List the DSM–5 coding for the diagnosis or diagnoses you have arrived at for the client.Apply the symptoms from the DSM–5 to support your diagnostic impression.

Apply symptoms to the overall diagnostic impression.

* List the DSM–5 coding for the diagnosis or diagnoses you have arrived at for the client.
* Apply the symptoms from the DSM–5 to support your diagnostic impression.
* Include why the client’s symptoms are a match for the diagnosis or diagnoses you have provided.
* Align your rationale with the diagnostic symptoms listed in the DSM–5.
* Discuss at least two additional pieces of information that are missing from the case study and that would help you arrive at a conclusive diagnosis.

Explain as clearly and precisely as you can how that principle leads to a particular conclusion.

Application of the Ethical Theory

Now that you have explained in general terms the core principle of the ethical theory you are focusing on in this paper, you will apply that theory and its core principle to your ethical question.

Explain as clearly and precisely as you can how that principle leads to a particular conclusion.
You can think of that conclusion as the answer someone would most likely give to your question if they were reasoning along the utilitarian, deontological, or virtue ethics lines you explained in Part 3.
This conclusion does not need to be the same as the position you stated in the Week 1 assignment. In fact, it could be the opposing position you discussed there. See the remarks about main purpose of the paper above.

Identify the ethical question.
Introduce the topic and question.
Explain the ethical theory of utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics.
Apply the selected ethical theory to the ethical question.

Would you plug in? What else can matter to us, other than how our lives feel from the inside?Explain.

Suppose there were an experience machine that would give you any experience you desired. Super duper neuropsychologists could stimulate your brain so that you would think and feel you were writing a great novel, or making a friend, or reading an interesting book. All the time you would be floating in a tank, with electrodes attached to your brain…Of course, while in the tank you won’t know that you’re there; you’ll think it’s actually happening…Would you plug in? What else can matter to us, other than how our lives feel from the inside?
In the course of the week’s discussion, you will need to do the following :

Engage with the text:
Using at least one quote from the assigned texts, explain Aristotle’s notion of eudaimonia. Then, discuss whether Aristotle would consider someone hooked up to the experience machine to be “happy” in the sense captured by that notion of eudaimonia.

Assess Locke’s argument that we can have knowledge of an external world despite our being directly aware only of sense data. Do you agree with him, or do you side with his critics who say that we can know only the contents of our minds?

Philosophy

Choose One

1. Summarize and evaluate Locke’s case against innate ideas. Does he successfully show that innate ideas do not exist?

2. Assess Locke’s argument that we can have knowledge of an external world despite our being directly aware only of sense data. Do you agree with him, or do you side with his critics who say that we can know only the contents of our minds?

3. Evaluate arguments for and against Berkeley’s subjective idealism. Do you accept or reject his theory? Why or why not?

4. Suppose someone claims that he can easily refute Berkeley’s idealism by simply kicking a rock or eating an apple. Does this demonstration show that Berkeley’s view is false? Explain.

5. Do you agree with Hume that any belief not based on perceptions cannot be knowledge and is completely meaningless? Give reasons for your view.

6. How is Kant’s theory of knowledge different from rationalism, empiricism, and skepticism?

7. In what way is Kant’s view a “Copernican revolution”?

8. Explain how Hume and Kant differ on knowledge of the law of cause and effect. Which view seems more plausible to you? Why?

9. Explain Kant’s distinction between phenomena and noumena. What would a skeptic say about this distinction? What would Hume say? Which of these three views is most plausible?

10. Kant assumes that our experience will always be shaped by a fixed set of fundamental concepts. But it seems possible that human nature and its innate concepts could change radically over time through evolution. What are the implications of this for Kant’s notion of conceptualized experience?

11. Some notable male philosophers have assumed that women’s reasoning ability is inferior to men’s. What conclusion about the philosophical enterprise do you draw from this? Should the theories of these philosophers be rejected out of hand?

12. Is there such a thing as a female nature ? Or is female or woman defined variously by society or culture?

13. Kant said that women are not capable of grasping principles, thus excluding women from moral reasoning. Should his theory of knowledge then be discounted, discarded, or ignored? Why or why not?

14. Are all universal statements in science and ethics suspect, as feminist postmodernists believe? Explain.

15. Feminist postmodernism has been accused of being a form of cognitive relativism. Is this charge valid? Why or why not?

Explain Descartes’ Evil Demon Argument and how it succeeds in undermining all knowledge.

Answer 1 question from set A and 1 question from set B. The response to each questions must be about 2 pages long.

Each essay should be structured like a normal paper, focused essentially on reconstructing and explaining one philosophical argument, and the philosophical theories relevant to that argument. You need to state those theories precisely and explain them in as much detail. The same goes for the premises of the argument—explain if it’s a good argument and why.

1) Explain why Relativists about truth have to believe that relativism about truth is false, according to Plato’s
Argument from Falsity.

2) Explain Descartes’s Dreaming Argument for Epistemic Skepticism and why Descartes finds it wanting as a
skeptical argument.

3) Explain Descartes’ Evil Demon Argument and how it succeeds in undermining all knowledge.

Set B: pick one:
1) Given Putnam’s Semantic Externalism about the meaning of words, the words you use now have different meanings than if you were to use these same words while being the victim of an Evil Demon, and this can help rule out that you are deceived by an Evil Demon. Explain how this is supposed to work, and why it doesn’t.

2) Explain the fallibilist criticism of Descartes’s use of Skeptical arguments such as the Evil Demon argument.

3) If scientific reasoning mainly relies on inference to the best explanation, explain how this blocks Hume’s argument for Inductive Skepticism. Explain inference to the best explanation and why Hume’s argument doesn’t work against it.

Explain as clearly and precisely as you can how that principle leads to a particular conclusion.

Application of the Ethical Theory

Now that you have explained in general terms the core principle of the ethical theory you are focusing on in this paper, you will apply that theory and its core principle to your ethical question.

Explain as clearly and precisely as you can how that principle leads to a particular conclusion.
You can think of that conclusion as the answer someone would most likely give to your question if they were reasoning along the utilitarian, deontological, or virtue ethics lines you explained in Part 3.
Note: This conclusion does not need to be the same as the position you stated in the Week 1 assignment. In fact, it could be the opposing position you discussed there. See the remarks about main purpose of the paper above.
This section should be around 300 words.
Place this section under the Part 4: Application of the Ethical Theory section.

In your paper,

Identify the ethical question.
Introduce the topic and question.
Explain the ethical theory of utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics.
Apply the selected ethical theory to the ethical question.
The Applying an Ethical Theory paper

Identify your thesis statement within the introduction of your paper. Outline your essay, considering deontological ethics, teleological ethics, moral objectivism, and ethical relativism in your argument.

Developing the Essay
Identify your thesis statement within the introduction of your paper.
Outline your essay, considering deontological ethics, teleological ethics, moral objectivism, and ethical relativism in your argument.
Provide at least 3 valid reasons to support your argument. Remember to think critically here—there likely are reasons that may not be evident at first.
Also, be sure to include the following in your essay:
Use of explanations of philosophical concepts—such as utilitarianism, categorical imperatives, process philosophy, moral relativism, moral absolutism, ethical relativism, moral objectivism, deontological ethics, or teleological ethics—to structure your essay and provide evidence to support your claims.

Discuss the article and Whitehead’s statement in the introduction, body, and conclusion of the essay. Locate and utilize at least 2 credible sources to support the arguments presented in your paper.

Use the following 2 starting points to develop your essay on morality and ethics:
The article by Jay Feldman: Sunday Dialogue: How Corporations Behave
Alfred North Whitehead’s controversial statement, “What is morality in any given time and place? It is what the majority then and there happen to like and immorality is what they dislike” .
Discuss the article and Whitehead’s statement in the introduction, body, and conclusion of the essay.
Locate and utilize at least 2 credible sources to support the arguments presented in your paper. Make sure you cite them appropriately within your paper, and list them in APA format on your Reference page.
Ensure that your paper is 4–5 pages in length, not counting the Title page and Reference page. In accordance with APA formatting requirements, your paper should include a Title and Reference page, should be double-spaced, and should include a running head and page numbers.
Formulating the Philosophical Thesis Statement
Select only 1 of the following focal questions to answer to help formulate your thesis statement:

Businesses can have ethical standards, but businesses are not moral agents. Do you agree or disagree?
Is it true that the “bottom line” of a business is profit and profit alone?
In business, are there other, less tangible goals that are intrinsic to—and just as important as—making money?
In a business environment, why should people be moral as individuals?
Why should a corporation or organization be moral?
Could you apply the first formulation of Kant’s categorical imperative to a business environment?

Compare and contrast Plato and Aristotle on the nature of form and matter. How does Aristotle reconcile Platonic dualism in his view of the unification of essences within material reality?

Using the text and online resources in this module, evaluate any video, and respond to one of the following focused questions in at least 500 words.
In your original responses, be sure to cite primary source quotations in the words of the philosophers in addition to secondary source information about their ideas.

Examples:

Descartes reached the conclusion, “cogito ergo sum” .
Descartes methodological doubt led to the certainty of the mind or thinking subject.
Focused Questions:
ANSWER ONLY ONE: USE SOURCES LISTED BELOW:
1.Compare and contrast Plato and Aristotle on the nature of form and matter. How does Aristotle reconcile Platonic dualism in his view of the unification of essences within material reality?
2.Explain Descartes method in his Meditations on First Philosophy. How does does his doubt lead to the certainty of “cogito ergo sum.” How did this realization lead to the mind-body problem in modern philosophy?