Get help from the best in academic writing.

You’ll be asked to first come up with both a reliable and unreliable resource on the topic

You’ll be asked to first come up with both a reliable and unreliable resource on the topic. I don’t know how to handle this Writing question and need guidance.

Subject: Philosophy
Topic: Abortion
Style: Harvard

For many reasons, we need a place for civil discussion on matters that have great impact on our lives and tend to lead to embarrassingly poor arguments and discussions in social media (especially by older generations). Since most of these issues hit ethical, social, political and even epistemic philosophy, and this is a great environment for students to practice both logical argumentation and finding legitimate resources, Offensive Fridays can play a very practical role in students’ introduction to Ethics.For these Offensive Friday discussions, you will have a formal environment such that you could practice both civil discourse and logical argumentation. You’ll be asked to first come up with both a reliable and unreliable resource on the topic for 5 points, followed by a small description of why you find each reliable or unreliable.
You’ll be asked to first come up with both a reliable and unreliable resource on the topic

There is an issue that has been debated upon by philosophers in the past and still so by scientists today. This issue is whether heredity or environment plays a greater role in the determining or shaping of an individual’s behavior. It is known as the nature versus nurture debate. Numerous generations before us have deliberated on the reasons behind the development of human behavior. There have been many theories formulated to explain why humans behave the way they do. The surviving theories for behavior derive from physiological and sociological explanations, however, the two explanations have not always been compatible with each other. The famous nature vs. nurture debate over human behavior resulted from conflicting views between proponents of the physiological (nature) and sociological (nurture) explanations. Throughout history, research has swayed popularity back and forth between the theories. Yet, theorists have broken down the line separating nature and nurture.* As of today, people utilize both explanations to explore human behavior. Considerably before our time, early philosophers endeavored to understand the human behavior. As early as 350 BC, such philosophers as Plato and Aristotle tried to understand behavior. *The question of nature or nurture as the primary drive can be traced to these times. Plato believed behavior and knowledge was due to innate factors. Author Fiona Cowie states, “The claim that the character of our mental furniture is to a large extent internally rather than environmentally determined found its first substantive defense in the works of Plato…” (Cowie, ). Plato theorized that all knowledge is present at birth. Plato also believed that the environment played a part in human processes, but he thought it had a unique role. He believed the environment did not teach people anything new, but its purpose was to remind people of information they already knew (Cowie, 1999). Although Plato’s views are not supported today, he laid the groundwork for other researchers to follow. Alternatively, philosopher Aristotle theorized a different idea about human behavior. He presented the idea that humans are born into the world with a “blank slate” and people’s behavior and thoughts are due to experience (Ashcraft, 1998). Unlike Plato, Aristotle hypothesized that humans were not born with knowledge, but they acquire it through experience (Ashcraft, 1998). Aristotle’s idea of the tabula rasa is not believed today. Nevertheless, his belief that the environment was a vital factor in behavior influenced many empiricists throughout history. During the late 1700s, the nature vs. nurture debate began to heat up between philosophers. Internalists (nature) and empiricists (nurture) wrote literature back and forth trying to prove their beliefs and disprove the other theories. Two philosophers, G.W. Leibniz and John Locke, were the main representatives of their respected explanations. Leibniz promoted the externalism point of view. Cowie states, “…Leibniz’s position on this issue is, of course, that the tabula is far from rasa: ‘The soul inherently contains the sources of various notions and doctrines, which external objects merely rouse up…’ ” (Cowie, 1999). Leibniz argued against Locke and other empiricists stated that “…there is no way ideas which come into the mind from outside can be formed into beliefs and judgments without the operation of specific internal mechanisms” (Cowie, 1999). Simultaneously, John Locke and his fellow philosophers campaigned for empiricism. Like Aristotle, the philosophers believed that humans’ thoughts and actions were determined not by innate factors, but by their unique experiences (Ashcraft, 1998). Locke argued against the internalists by tentatively examining different human processes such as logic and reasoning. He would ask how it was possible to use logic and reasoning if people were born with all of the knowledge they would ever acquire (Cowie 1999). The contrasting views of the two groups had begun the nature vs. nurture debate, which would linger in the fields of philosophy and psychology for decades. A key point should be made that even though the literalists and empiricists felt strongly about their theories, the explanations were not entirely opposite of each other. Cowie explains, “…rhetoric aside, both empiricists and nativists are both internalist and externalists about the origin of what is in our minds” (Cowie, 1999). Even Leibniz and Locke stated that the philosophies sometimes were only different by the choices of words they used to describe their theories. Leibniz once wrote that fundamentally their views were the same about the nature vs. nurture question (Cowie, 1999). The most recent studies that have been done on twins and adoption use both identical and fraternal twins. This consists in the studying of twins that were separated at birth and grew up in separate homes. Identical twins are 100% genetically similar and offer exact genetic replicas to study, where fraternal twins are the same as any other siblings at 50% similar (Vanderbilt). Some of the final results of these studies show astonishing similarities between identical twins, yet others show little evidence of these similarities. With fraternal twins there is some similarities but none that are complete evidence of the nature theory. These studies fuel the pot for both the nature and the nurture ideas. The nature vs. nurture debate over the last forty years has reached an agreement that they both influence the development of human behavior. In the 1960s, researchers from both theories began to study the interaction of the genes and the environment (Devlin, 1997). Dr. Ann Barnet explains, “Even in an unborn baby, genes and environment interact almost from the moment of conception”(Barnet, 1998). The statements of Dr. Fausto-Sterling and Dr. Evan Balaban can sum up the interaction between nature and nurture. Fausto-Sterling states, “People want simple explanations for hard-core problems. If there was an anti-testosterone drug that we could to inject to make young boys nice…it would be easier and cheaper than transforming schools…or whatever is at the heart of the problem” (Barnet, 1998). However, Balaban replies, “…don’t hold your breath if you think looking for genes to help you understand violence. I would put my money on some clever environmental manipulations, because in the end you’re going there anyway” (Barnet, 1998). The nature vs. nurture debate has produced many research advances in the area of human development. Even though evidence proves that there is an interaction between genes and the environment, people will continue to study the effects of each in development. In these future studies, I hope more groundbreaking advances will be made to aid humans in better understanding human behavior. In the end, that is what both sides of the nature vs. nurture debate intended to accomplish. Works Cited Ashcraft, M. (1998). Fundamentals of Cognition. New York, NY: Longman. Brooks, J. (2004). The process of parenting. (6th ed). Toronto, ON: McGraw-Hill. Cowie, F. (1999). What’s Within?. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Devlin, B. (1997). Intelligence, Genes, and Success. New York, NY: Copernicus. Deutschmann, Linda B. (2002). Deviance and Social Control Third Edition. Scarborough, ON: Nelson Thomson Learning. Fujita, Frank. (2000). Nature vs. Nurture. 3/15/2002 from: http://folk.uio.no/roffe/faq/node11.html Hockenbury

Option #1: Contributing to the Conversation

Option #1: Contributing to the Conversation.

Begin this Critical Thinking Assignment by creating an annotated bibliography, using at least 6 sources. These sources can be the sources on a particular topic that you have gathered over the course of the past three modules. Please follow the format at this link: http://csuglobal.libguides.com/CommonWritingAssign/annotated_bibFor each annotated citation, summarize the main theme and scope of the source. Each annotation should include a sentence or two related to each of the following criteria:Your evaluation of the authority of the content. Be sure to include the type of source you are evaluating.A summary of the main theme or key elements of the article and its intended audience.An explanation of how the information compares to or contrasts with the other work you have cited—which means you will summarize the argument or stance of the author in each source, then connect the sources by comparing their similarities and differences, stating your interpretation of the issues.Each annotation should be about two paragraphs long. Please see this link: https://www.bethel.edu/library/research/apa-annobib-sixth.pdfNext, write a short reflection paper (two pages), complete with in-text and reference citations, in which you reflect on what you have learned from the sources in your annotated bibliography. Who were the experts who emerged from your research? How do the ideas in each source relate or connect? Or not? Were there diverse perspectives? What perspectives or viewpoints were overlooked?In a final paragraph, share what you learned about writing and research during this course overall. What did you learn about yourself as a researcher during this course? How would you evaluate your overall growth as a researcher? How does this work connect with your overall education?Adhere to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing & APA and the annotated bibliography template.Your annotated bibliography should be 7 to 9 pages in length (excluding cover page and references) and formatted according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing & APA. Be sure to discuss and reference concepts taken from the assigned textbook reading and relevant research. Review the grading rubric to see how you will be graded for this assignment.
Option #1: Contributing to the Conversation

Details of child and context of the observation

best essay writers We would suggest that, prior to any action; social workers need to be capable of taking an observational stance to give themselves the possibility of objectivity in coming to their conclusions. The observational stance requires them to be aware of the environment, the verbal and non-verbal interaction; to be aware of their own responses as a source of invaluable data, provided they are aware of what comes from them and what from their clients; and to develop the capacity to integrate these and give themselves time to think before arriving at a judgment or making a decision. (Trowel

Physics homework help

Physics homework help. Write an article for your school magazine about looking after pets. You might like to discuss why people like to have pets, what kinds of pets you could have and the importance of looking after animals.,Write an article for your school magazine about looking after pets,Write an article for your school magazine about looking after pets. You might like to discuss why people like to have pets, what kinds of pets you could have and the importance of looking after animals. Remember that you are writing for people of your own age. but in 130 to 180 words please.,More details;,Owing, ,a, ,pet, ,makes, ,happier, ,n, ,more, ,likely, ,to, ,live, ,longer,.,.,!,!, ,Owning a lively pet may sometimes prove exasperating, but it appears all the effort is worth it., ,Pet owners are healthier, have greater, self-esteem, and are less lonely than those who don’t have animals at home, according to a study., ,Not only that, but they are also more conscientious, extroverted and less fearful, researchers at the American Psychological Association said., ,They believe that pets serve as important sources of social and emotional support for the average person, and not just individuals facing significant health challenges.,Lead researcher, Allen R McConnell, of Miami University in Ohio, said: ‘We observed evidence that pet owners fared better, both in terms of well-being outcomes and individual differences, than non-owners on several dimensions., ,‘Specifically, pet owners had greater self-esteem, were more physically fit, tended to be less lonely, were more conscientious, were more extraverted, tended to be less fearful and tended to be less preoccupied than non-owners.’, ,Pet owners are just as close to key people in their lives as to their animals, the study found.,This indicates no evidence that relationships with pets come at the expense of relationships with other people, or that people relied more on pets when their human social support was poorer., ,The scientists, from Miami University and Saint Louis University in Missouri, conducted three experiments to examine the potential benefits of pet ownership among what they called ‘everyday people’., ,They questioned 217 people with an average age of 31 and family income of $77,000, 79 per cent of whom were women.,Attachments,Click Here To Download,Physics homework help

Genetic Drift Webquest

Genetic Drift Webquest. I’m studying and need help with a English question to help me learn.

Before you begin the assignment make sure you view the video “Gene Disorders Hit Amish Hard” and make sure you read this week’s PDF “Evolution and its Mechanisms”
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eAJDQ_SgDk
Pdf is attached!
Genetic Drift Webquest
Introduction
The Amish in the US began as a small group of Swiss-Germans that immigrated to the US in the 1700’s. Over the course of a few centuries they grew from a small founding population of 200 to a current population of more than 250,000. The most interesting thing about the Amish is that it’s a religious group that has remained culturally isolated and by extension, genetically isolated from the rest of the country. This genetic isolation from other humans has lead to an unprecedented amount of genetic disorders among the Amish.
Physicians were initially exposed to the genetic problems plaguing the Amish in the 1960’s. When the Amish began to reach out to the medial community doctors discovered that there were an unusual number of rare genetic diseases. One of these visible and rare genetic disease was called Ellis-Van Creveld syndrome. What was surprising to medical geneticists was not the presence of the rare genetic disease but rather how many Amish had the disease in the first place. Basically, the Amish in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania had more cases of Ellis-Van Creveld syndrome than all other human in the world combined! What was even more surprising was the fact that there was not just one rare genetic disease but rather dozens of rare genetic disease (In this context, rare genetic disease means that there may be less than 150 humans in the planet having the disease). Even more unfortunate is the fact that there are hundreds of other genetic disease associated with the Amish.
The big question that the Amish wanted to know was, why do they seem to have an unusual share of genetic disease when compared to the non-Amish and how do they stop those genetic disease in the first place!
What you are doing

Your task will be to investigate a rare genetic disorder found among the Amish and to use evolutionary theory to both, help you understand why genetic disease can become common among isolated populations and to see how evolutionary theory can assist in curbing prevalence of genetic disease.

Before you begin your task make sure you do the following things.

Read lecture notes on evolution. Especially the ones pertaining to Genetic drift.
Watch video on Amish genetic diseases.

What you need to do
Before you begin this assignment, I recommend that you clearly understand what evolution is (a change in allele frequency from one generation to the next). Make sure you use the information provided and give me informed ideas that are based on your understanding of the subject matter. For this assignment you will have to answer the following items:

Pick and a rare genetic disorder that is common among the Amish and tell me how common the disease is around the world vs among the Amish? Give me estimated percentage of afflicted individuals! (I don’t need to know details of the genetic disease just its name). The important idea is to understand why disease associated alleles are found in high frequencies in the first place!
Explain in evolutionary terms why the genetic disorder that you investigated is found in unusually high frequencies among the Amish in the first place. You will need to give me one evolutionary mechanism that can specifically explain the Amish issue. Make sure you name the evolutionary mechanism and give a quick explanation of how the evolutionary mechanism works.
Explain how the Amish might be able to curtail the incidence of your chosen genetic diseases using evolutionary knowledge. You will need to give me one evolutionary mechanism that would be able to fix the Amish dilemma. Make sure name the evolutionary mechanism and give a quick explanation of how the evolutionary mechanism would be able to work.
Lastly, remember to cite all your work!

Genetic Drift Webquest

Essay Writing at Online Custom Essay

5.0 rating based on 10,001 ratings

Rated 4.9/5
10001 review

Review This Service




Rating: