THERE ARE TWO REFLECTIVE PAPERS CAN BE SUBMITTED ANYTIME DURING THE SEMESTER –SUBMIT BOTH OF THEM IN THE SAME SUBMISSION, IN THE WEEK 12 DROPBOX (if submitted prior to Week 12, I can provide written feedback, but I may not be able to if it is submitted after this). Use effective documentation style (MLA, APA, or Chicago) THAT CITES YOUR SOURCES (even if its only the Text) IN THE NARRATIVE OF THE PAPER. The Papers should each be an approximately 3 page (roughly 1000 word–although I don’t really count words closely) researched essay on the following:

PAPER 1: (50 points of 100)

1) Pick TWO thinkers/philosophers or TWO written works mentioned in the Text (and, if necessary, consult at least one or two other sources for information about them).

2) Compare/contrast the background of the two people or works with each other.

3) Compare/contrast the main themes or ideas of each with the other

4) Compare the different philosophical arguments about reality, human nature, society, Government, etc, between the two

5) compare the relative impact on the arts and culture/society of the two (if applicable)

6) Compare/contrast which you think is more effective and why. Which do you like better and why.

PAPER 2: (50 points of 100)

1. Select one of the Discussion Topics from the term and explain in 2-3 pages how you would answer the question it asks.

2. Justify your answer by explaining precisely why you feel this way (what your reasoning is for it)

3. In doing this, use the following format (you don’t have to use these exact words, but respond in this way–and write the paper as a regular narrative essay) :

a) The question I’ will discuss is: …….Describe the question (Introduction)

b) This the problem or issue it involves and Is what I think is the answer or solution to it (this is my view of it):…….

c) These are the reasons for why I think that my view is correct:…….

d) However, there are views that disagree with mine for these reasons:……. (here you might want to include a thinker or theory from the text –cited!)

e) nonetheless, I think that these are wrong and my view is still better because:…… (here you also might want to include a thinker/theory that supports yours)

f) Therefore, I still believe that my view is correct (conclusion

SUBMIT BOTH PAPERS IN THE SAME SUBMISSION IN THE WEEK 12 DROPBOX

_________________________________________________________________________

The reports must be written in Microsoft Word and can use MLA formatting (MLA Handbook, 7th Ed., PurdueOWL.com), but you can also use APA, Chicago, or any other formatting stylec, so long as you make sure your sources are cited in the narrative of the paper and listed at the end. Proofread thoroughly for college-level spelling, syntax, and grammar.

Before submitting it in the drop box, be sure it is complete and ready for grading. Once submitted, it cannot be resubmitted.

Below please see the link to the textbook only if needed

https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialSciences/ppecorino/…

This is the discussion post Ive selected that I would like for you to write about. I am a believer in Christianity, I believe in Jesus Christ as lord and savior. I’ve wrote about it in many discussions posts this semester so I would like for my faith to tie into the second half of this essay requiring a response to a dissuasion post.

Please see discussion post I selected below:

One of the fundamental issues regarding philosophy of Religion (and keep in mind that the very category “religion” as a distinct field from “science”, or anything else, is a relatively recent invention of out culture) is basically this: If you believe in God (or gods, etc), then how do you reconcile evil and suffering with this belief (Is God –or Gods, if you believe in more than one– OK with evil and suffering in the world for some reason? Does His/Her/Their plan or nature include evil and suffering somehow/ etc?) OR if you are an Atheist/naturalist in philosophical disposition, then what is your perspective on evil/suffering? (can there even BE such a thing as evil in a mechanistically determined natural world? Is the universe and life ultimately meaningless and purposeless, if all cause/effect is nothing more than a blindly mechanistic physical process? etc?)