ENG 102 TSCC Everything that Rises Must Converge by Flannery O Connor Story Analysis Writing Assignment Help

R1

The thing that interested me about this class was learning that there is more than one ethical philosophy out there. My mindset was be a good person and do to others what you would want done for yourself. I never thought of duty based ethics or virtuous ethics being part of the equation. Duty based ethics being what you think is ethical dependent on what your government tells or asks you to do, while virtuous ethics asks you to judge someone’s moral compass by their characteristics

R2

I had a lot of fun with this course. It made me really think about my morals and the current ethics and one of the best things I got to learn was seeing another side of different scenarios. I love to debate. My last year roommates and I would do debates for hours on end about dang near everything. Sports, politics, everyday stuff, you name it. One of the hardest things to do when that is going on is being able to see what is on the other side of the debate. By learning about different ethics, I learned about what may cause people to think differently and help me understand more than just my side of a debate. That is something I think everyone needs to understand.

R3

I honestly consider all of the content interesting and important. I enjoyed all the different ethical reasonings, what they mean, and what is considered ethical and unethical for each respective method. Prior to this course I had never heard of Kant/Kantian, utilitarian, or libertarian. It was interesting to apply these ways of thinking to common issues that affect people of different backgrounds. I enjoyed having different conversations with some of my classmates who either agreed of respectfully disagreed with my opinions. It was interesting to see how many people agree with what I thought or felt whenever it come to the discussion questions. I can definitely see how learning about ethics can help me in my future career in Psychology. I can see how I can use it now when it comes to Army leadership and decision making. Sometimes decisions have to be made that will not make everyone happy, but will make the majority happy. Sometimes things are not considered at all because they are considered completely unethical. I enjoy reading all of your responses and wish you nothing but blessings and success! Thank you for such an interesting course!

R4

I think that as a whole this class was very interesting and the readings were not a bore. I know sometimes textbooks can be. I did not know that there were three major theories that dealt with ethics and how different individuals processed situations and topics to decide what made something right or wrong and why. I think for me I can see where all three major theories are coming from and depending on the situation I do not strictly agree with one but I can relate to them all in different ways. Ethics is very opinion based which makes it hard because there is no right or wrong answer. I think it was neat seeing everyones views on different topics and our thought processes behind them. It makes me understand how to listen to others opinions and take them into consideration when they differ from my. It is always nice to see different perspectives.

Assignments must be presented in an APA format, with a minimum of 2 evidence-based references, no older than 5 years are required and minimum 500 words.

Nancy is an autonomous 85-year-old living in her own home. She

is hospitalized for atrial fibrillation and two new medications are added to

her regime. She has been forgetful and asks the nurse to repeat statements

several times. She doesn’t think she can remember to take all her medications

and asks if Medicare can pay for someone to come administer the medications

twice a day.

1. Does Nancy meet the eligibility for home care visits?

2. If so, how much (if any) would Medicare pay for home care for Nancy?

3. What other options could be discussed with Nancy?

4. Explore options for living in an independent or assisted living home. What are the costs involved?

You have read about server virtualization and cloud computing in chapter 6 of your textbook. For your written assignment this week, complete a case study of the organization you work for (use a hypothetical or “other” organization if more applicable) that will address the following prompts:

• Describe the organization’s environment, and evaluate its preparedness for virtualization.
• Explain Microsoft (or another product) licensing for virtualized environments.
• Recommend a configuration for shared storage; make sure to discuss the need for high availability and redundancy for virtualization for the organization.
• Explain Windows Azure capabilities for virtual machines and managing a hybrid cloud, including Windows Azure’s Internet as a Service (IaaS) and storage capabilities
• Make a recommendation for cloud computer use in the organization, including a justification for your recommendations.

Submit your research paper as a single document. Your paper should meet the following requirements:

• Be approximately 2-4 pages in length, not including the required cover page and reference page.
• Follow APA7 guidelines. Your paper should include an introduction, a body with fully developed content, and a conclusion.
• Support your answers with the readings from the course and at least two scholarly journal articles to support your positions, claims, and observations, in addition to your textbook. The UC Library is a great place to find resources.
• Be clearly and well-written, concise, and logical, using excellent grammar and style techniques. You are being graded in part on the quality of your writing.

PLCY 340 Second Paper

Instructions: In 2000-2500 words, answer one of the following questions. Papers must use a recognized citation system – e.g. Chicago or MLA – and must be double-spaced throughout. Papers are due November 1st at 11:59pm. Papers should be submitted electronically (in .doc or .docx file format) to the course website via the “Assignment” portal.

1. In 2017, Senator Sherrod Brown and Representative Ro Khanna introduced joint legislation in the Senate and House to address growing income inequality in the U.S. The Grow American Incomes Now (GAIN) Act substantially expands the Earned Income Tax Credit to raise the incomes of low- and middle-income Americans. The cost of the bill – $1.4 trillion over 10 years – would be funded by raising taxes on high-income earners. What is Rawls’s difference principle? What is Rawls’s argument for this principle? How might Rawls’s difference principle lend support/justify the GAIN Act? Suppose that the GAIN Act would be effective in raising the incomes of low-income Americans and would not substantially disincentivize high-income Americans from performing productive work, would the U.S. Congress act justly by passing it? Why or why not? It will useful to consider how libertarians such as Robert Nozick would object to Rawls’s position.

2. The Moving to Opportunity experiment demonstrated that young children (13 or younger) of households receiving Section 8 housing vouchers who move to low-poverty neighborhoods are likely to have significantly higher incomes and rates of college attendance than children who remain in high-poverty neighborhoods. Suppose that on the basis of this evidence, The U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Agency enacts a revision to Section 8 housing vouchers to mandate that they are only usable in low-poverty neighborhoods (recipients must use the vouchers to rent housing in a low-poverty neighborhood or forego access to the program). What does Elizabeth Anderson mean by “integration?” Why does she think that the U.S. government has a duty of justice to promote integration in the U.S.? Why might Anderson support the proposed Section 8 housing voucher policy? What does Tommie Shelby mean by “egalitarian pluralism?” Why might he criticize this proposed policy? Should HUD implement this policy? Why or why not? If not, what might be a more just policy for ensuring low-income Americans have access to safe and affordable housing?

4. A central and controversial component of the Affordable Care Act is the individual mandate, which requires individuals to purchase health care insurance or face a penalty. What is the individual mandate and why is it an important component of the Affordable Care Act, given its goal of ensuring that all Americans have health insurance? Why might someone think that the government has a duty of justice to ensure that all Americans have decent health insurance? Why might libertarians such as Robert Nozick claim that the mandate is an unjust policy? Are they right to think this? Why or why not? If they are right, is there an alternative just way to realize the goal of universal health insurance? For example, is it permissible for the government to use tax revenue to fund a single-payer system similar to Medicare?

5. Some cities in the U.S., including Philadelphia, Seattle, San Francisco, and Boulder, have passed soda taxes in order to reduce consumption of soda and decrease the prevalence of obesity, type 2 diabetes, and heart disease. Opponents of soda taxes argue that they are objectionably paternalistic and regressive. What is Mill’s harm principle? Do soda taxes violate it? Why or why not? Are soda taxes a just way to reduce soda consumption and improve public health? Why or why not? Are there other policy options that are ethically defensible? For example, would it be permissible to prohibit SNAP recipients from using their benefits to purchase soda? Why or why not? In answering this question, assume that soda taxes are effective at reducing consumption of soda and improving public health.

Evaluation Guidelines

The purpose of this paper is for you to provide a reasoned defense of a position on the above question. Your paper will be evaluated in accordance with the following guidelines:

1. Thesis: Does the paper advance a clearly formulated thesis? Is the scope of the thesis appropriate? Or, does the paper set out to accomplish too much or too little?

2. Understanding and Reconstruction of Text/Positions/Arguments: Does the paper demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the text/arguments/positions under discussion? Does the paper support its interpretation of the text by appeal to textual evidence? Does the paper reconstruct the positions/arguments under discussion in a systematic way, making clear the way in which the different components of the argument/position fit together? Or, does the paper only present a superficial understanding of the text/arguments/position? Is the paper fair to the positions/arguments under discussion by reconstructing them charitably? Or, does the paper reconstruct the arguments in a way that fails to recognize their strength.

3. Strength of Argumentation: Does the paper present strong arguments to support its thesis? Does the paper consider possible objections to its position? Or, does the paper present arguments that invite immediate objections or that commit fallacies? Do the thesis and arguments of the paper consider the complexity of the issue under discussion? Or, does the paper advance claims that are overbroad or too general?

4. Organization: Is the paper well organized? Is its structure apparent to the reader? Does the paper proceed in a rational fashion? Does the paper contain a helpful introduction and conclusion?

5. Clarity of Expression: Is the paper clear? Does the paper use simple language and grammatical sentence structure? Does the paper define the concepts that it introduces?

Grades

A Paper: An “A” paper will defend a clearly formulated and tightly focused thesis. It will be clearly written and will be organized in a rational and coherent manner. It will demonstrate a strong grasp of the material under discussion and will reconstruct the arguments under discussion in a systematic way. It will support its thesis with strong arguments that do not invite immediate objections and that appreciate the complexity of the issue under discussion. As well, it will consider well thought through objections to the positions that it defends.

B Paper: A “B” paper will defend a clearly formulated thesis. Though appropriately focused, the thesis may be either too narrow or too broad. It will be well organized and clearly written. The paper will demonstrate a good grasp of the material under discussion, but it may not do so entirely comprehensively or systematically. It will support its thesis with good arguments; however, these arguments may need work in a number of respects.

C Paper: A “C” paper will demonstrate an adequate grasp of the material, but will not present it in a comprehensive or systematic way. It will have a thesis, but the thesis will lack focus, either being too narrow or too broad. It will present arguments to support its thesis, but these arguments will require more thought and consideration.

D Paper: A “D” paper will demonstrate a very minimal understanding of the material and will fail to engage with it in a critical way. It is poorly organized, and is difficult to follow.

F Paper: An “F” paper will demonstrate very little grasp of the material and will fail to engage with it in a serious or critical way. It will fail to provide a complete answer to the assignment.