’s treatment of the structural diagram in 12 Essential Skills of Great Preaching.
For these assignments, you will be required to complete the worksheets according to McDill’s treatment of the structural diagram in 12 Essential Skills of Great Preaching. Each worksheet focuses on a specific skill and will assist you in diagraming the first chapter of Philippians.
Use the entire first chapter of Philippians for the following worksheets:
• Sturctural Diagram Worksheet
• Immediate Observations Worksheet
• Research Questions Worksheet.
For all other worksheets, use Philippians 1:12–18.
A rubric for each worksheet has been provided; be sure to complete the assignment according to the specified grading rubric.
PRESENTATION
1. Presentation: Let’s Get Started – Open the Tool Box
Truth or Happiness
Topic for Reflection Journal: 1) Truth or Happiness
Socrates argued that the whole point of life was to pursue the truth. As he famously argued, “the unexamined life is not worth living.” Sometimes that meant giving up life’s pleasures and facing uncomfortable truths. The truth, he said, is eternal, while pleasure is temporary. Another Greek philosophers now called the Epicureans argued that the main point of life is to pursue happiness. We ought to enjoy the pleasures of life: food, sex, literature, music or whatever it is that makes you happy. Life is short, so enjoy it while you are here. Life is only good when it makes you happy, and so truth is only good when it brings happiness.
Topic: Does knowing the truth always bring happiness? Or is it just sometimes better to focus on happiness? Can you think of a case in which it is better for someone to be happy than to know the truth? What about examples of when it is better to know the truth than to be happy? Would you want to know an unpleasant truth, even if that truth makes you unhappy? Make sure to respond to all of these questions.
Transgenders in the military
Please read a book that is a personal narrative about the subject…for example, the book ″Warrior Princess″ by Kristin Beck. Use the narrative as a primary example in the paper to consider how this person′s identity is linked to cultural notions about masculinity, femininity, sexuality, the military, etc. The assignment should work closely as possible with this primary narrative but should also include a research based source on the subject to consider what insight these materials bring to the narrative. The research portion can contain multiple sources but the narrative portion would derive from that one book. Some examples of questions to be answered in the paper are…What did I learn about the topic from reading? What does it mean to be someone transgender in the military? What do the characters reveal about the nature of living as trans? Try to consider identity as something more than individual, but always in a sense also, social and/or cultural.
apology – Article review
For the Entry itself, i.e. body of text:
Date:
Reading for that Week, i.e. Plato’s Gorgias
Dear Diary:
First, here is what I think is going on in this dialogue [attempt your summary of what you read]
Second, I find the following discussion particular interesting…because
Third, this makes me think of the following questions…
Fourth, I think I see a relationship between the Plato’s Gorgias and Confucius’ Analects, etc…on
this point.
In general, what we will be looking for are these four or five general rubrics:
1. Summary
2. What is striking, noteworthy, interesting to you…
3. What kinds of issues, questions, concerns, insights does it provoke in you
4. And as you move along, try to see if there are differences or similarities among the texts
that you will be reading.
Should the drinking age be lowered to 18
Students, please view the “Submit a Clickable Rubric Assignment” in the Student Center.
Instructors, training on how to grade is within the Instructor Center.
Assignment 2: Conflicting Viewpoints Essay – Part II
Synthesizing and Writing
Due Week 4 and worth 100 points
When looking for information about a particular issue, how often do you try to resist biases toward your own point of view? This assignment asks you to engage in this aspect of critical thinking.
Write at three to four (3-4) page paper in which you address the following:
Restate your topic from Assignment 1, give your position on the topic, and explain why you chose that topic. Identify two (2) opposing views on the topic, and then present the view that you’ll try to defend in the assignment. Be prepared to support your opinion with academic sources.
Identify three (3) reasons to support your position. In separate paragraphs, go through each reason and describe why it supports the position you took in the first section.
Go back to your Believing Game answers from Assignment 1. Describe why you thought those responses were true. What led you to ‘believe’ things in that way? Was it an expectation (straw man) or did you truly examine what they were saying?
Identify at least two (2) biases you experienced in your examination of the topic. How did the biases support or contradict the position you took? Did the biases create a barrier to your thinking?
Since we all have biases or opinions, how did your own background shape the way you felt about the topic you presented in the first section?
Now that you have used the Believing Game, has your thinking about the topic changed? If so, why? If not, why not?
The paper should follow guidelines for clear and organized writing:
Include an introductory paragraph and concluding paragraph.
Address main ideas in body paragraphs with a topic sentence and supporting sentences.
Adhere to standard rules of English grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and spelling.
Follows APA citation rules. (Note: Since Procon was used as a resource in Assignment 1, it is fine to cite again here)
Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:
Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA Style format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.
Note: This assignment will be automatically run through SafeAssign plagiarism detection software in order to check for originality, and a report will be sent to your instructor.
The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:
Identify the informal fallacies, assumptions, and biases involved in manipulative appeals and abuses of language.
Create written work utilizing the concepts of critical thinking.
Use technology and information resources to research issues in critical thinking skills and informal logic.
Click here to view the grading rubric.
timeline of events of surrounding Mr. Sokol’s resignation,
• This paper comprises three percent of your raw course grade.
Description and questions
In March 2011, David L. Sokol resigned from Berkshire-Hathaway.
Describe the circumstances under which Mr. Sokol resigned. First, present the facts, by addressing the following questions:
• Who were the key players? Describe their public reputations before Mr. Sokol resigned.
• Describe the timeline of events of surrounding Mr. Sokol’s resignation, both chronologically and in terms of when information revealed publicly.
• Describe Berkshire-Hathaway’s unofficial ethics policy.
After compiling the facts, consider the counterfactual – what could have happened but didn’t. Address the following questions:
• Explain why Mr. Sokol’s actions did or did not violate Berkshire-Hathaway’s unofficial ethics policy.
• Define a generic standard for what would have been “the right thing to do.” This standard is your opinion. For example, you might state, “I believe the company should have required its officers to do the following: …”
• Explain what behavior by Mr. Sokol and other key players either fell short of or met your standard.
• If these individuals’ behavior fell short of your standard, conjecture what they could have done differently that would have satisfied your standard. If these individuals’ behavior met your standard, conjecture what they could have done differently that would have fallen short of you