Best Writer

This week, we continued exploring the debate between Clifford and James concerning the ethics of belief, particularly how this debate has evolved with new technology and in our contemporary context. For this Critical Assessment, you will be asked to use your knowledge from the past two weeks to answer the following question:

“Is one of the heuristics from the Clifford/James debate that we explored in week 1–avoid falsehoods or acquire truths–a better heuristic to use, assuming you want to avoid echo chambers?”

In total, your paper should be about 800 words. You should address the following over the course of your paper:

a. Using an example, explain what the distinguishing features of echo chambers are and why one might want to avoid echo chambers when possible, given the reading for this week. (This should be about 3-5 sentences).

b. Explain what these two heuristics are and how they are generated from James’s/Clifford’s views (i.e., why do the core features of Clifford’s view yield this rule for how we should approach new beliefs/evidence? why do the core features of James’s view yield this rule for how we should think about risk/reward with respect to beliefs?). (This should be about 4-5 sentences).

c. Defend a position concerning the bolded question above and explain your answer. Notice that your answer may take on one of three claims: (1) avoid falsehoods is a better heuristic for avoiding echo chambers, (2) acquire truths is a better heuristic for avoiding echo chambers, or (3) neither heuristic will help one avoid echo chambers. (This should be the majority of your paper). In defending your argument, you should use the podcast to support your argument (and think about what advice you’d give Caleb in writing your argument). Here’s some things to consider that you may want to address, or at least think about before writing this Critical Assessment: How did Caleb see himself when he went down the far-right rabbit hole and when he then went down the far-left one? How did Caleb think about the beliefs/evidence of others compared to his own? Do you think Caleb is any less susceptible to echo chambers at the end of the story?

Your paper should include a brief (~3 sentence) introduction and conclusion. You can use quotes from either of the papers to support your interpretation, but you must try to explain these concepts mainly in your own words. If you do use quotes or say something like “Clifford argues that…” you should include an in-text citation that identifies the author and the page number associated with the argument. Be sure to spend some time looking through the rubric before you begin writing the CA.

(you only need to use the sources I have provided. Including two reading packets and two podcasts(these sources must be included.
This paper doesn’t require a reference page, but in-text citations are needed.
This paper requires a large portion of original thoughts and understandings rather than3 paraphrasing the philosophy and ethical theories for a large amount.
This paper requires specific and correct explanation of the examples you choose to include from the podcast or reading.Thank you!)

The podcast links:
1.

2.

Article in uploaded files

For this assignment, you must write a 2 page (600 words of content) reaction paper on your thoughts while reading the assigned article for the week.
Briefly summarize the article (1 or 2 paragraphs). Then, you could write about what you found interesting, what surprised you, discuss how the content relates to the readings for the week, or relate the article content to your previous knowledge.

All the instructions will be on the file i put in its called “source paper 3 instrcutions”
you will need to use 2 sources from the story i am posting and 2 sources but get with me about the aditional last 2 sources…

The essay has to be about the story ” THE PRINCIPLES OF HEAVENLY NATURE” that i have posted as a word document

Examine two different perspectives of American affluence by notable intellectuals of the period. The first is by Clark Kerr, Chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley. And the second is by sociologist C. Wright Mills.

Clark Kerr, “Freedom in Industrial Society” (1960), in Foner, Voices of Freedom, 245-249.
C. Wright Mills, “On ‘Cheerful Robots'” (1959), in Foner, Voices of Freedom, 255-257.
Kerr argued that in America industrial society and individual freedom were compatible, but that this new society also demanded a new consensus about the ideas and values central to the functioning of that society. Although work in industrial society requires a good deal of discipline and limits to an individual’s freedom, this is compensated for by the expansion of leisure activities and consumerism outside of work which provides the economic conditions for that freedom in industrial society. Furthermore, industrial society requires a necessary consensus beyond ideological or political disagreement. This consensus concerns a common set of ideas, beliefs, and value judgments, articulated by educated intellectuals, and integrated throughout the whole of American industrial society, which cannot function with that consensus.

Mills, on the other hand, argued that the Cold War and industrial society in America in the 1950s created the conditions for a new sense of alienation along with the demands of conformity and normalization. Work had become monotonous and repetitive. Suburban life was homogeneous and hollow. Consumerism created the endless cycles of desire and its temporary satiation. And massive bureaucracies ruled by “power elites”—corporate executives, politicians, scientists, and military leaders—alienated individuals from their freedom. Technological society could create a new conformism without recourse to forms of political oppression characteristic of totalitarian societies. Social control could be achieved on a wide scale through the means of proper training and conditioning, or could produce what Mills called “cheerful robots”: a society comprised of predictable human automatons, lacking freedom and rational thought.

Your task is to compare and contrast these two sources and explain how their very different assessments of America in the 1950s reflects the new circumstances of technological society. You do not necessarily have to take a side in their debate, or agree or disagree with one side or the either. A very good paper, for instance, will formulate an interpretation that shows how this debate reflects the broader place of America within the historical context of the Cold War and American consumerism in the 1950s.

Here are some questions to help you think about the two sources (you don’t necessarily have to answer these questions in your paper)

How does the concept of freedom function differently in Kerr and Mills? Are there any points of agreement between the two about freedom?
How do the circumstances of America’s involvement in the Cold War create the conditions upon which this new technological society functions?
How does the America Kerr and Mills describe in the 1950s differ from the America of the 1930s during the Great Depression?
In what sense, if at all, might the descriptions or prescriptions of Kerr and Mills still apply to American technological society today, in the 2020s?
For the paper it is absolutely imperative that you cite your sources using one of the acceptable academic citation styles (MLA, APA, Chicago, etc.), and that the citations appear correctly in the body of your paper. If you fail to submit a paper with citations you will fail the assignment. You must cite your sources.

The paper must include the following:

A descriptive title.
A thesis statement and an argument. Do not simply summarize or describe the sources. Provide an analysis of the meaning and significance of the texts. In other words, form an interpretation of the texts.
Provide evidence from the text to support your thesis statement. The evidence must come from the text itself.
Use in-text citations when quoting or paraphrasing a source.
Include a bibliography at the end of your paper.
750-1250 words (a minimum of 3 full pages, roughly, 3-5 pages).
10 or 12-point readable font, double-spaced, with 1” margins

Number each point.

1) Discuss FIVE major points discussed in the readings on Reconstruction.

2) For each point note explain why you feel it is important.

The final paper for the course is a 4 to 7-page paper on 2014 and beyond for J.C. Penney’s. Using the research that you have conducted, and the case study provided, describe what you think the opportunities and concerns for J.C. Penney’s are going forward. What would your recommendations be if you were an outside consultant hired to lead J.C. Penney’s to a solid foundation?

Review the results of your survey (see file below). Think about the material on pages 118-120 of the WK text. Write a paragraph about your relationship maintenance preferences. How do they influence the way that you approach your supervisor (or other authority figures), especially during potentially risky situations?

The cultural group that I decided to do was the San Francisco Vegan Society. You can find them on Facebook for more information. You can be very creative with this paper in terms of the three aspects you choose for my cultural group that were significant themes. You can also make up examples to support your themes. The data they’re asking for to cite is my field notes. The field notes is the journal I write weekly about my cultural group. I have attached different journals from 4 different weeks that you can use to incorporate into the paper. So basically right it from the perspective of you joining a vegan group and you eat different types of meat. This can be all made up.

In this paper, you will describe and analyze three aspects of your cultural group that you think could be significant themes in your final paper. You will identify these three themes and describe each of them in detail. Provide and analyze at least two examples (unique events that represent the larger category/pattern) of each of the themes. Include data (e.g. quotations or vignettes) from your field notes with your examples. Cite your field notes like this: (FN date: time).

You do not need to cite other course material; however, your description and analysis should make use of relevant concepts, such as empathy, group style, boundaries, implicit rules, norms, ideology communication patterns, values, identities, rituals, behaviors/practices, social processes, power and authority, meaning making, etc. Note: these cultural elements do not themselves constitute themes. Also, the point is not just to show you know these concepts but to use them to augment your description and analysis.

NOTE: This paper focuses on finding meaning in three aspects of your group’s culture to help you build up to the final paper (you will be able to use parts of it there). This paper should not include much reflection of your experience or comparison between yourself and the group (you will have a chance to do that kind of analysis in your final paper).

You must use the the following organization:

Begin your paper with an introductory paragraph that: 1) briefly introduces your cultural group, including the main difference between you and the group and how you participate; 2) briefly introduces the three cultural themes that you are describing and why you chose them (one sentence for each would be about right).

The rest of the paper should follow the organizational structure you laid out in your introductory paragraph by systematically describing and analyzing each of the three themes in the order they were introduced (with analysis of at least two specific examples for each of those themes). Discuss any connections between your themes as you go.

In your conclusion, summarize your themes and reflect on any connections between them; share what you plan to focus on in your remaining observations and analysis of the group: what would you like to understand better about your group now that you have written this deep-description paper?

Remember to use pseudonyms—not the real names— for your participants.

This paper should be 4-5 pages long.

Topic: Los Angeles County Foster Youth and the Lack of Continuity in education
The outline of the paper and points breakdown is as follows:
I. Identification of the community; defining its boundaries; and historical overview. Be clear in why this
community should be investigated. Use the areas below to guide the paper in defining community. –

II. Socio-demographic analysis –
a. Age
b. Gender
c. Race/Ethnicity
d. Family Structure
e. Income and Poverty
f. Housing Patterns
g. Employment patterns

III. Major economic forces and how they shape the livelihood of people in the community –
a. Major employers
b. Business and commercial patterns

IV. Descriptions of community institutions –
a. Educational
b. Cultural
c. Social Services

V. Analysis of residential patterns and how they are affected by ethnicity and class (where different groups
of people live) –

VI. Patterns of inter-racial/ethnic conflict, social class conflict, and integration –

VII. Assessment of quality of life in the community – 3 pts
a. Level of safety
b. Sense of belonging
c. Degree of integration
d. Mutual supportThe outline of the paper and points breakdown is as follows: (35 pts total)

These are the assignment instructions: 1,500 words (formatting should adhere to genre conventions)
Considering the examples from Takijii Kobayashi, Susan Sontag, and Frederick Douglass (in linked files) that we have read in class, choose a narrative that you have written that you think could be productively revised into a collective protagonist form. There are many ways to imagine this “collective.” It could be, as in the case of Takijii and Douglass, a labor condition. It could also be, as in the case of Sontag, a community that is formed by a historical event (i.e., environmental or epidemiological).
Achieving success with this assignment requires much more than simply changing the pronouns in the story from “I/he/she” to “we/they.” It requires thinking about how the narrative will unfold, how scenes will develop, how character will be established, in a collective rather than individual mode. Use the pieces attached at the bottom for writing style inspiration but not their plots

Here is the topic of the paper you will be writing with all details.

Title: Confronting Biases.
Following the social justice movement of 2020, racism and structural oppression became a major concern for many individuals. One white and one black, who had been best friends since childhood, were forced to consider how they would react to the events taking place all around them. The tension between the two protagonists intensified, threatening to destroy their friendship as the movement gathered traction and protests broke out across the nation.The white character, who had never personally encountered racism, initially sympathized with the movement but found it difficult to grasp the pressing nature of the problem. He became upset with what he saw as a lack of advancement as the protests grew more uncontrollable.
Meanwhile, the black character was struggling with the pain and trauma of his own experiences with racism and the need for immediate and significant change.The two characters’ friendship and how their contrasting worldviews threaten to drive them apart form the narrative’s main premise. The characters are forced to face their own prejudices and presumptions as the stress increases. They start to pay closer attention to one other’s viewpoints as they start to recognize how their own experiences have influenced their own.The characters learn more about the pertinent issues through their discussions and disagreements. The white character begins to grasp the movement’s urgency and the necessity for dramatic change. On the other side, the black character starts to recognize how his personal experiences have impacted his opinions and begins to value his friend’s viewpoint.In the end, the characters reach a place where they can put aside their differences and cooperate to achieve a shared objective. Even when it’s challenging or uncomfortable, they understand how important it is to hear and comprehend many points of view.
They recognize the necessity of ongoing activism and action to promote racial justice and equality in their own communities.The story emphasizes the value of confronting our own presumptions and biases and engaging in unpleasant conversations. It also shows the necessity of ongoing activism and action to combat racism and systematic oppression. The story’s protagonists are a good representation of the larger group of individuals battling for racial equality and justice.