Expert answer:please answer each single question in this paper I will send you pages number that is assigned to read and answer for each part to be able to answer
study_pool_1.docx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Part 1 : Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emile (PowerPoint and 109-113):
Be able to explain what Rousseau and Hobbes mean by a “state of nature.” Why does Rousseau believe that humans
must be naturally good? If humans are naturally good, why do some people turn out bad? Be able to explain and
give examples of what causes a person loses his/her natural goodness, according to Rousseau. Why does Rousseau
think that education from man and education from things ought to support (and not go against) education from
nature?
Part 2: Thomas Hobbes (Powe point):
Why does the “state of nature” turn into a “state of war,” according to Hobbes? What do human beings realize that
they need to do, to get themselves out of this “state of war”? What is the “social contract” that humans agree to?
Why would humans agree to this contract, in other words, why do humans not want to continue in the “state of
war”? Why does Hobbes think that the best form of government is an absolute monarchy?
Part 3: Rene Descartes, Discourse on Method (book pages 84-89):
Be able to define these phrases: different in kind, different in degree. According to Descartes, which of the previous
two phrases applies to the difference between humans and other animals, and why? What are the two things that
humans can do, but animals cannot do, according to Descartes? According to you, how would Descartes define
human nature?
Part 4 : Alex Kacelnik, “Meanings of Rationality” (Power point ):
Kacelnik explains three different senses of what “rational” can mean: PP-rationality, E-rationality, and Brationality. Be able to define each of these, and explain the similarities and differences between the different
senses. The author then provides three experiments, each of which tests animals for one of these kinds of
rationality. Be able to briefly describe each experiment, state what animal(s) was tested, and explain whether the
animal(s) succeeded or failed to display that kind of rationality. What is the point of Kacelnik’s article?
Part 5 : Ruth Millikan, “Styles of Rationality” (Power point ):
How does Millikan define the term “rationality”? Does she think non-human animals can be rational? Be able to
explain your answer and give your own example. Millikan thinks that one difference between humans and other
animals is that we are interested in a certain kind of facts. What are these facts? How do we test such facts to see if
they are correct? Be able to explain and give your own examples. What is the kind of reasoning that sets humans
apart from other animals, according to her? According to you, how would Millikan define human nature?
Part 6: Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism and Humanism (book pages 185-198):
What does it mean to say that, for manufactured objects, “essence precedes existence”? Be able to give your own
example. What does Sartre mean when he says that, for human beings, “existence precedes essence”? Be able to
give your own example. Be able to explain the following terms: abandonment, anguish, and despair. What does he
mean when he says that a person is “nothing else but the sum of his actions”? Does Sartre think that moral failings
(such as cowardice) should be blamed on biological or genetic flaws? Why or why not? What is “quietism” and why
would an existentialist like Sartre be opposed to it? According to you, how would Sartre define human nature?
Part 7: B.F. Skinner, About Behaviorism (book pages 207-221):
What causes our behavior, according to Skinner? Be able to give your own example illustrating his point. Be able to
contrast what the cause of our “essence” is for Skinner vs. for Sartre. Be able to give at least two reasons why
Skinner thinks that we should not say that “mental states” or “feelings” are the cause of human behavior. Be able to
define and give examples of the following: operant conditioning, positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement,
and punishment. Does Skinner think the difference between humans and other animals is a difference in kind or a
difference in degree, and why? According to you, how would Skinner define human nature?
***Think about (and be prepared to explain) whether you agree or disagree with the main points in each
philosopher, and be prepared to give your own examples to illustrate these points.***
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
