(NOTE: Include both Task 1 & 2 responses with main types of arguments (Deductive & Inductive) in a single post, and then you must respond to three colleague posts. Be sure to clearly indicate which Task (1 or 2) you are responding to.)

Hi everyone,

We have learned this week about deductive reasoning, including what it takes for an argument to be valid. This discussion allows us to get more practice with the concept through making arguments valid. You will see a list of arguments here. These arguments are not presented in standard form, and each is missing a premise that would be necessary to make it valid. Your tasks will be to put the argument into standard form and add the missing premise that would validly link the premises to the conclusion.

Prepare: To prepare to respond to this prompt, reread the section from Chapter 2 of our book titled “Extracting Arguments in Standard form,” all required portions of Chapters 3 and 4, as well as the guidance and required media for this week. Further assistance in the filling missing premises can be gained from watching the video Constructing Valid Arguments. (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. .

IN 350 WORDS .

Please summarize and briefly explain Catharine MacKinnon’s argument for the censorship of pornography (as it is presented in the reading and lecture notes). How is MacKinnon’s particular pro-censorship argument supposed to be different from obscenity based censorship arguments? Do you think there are any worries/difficulties that MacKinnon’s argument faces? If so, what are they and how might MacKinnon respond to those worries/difficulties?

Write a one-paragraph essay arguing what should be done about Medical Treatment according to one of the six theories. Make sure to respond to the author’s arguments, whether the theory you are using agrees with them or not. Remember, briefly describe the issue, the theory, and what the theory would say about the issue and why.

CAN ONLY USE THE THEORY OF CARE ETHICS

DQ 1

Belief in God is irrational. Discuss.

DQ 2

“Some people claim that the universe looks as if it was designed by a good and benevolent designer only if one ignores much of reality. For example, consider this description of a horrific event from Elspeth Huxley’s autobiographical account of growing up in Africa early in the 20th century:

[Baby chicks] had hatched the day before, in the night a column of siafu, those black, purposeful, implacable, and horribly sinister warrior ants, had marched through the nest. In the morning the yellow chicks were limp, bedraggled, soiled little corpses with their insides eaten out, lying in the nest. The hen was alive, and that was the worst part of it, for the ants had swarmed over her and eaten half her flesh away and her eyes, and she lay there twitching now and then, as if to demonstrate that unreasoning persistence of life that is the very core of cruelty.

Such events are commonplace in nature.

How would you reconcile such events with the view that the universe was created by a wise, good, and benevolent creator?”