Rutgers Application of Knowledge MGT in US Agency for International DEV Discussion Health Medical Assignment Help

All papers will follow similar directions. This first one will probably be the hardest, even as we dive into more advanced material. Please give me full effort and trust that it will reflect in your grade. To help your papers, feel free to read this outline for how to write a good philosophy paper.

http://www.sfu.ca/philosophy/resources/writing.htm…

Here are your directions:

Write a SHORT intro with no more than three sentences with one sentence being your thesis. A thesis is “a specific point that you are trying to establish – something that you are trying to convince the reader to accept”. The thesis is your conclusion, and your entire argument will be to defend the thesis. The entire point of the intro paragraph in a philosophical paper is simply to present your thesis. You honestly want as short of an intro as possible since it the meat and potatoes of the paper are in the argument. For this paper, you have two options, Utilitarianism is true or it’s not. You’ll need to pick one. Do not fence-sit. However, your thesis statement also needs to state the fundamental reason(s) that make(s) you correct. For example, if I want to argue that cereal is a better breakfast food than eggs, I can’t just blankly state that. I need to say, “Cereal is a better breakfast food than eggs because cereal is faster to prepare and I’m a horrible cook.” In that thesis, the entire paper is already given away. It gives two reasons, and that will be my argument. That’s what you want. A good thesis awards 20 points. Do not “fence-sit”. And for the record, eggs are great.

Since your thesis will be on Utilitarianism, you will need to immediately define your terms. This is absolutely the most fundamental problem in most arguments: no one knows what people are really talking about. In my cereal vs eggs example, I actually imply that cereal is not “cooked” even though they are both “prepared”. Little things like that matter A LOT when we talk about more important topics. You will describe Utilitarianism as argued by Bentham and Mill in order to best define Utilitarianism. Try to describe the differences between the two, but what is most important is what they have in common. Include examples. Good description/definition of your important terms awards 40 points.

Now that Utilitarianism has been well defined, you can argue. You will be evaluating those claims within Utilitarianism, and supporting whatever reasons you’ve given for your claim. Support can be all sorts of things, but in general, the supports should be more obviously true to help walk the reader to the truth of your thesis. Do not use a shotgun approach to argument, where you take a thousand little reasons and hope they are strongest. The simple argument is the strongest, and you should build up to your conclusion from a strong foundation. In my cereal vs eggs example, I would need to cite that cooking eggs is actually longer, I would need to tell you why time is so important (maybe because we’re all rushing to start our day), I would need to say why my poor cooking skills matter, etc. Good argumentative form awards 20 points.

The next step is done for both integrity and logic. You’ll need to respond to objections and offer concessions. In my cereal vs. eggs example, I would need to expect a reader to think “What if I have lots of time? What if it’s a Saturday? Why does your bad cooking mean I shouldn’t cook eggs for me?”. At the end of a good philosophical paper, these kinds of things are addressed. Sometimes, this is actually the longest section. Mill’s “Utilitarianism” is almost entirely objections and concessions. Concessions are valuable because, if you identify the limits of your logic, it helps people understand your claim. Moreso, it might help you realize that you need to beef up your reasons or change your claim entirely. Specifically, in this section, I want you to focus on objections. Say why someone might disagree with you, and why their reason is mistaken. This means you have to anticipate a point of disagreement and address it immediately. This strengthens your reasons for your position. In a full book, you would address any and all possible objections, but I really only need you to pick one or two that you think are most common. Good objection anticipation awards 20 points.

If you would like, you may have a concluding paragraph to summarize everything, but honestly, philosophical papers don’t always need these. Philosophy is not an English class, a History class, or a poetry class. Do whatever makes you feel comfortable; the important parts are the thesis, the definitions, the arguments, and the objections.

Don’t plagiarize. Don’t even get close. Put quotes on anything that needs quotes. Plagiarizing on the draft counts just as much as anything else.

You need to write 2.5 pages for the draft, you’ll need a full 4 for the final. Do not fence-sit.

PreviousNext

Pretty straightforward, reflection and theory paper. Only 3 page (4 including reference page) I will be providing the link to the textbook (it’s free) as well as the rubric once accepted. The chapters to chose a theory from is below.

1. Define the career/life goals of a Forensic Psychologist. (5 points)

2. Do some research: (30 points)

• Choose and describe a theory from the course that interested you most.
• Discuss how this theory helped you better understand something about yourself. Reflect on and personalize the concepts learned and apply them to a real-life situation.
• Do a little research on this theory and provide at least one additional fact that you learned outside of the OpenStax textbook.
• Cite your sources, including any additional facts you use from the OpenStax textbook.

3. Explain how this theory will help you better understand and work with people as a forensic psychologist and/or life in general. (10 Points). Reminder of chapter titles to help you find your topics:

Chapters to choose from:

1Introduction to Psychology

2 Psychological Research
3 Biopsychology
4 States of Consciousness
5 Sensation and Perception
6 Learning
7 Thinking and Intelligence
8 Memory
9 Lifespan Development
10 Emotion and Motivation
11 Personality
12 Social Psychology
13 Industrial-Organizational Psychology
14 Stress, Lifestyle, and Health
15 Psychological Disorders

Assignment 1 Question-Chapters: 1, 2, 3 & 4: – [5 Marks]

Q1: Imagine a society that produces military goods and consumer goods, which we’ll call “guns”

and “butter.” [2 Marks]

A)Draw a production possibilities frontier for guns and butter. Using the concept of opportunity cost, explain why it most likely has a bowed-out shape.

B)Show a point that is impossible for the economy to achieve. Show a point that is feasible but inefficient.

C)Imagine that the society has two political parties, called the Hawks (who want a strong military) and the Doves (who want a smaller military). Show a point on your production possibilities frontier that the Hawks might choose and a point the Doves might choose.

D)Imagine that an aggressive neighboring country reduces the size of its military. As a result, both the Hawks and the Doves reduce their desired production of guns by the same amount. Which party would get the bigger “peace dividend,” measured by the increase in butter production? Explain.

Q2: Canada and that each of these workers can produce either 2 cars or 30 bushels of wheat in a

year. [2 Marks]

A)What is the opportunity cost of producing a car in Canada? What is the opportunity cost of producing a bushel of wheat in Canada? Explain the relationship between the opportunity costs of the two goods.

B)Draw Canada’s production possibilities frontier. If Canada chooses to consume 10 million

cars, how much wheat can it consume without trade? Label this point on the production

possibilities frontier.

C)Now suppose that the United States offers to buy 10 million cars from Canada in exchange for 20 bushels of wheat per car. If Canada continues to consume 10 million cars, how much wheat does this deal allow Canada to consume? Label this point on your diagram. Should Canada accept the deal?

Q3: Suppose the demand function for corn is Qd = 10 − 2p, and supply function is Qs = 3p − 5. The

government is concerned that the market equilibrium price of corn is too low and would like to

implement a price support policy to protect the farmers. By implementing the price support

policy, the government sets a support price and purchases the extra supply at the support price.

In this case, the government sets the support price ps = 4. [1 Mark]

(a)Calculate the original market equilibrium price and quantity in absence of the price

support policy.

(b)At the support price ps = 4, find the quantity supplied by the farmers, the quantity

demanded by the market, and the quantity purchased by the government.

Only7-8sentences

Your response must put concepts from two different essays read during the given week into conversation. For example, in Week 2, we read excerpts from Dorothy Roberts’ Fatal Invention and Deirdre Cooper Owens’ Medical Bondage. There, your task would be to make connections between these two black women theorists. For example, how does Cooper Owens’ theory of the “black” body in which she includes poor Irish women relate to Roberts’ theory about race as a political category? You might even make connections between a theorist and the music or artwork for the given week. For example, how does bell hooks’ concept of theory as liberatory practice help us to see the ways that Aretha Franklin and the Virginia Female Jubilee Singers were theorizing about the world in which they lived?

This is an exercise that will get you thinking about the ways in which the work of scholars is always connected, implicitly and/or explicitly. This will also be practice in using in-text citations for MLA, APA, or Chicago style. Therefore, when you quote from any of the theorists, please ensure to cite in one of these styles. Please also create a Bibliography/Works Cited below your response.

Example in MLA style:

As the astute philosopher Nicki Minaj once said, “Broke people should never laugh” (0:36-0:39). Unfortunately, I have not laughed ever since she made this statement. However, it would put a smile on my face if you all continued to do well in my class and to read each theorist with the attention she deserves. I would be very happy, for example, to see connections being made between Nina Simone singing “My skin is black, my arms are long, my hair is woolly, my back is strong” (1:04-1:25) and bell hooks arguing that she “saw in theory then a location for healing” (1). Or making connections between the theory of the “medical superbody” (Cooper Owens 7) and that of race as a “political category” (Roberts 35). Whatever you choose to do, make me proud!

Works Cited (in alphabetical order)

Cooper Owens, Deirdre. Medical Bondage: Race, Gender, and the Origins of American Gynecology. University of Georgia Press, 2018. Print.

hooks, bell. “Theory as Liberatory Practice,” 4 Yale J.L. & Feminism (1991). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjlf/vol4/iss1/2.

Nicki Minaj. “Broke people should never laugh.” YouTube, uploaded by Kaicho November 1, 2020. www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlTwC6fDz1o.

Nina Simone. “Nina Simone’s best FOUR WOMEN Performance.” YouTube, uploaded by Mpho Tsilo August 30, 2017. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6OC314zDZ4.

Roberts, Dorothy E., Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, and Big Business Re-Create Race in the Twenty-First Century. New York: New Press, 2011. Online Resource.