Archive for category: Homework Assignment Help

Peloponnesian War who started the war?

In the Peloponnesian War, who started the war? And why? (Answer with reference to specific passages, citing Book and Paragraph Numbers] Was Pericles a good leader?

In the Peloponnesian War who started the war?

Firstly, In the Peloponnesian War, who started the war? And why? (Answer with reference to specific passages, citing Book and Paragraph Numbers]
Secondly, Was Pericles a good leader?

Thirdly, Were the Athenians right to refuse to allow Melos to remain neutral?

Fourthly, What does Machiavelli think of Agathocles?

Further, Were Britain and France justified in declaring war on Nazi Germany? (Answer with reference to Just War Theory, the Revisionist Theory of the Reductive Individualists, and your own views).

Moreover, Was the United States justified in fighting a war in Vietnam? (Answer with reference to Just War Theory, the Revisionist Theory of the Reductive Individualists, and your own views).

More details;

Naturalistic fallacy discussion from DeNicola’s moral philosophy

This is an assignment that focuses the naturalistic fallacy discussion from DeNicola’s moral philosophy. The paper also formulates a clear statement of the problems and issues.

The naturalistic fallacy discussion from DeNicola’s moral philosophy

Naturalistic Fallacy
What is the ‘Naturalistic Fallacy’? Does avoiding it require us to avoid adducing any facts in support of a moral claim? If not, can we designate some facts as especially relevant to our attempt to justify a moral norm or law? Give examples. [For this essay topic you are advised to read and use Chapter 13 from Daniel DeNicola’s Moral Philosophy: a Contemporary Introduction in addition to the weekly readings (Attached) plus any other sources you deem relevant] Guidelines In your essay, you should strive to achieve three GENERAL GOALS

a) To formulate a clear statement of the problems and issues involved, giving the reader a sense of their interest and philosophical importance. The reader should not be left wondering “Why should I care?” In the course of doing this, you should exhibit an accurate interpretation of any texts on which your dis- cussion is based, including theses advanced & arguments adduced to support them. Puzzles & dilemmas are good starting points.

The naturalistic fallacy discussion from DeNicola’s moral philosophy

b) Additionally, to provide a carefully argued critical perspective of your own on the central ideas under discussion. “Of your own” does not mean “completely original with you”: but it does imply that you have adopted a position and are prepared to explain and defend it. (If the position does come from someone else, cite the source.)

c) To arrive at an assessment of the issues, based on a discussion in which you should put forward the best possible defense of the posi- tion you think is the most satisfactory. You are not, however, to arrive at a settled conclusion. Presenting your own position can quite well mean presenting a forceful dilemma which you are unable to solve. Many an A paper (and many a published one) is valuable precisely because it throws into sharp relief ambiguities and difficulties of interpretation and argument. You might even present a multiplicity of incompatible perspectives, between which, for well argued reasons, you cannot decide. In structuring your philosophy essay, you might be guided by the following:

1. Introduction: Firstly, state what your argument or inquiry is going to be, and briefly indicate your method of attack.

2. Exposition: Secondly, set out the views, theses or claims that you will be advancing AND/OR examining. You may construct the paper either around a thesis of your own, or around the views held by authors of your readings. In either case, other views should be brought in as foils for your own discussion. Make sure you support your claims about your authors’ views by precise citations. But DO NOT quote extensively: instead, paraphrase. Cite page references to the text so that your readers can check up on you.

The naturalistic fallacy discussion from DeNicola’s moral philosophy

When discussing another author’s argument, be sure to exhibit the structure of the argument: Premises, unexpressed assumptions needed for the argument to go through, and conclusion(s). Pick out any crux of interpretation: define any special terms, and discuss any alternative definitions that might be appropriate. Sharpen any difficulty found by suggesting contrary alternative interpretations. If something is unclear, don’t gloss it over: draw attention to it. That way, you will get points even for what you don’t understand! 3. Discussion: Criticism of the views expounded in part

2. Thirdly, consider possible objections (perhaps taken from our authors, if you are highlighting a thesis of your own), and do your best to defend yourself or your author(s) against them. If an author(s)’ argument is bad, explain why: Is one or more of the premises false? (This makes the argument unsound.) Does the conclusion not follow? (This is what it means to say the argument is invalid, if it is intended to be deductive. If not, the premises may just be poor reasons for the conclusion). Sometimes the best you can do might be to point out that the view you are criticizing has highly implausible consequences. Also, does the argument rely on assumptions that are unacceptable, or arbitrary, or debatable? Does the argument contain crucial ambiguities? (In 2 and 3, use the methods suggested in Writing Critical Summaries)

Lastly

4. [Only if you have started by considering other people’s views]: Constructive Section: Here you may set out your own assessment of the issues in question, and show how it escapes the criticisms that you have leveled against the author(s) considered. You should also defend your view against any obvious objections that might be or have been leveled against it. 5. Conclusion: Here you can also briefly recapitulate the gist of your argument and restate the central “message” that your paper has attempted to establish.

Panama Canal Project Failures of the French Effort

This paper focuses on The Panama Canal Project Failures of the French Effort. Write a 3-page, double-space paper (plus cover page and bibliography) on the article entitled, “The Panama Canal Project Failures of the French Effort.”

The Panama Canal Project Failures of the French Effort

Write a 3-page, double-space paper (plus cover page and bibliography) on the article entitled, “The Panama Canal Project Failures of the French Effort.”

Additionally, use the course book and the resources attached for background information.  The paper will also be double-spaced, Times New Roman, font 12 with 4 citations. At the conclusion of the paper, describe ways that you can apply this information in your workspace.

More details;

French Panama Canal Failure (1881-1889)

Under the charismatic leadership of Ferdinand de Lesseps, the French attempted to construct a sea-level canal in Panama.  DeLesseps, who had been successful in building the Suez canal against all odds, assured everyone that building a canal in Panama would be easier to make than the Suez Canal.  However, after $287 million in expenditures and also more than 20,000 deaths, the French attempt failed. The debacle was blame on poor administration and corruption, but the main causes more likely were yellow fever and malaria.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s book “The Social Contract”

This is a paper that is focusing on the reading of Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s book “The Social Contract”. The paper also provides additional information to use in the writing of the assignment paper. Below is the assessment description to follow:

Reading of Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s book “The Social Contract”

Purpose

This assignment allows you to further your research skills. Building on Enlightenment philosophies that are the foundation of the American government, you will construct an argument about the role of government in ensuring public health. To do this, you will research arguments for and against public health policies related to COVID-19. You will practice integration of sources, as well as MLA citation of those sources.

Required Reading

For this assignment, you will read Book I of Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s The Social Contract. You will also view videos explaining the philosophies of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke.

For your research, you will need to consult newspapers and magazines to gain an understanding of the controversies surrounding public health decrees, as well as websites of county, state, or federal health agencies.

Background

Americans have confronted several issues in 2020: systemic racism, climate change, economic destabilization, and global pandemic. Our nation has been divided over these issues and how best to address them, and these issues figured prominently in this year’s presidential election.

As we struggle with how best to control the pandemic, issues of individual freedoms are being weighed against the public good. Some countries chose to shut down entirely, while others (Sweden) opted to maintain status quo in favor of developing “herd immunity.” Across the U.S., states issued “safer at home” orders, with some mandating masks. In California, every county is assigned a colored tier that dictates which types of businesses and institutions can reopen.

In a country that prizes laissez-faire capitalism, these public health orders do not go unchallenged. Also, in Orange County, for example, there have been multiple protests and refusals to wear masks in public. Several religious leaders cite the separation of church and state to justify defying public health orders against congregating indoors.

The California “Blueprint for a Safer Economy” goes further than many others in its efforts to mitigate the disproportionate impact COVID-19 has had on some communities (https://covid19.ca.gov/safer-economy/
(Links to an external site.)
). In addition to looking at positivity and hospitalization rates, counties are assess on a health equity metric. This, too, has caused consternation among people in communities that have lower positivity rates.

Writing Task

In a 1500- to 2000-word essay that incorporates four to six sources, addresses the following question:

WHAT ROLE SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT PLAY IN ENSURING PUBLIC HEALTH?

Please be sure to cite all your sources using MLA format, both in-text and on a Works Cited page.

Benefits of Advocacy Interventions Assignment

This is a paper that is focusing on the student to describe benefits of Advocacy interventions. The paper also provides additional information to use in the writing of the assignment paper. Below is the assessment description to follow:

Describe benefits of Advocacy interventions assignment

Benefits of Advocacy Interventions

Advocacy is essential to the work that human service professionals do with children and their families. For this assignment, you will explore the ways in which advocacy interventions are useful by developing a case study involving one or more children and family members.

Assignment Directions

Please be sure to address all of the following in your assignment:

Develop a case study that involves a child or children and family members.
Make sure to be descriptive in terms of the ages of any children, which family members are part of the case study, and their ages and role with the child/children. Include any other information that is pertinent and include the socioeconomic status of the individuals in your case study and other important background details.
Identify an issue that is impacting the child(ren) and the family members.

Provide some general background on the issue you chose. The background should be specific to the family, along with general information about how many people are impacted by the issue in society, the history of this issue in the country, etc.
Analyze two ways in which advocacy would be beneficial to the case that you discussed.
Be sure to discuss why advocacy is beneficial in terms of the self-determination of the individuals in your case study.
Explore three advocacy interventions that would be particularly useful to the individuals in your case study.
Examine any challenges that human service professionals may encounter when advocating for the individuals in your case study. Also, analyze how human service professionals could overcome these challenges.