Search Our Essay Database

Essay Instructions: Paper is an evaluation of Kant's refutation of the Ontological Proof of God's Existence, CPR pp (The antinomy of pure reason fourth conflict of the transcendental ideas). Any reference to Kant's text in the critique should be cited. This paper, on JSTOR should help. If you need me to email a copy of it let me know.
Kant's `Refutation' of the Ontological Argument
S. Morris Engel
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research
Vol. 24, No. 1 (Sep., 1963), pp. 20-35
I'm available to answer any other questions you may have.

Essay Instructions: This essay assignment will utilize Toulmin's Terms. This essay is argumentative essay.
Here are guidelines:
-Claim. If you were a lawyer defending your client (topic) what would be your absic claim? Underline it.
-Research at least 18 sources. Include a minimum of six.
-Warrants. Okay, you have a claim. However, you need to clearly develop your case and part of that process is develop a number of assumptions and principles supporting your claim. Underline and label in margin. These are basically your main points, or arguments.
-Backing. What is your reasoning for all this? A good lawyer develops a good argument based on good sound logic. How will you convince us?
-Qualifiers. These are the lingo of a good lawyer. These little words link the validity of our claim to our warrants. They may include words such as: often, probably, possibly, etc. Also use liberally, words like: opponents, proponents, those who support, those who disagree, the opposition, supporters, etc. Underline as many qualifying words as you can.
-Opposition. Highlight "all" your opposition. All points of opposition including the refutation or concession.

Requirements:
-Formal Outline (Formal full-sentence)
Ex.I.
A)
B)
C)
II.
Do not go over letter"C".
-Paragraph from textbook. At end of works cited page.
-Underline Claim
-Warrants (underline and lable in margin)
-Qualifying words (underline)
-Highlight your opposition.
*The souces must be from; Journal, Expert Interview and Scholarly sources.

*Use this Library. Name of the library subscriber, city(Lansing Community Coll.Lib.,Lansing.)
Good luck.

Essay Instructions: We will offer more for this one!!!!!

Paper is to be 1400 words long (5-7 pages). Length will not be a criterion in the evaluation of your paper. Density and accuracy will be. Will be looking for papers that try to answer the question, including all the sub-prompts of the question, all of them, and not something else. Not answering a question, not fully answering the question, or answering a question that is not being asked will cost you points.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Below is the prompt. The reference for the prompt is readings on Saint Aquinas and Russell.
You can find scanned copies of the reading in the link here:
http://jumper52.cjb.cc/aquinas.htm
http://jumper52.cjb.cc/russell.htm


***Prompt***
IV. The Christian God 2

1. Lay out, in numbered form the steps of Aquinas? summary of the thesis
that derives the existence of God from ?the nature of efficient causation.?
2. Do the same for Russell?s alleged refutation of the argument that the
existence of God can be demonstrated by arguing for and from the necessity of
a first cause.
3. What is the logical relation between the conclusion of Russell?s
argument and Aquinas? thesis relate? Say, as clearly as you can, why Russell?s
refutation fail to be a refutation of Aquinas? summary.
4. What would one need to assume or to show if one wanted to reject the ?
argument from efficient causation? summarized by Aquinas?

Essay Instructions: The essay consists of two questions:
1. Explain how Socrates refutation of Gorgias is supposed to work (447a-461b, but especially: 458e-461b). What key steps are there in the refutation? Could Gorgias have (easily?) avoided refutation? What key steps are the in the refutation? Could Socrates (or Plato) trying to make this refutation? Or is the whole thing just about making Gorgias look bad?

2.Explain and critcally evaluate Socrates reasoning for the apparently preporterous claim that tyrants like orators have no great power (Gorgias 466a-468e). You should make sure that you take into accout Socrates distinction between doing what one wants and doing what one sees fit. How does Socrates argue for this distinction? How crucial to Socrates argument is it? Is there any such distinction or is Socrates simply mistaken? Or, even worse, is Socrates merely playing word games.

There are faxes for this order.