šŸ·ļø LIMITED TIME OFFER: GET 20% OFF GRADE+ YEARLY SUBSCRIPTION ā†’
Log in
Philosophy
14
answers
2
watching
269
views

Is rational egoism a moral theory?
a. Yes.
b. No.
 
Is Utilitarianism (in its classic form) an impartialist moral theory?
a. Yes.
b. No.

Watch
14
answers
2
watching
269
views

For unlimited access to Homework Help, a Homework+ subscription is required.

Unlock all answers

Get 1 free homework help answer.
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Avatar image
Read by 1 person
Already have an account? Log in
Share

Related questions

Descartes begins by stating: "I will now shut my eyes, block my ears, cut off all my senses. I will regard all my mental images of bodily tings as empty, false and worthless." Why does he do so?

Having my first discussion assessment due soon but could use help, I have to explain if if I agree or don’t agree with them (I agree with both of them but not sure what to write) the response needs to be 6 sentences in length for each.

1) Give an example of when you feel that this method is the best approach.
The Socratic Method consisted of asking people questions about matters they presumably knew something about. Socrates would usually begin by asking for a definition of a concept like 'justice'. I believe it is an effective way of learning especially in a setting where it takes one a certain level of "know-how" l'd call it because it is engaging the student to stimulate their own answers and understanding. I took chemistry Summer 22' and my professor would always begin class or a new topic with a question such as "What do you think ___is?" We'd all answer. He then would say "why do you think this?" and if we were wrong he would tell us but if not, he would further explain the details behind it. So, he had me engaged from the moment he walked in. He also used a chalkboard so that brought back the nostalgia of when I was back in elementary school learning new things every day.

2) Give an example of when you feel that the Socratic method is ineffective.
I feel the Socratic method would not be effective in a courtroom. I believe this because the person being questioned will feel the need to hide what He or She knows. This will result in the complete opposite results desired from this method. Or maybe at a seminar when one's purpose is to explain and give information. For example at an apple device release.
 
 
I do believe the socratic method is a good strategy to learn because you tend to go back and forth on a discussion until you get to the point that you have been trying to prove. This way you are breaking down the discussion into smaller parts, making it easier to comprehend.
 
1) I would say the Socratic Method would be highly effective in the court of law. I have seen this play out in a few shows as well like Caso Cerrado and Dr. Phill. Where the interviewer will ask a few questions to get to the bottom of a conflict and depending on the interviewee's response, the interviewer will continue to ask questions until he/ she breaks and tells the truth or the way things actually are.
 
2) An example where the Socratic method would not work would be in a situation where the discussions has an indefinite amount of answers. For example " what is the purpose of life" ? One could argue that we are simply here as animals and our sole purpose is to repopulate the earth. On the other hand we could also say that we create our own purpose here, we decide what we will do with our lives. But who's to say that both answers are incorrect? Here the socratic method would continue in an endless loop.

Philosophy 

Reflection Question: What do you value?

I value vacations and playing video games. I put forward the idea these are valuable things to me. However, playing video games is only an instrumental value. In other words, young students play video games because they receive joy and satisfaction from playing video games. Do you agree?

Question 1: Is traveling the world (vacations abroad) desirable because it is instrumentally valuable, i.e., only valuable because it will help you achieve or acquire other things you desire? Is this because you think it is bad (unpleasant) in itself or just neutral (neither desirable nor undesirable)? Or is traveling the world also intrinsically valuable, i.e. valuable for its own sake? If so, why?

Question 2: Is playing video games (Xbox, Playstation, Nintendo Switch) desirable because it is instrumentally valuable, i.e., only valuable because it will help you achieve or acquire other things you desire? Is this because you think it is bad (unpleasant) in itself or just neutral (neither desirable nor undesirable)? Or is playing video games also intrinsically valuable, i.e. valuable for its own sake? If so, why?

Related Documents

PHIL215
Final Exam
Study Guide
PHIL215 Study Guide - Final Guide: Scenario Analysis, Nuclear Reaction
rosewallaby571
PHIL 220 Lecture Notes - Lecture 19: Phlogiston Theory, Antoine Lavoisier, Entrust
amberkoala51
PHIL1090 Lecture Notes - Thrasymachus, Polemarchus
ochremouse467

Weekly leaderboard

Home
Homework Help 3,900,000
Philosophy 200
Start filling in the gaps now
Log in