Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
Leadership and Religion Philosophy
THE ROLE OF THE INTELLECTUAL:
KNOWLEDGE AND RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC LIFE
FEBRUARY 14, 2019
Nearly two and a half millennia ago, a Greek aristocrat founded the first Academy. He also wrote a book about the role of the intellectuals in public matters – and how a good leader should have a philosophical background, that is an understanding of what it is to be just, truthful and good.
To read more, please check this article.
Can you suggest ONE THING that each of us – students, lecturers, writers – could do, to help turn this difficult situation around, and contribute to saving Europe and its values from destruction? What would Plato’s philosopher-king do, in these circumstances?
8,
THE INDIVIDUAL V. THE GREATER GOOD
NOVEMBER 20, 2019
Who is the individual within their society? Would they be the same without it?
What is the role of the self in furthering societal aims? Or should we strive towards self-development, above all?
And which should we prioritise – the individual, or the greater good – when their interests do not align?
Throughout this semester, Regent’s students in philosophy have wrestled with these questions.
To read their thoughts, click here:
9,
THE SELFLESSNESS OF LEADERS
MARCH 30, 2020
In a short article published by Harvard Business Review last February, Dalai Lama talks about three styles of leadership – mindful, selfless and compassionate.
They are not mutually exclusive, of course; in fact, one can easily find common features and discuss their complementarity.
But what I’m interested in is the second route – focused on selflessness, and the apparent contradiction between being selfless and the popular view of a leader who is full of themselves. How do we reconcile the two?
And if we don’t, how are we to understand Dalai Lama’s suggestion that best leaders are selfless ones? Discuss this in the context of Buddhist philosophy.
10,
THE ‘BRAIN IN A VAT’ THOUGHT EXPERIMENT
7 MARCH 2018
Arguably the most famous thought experiment on knowledge and reality, this exercise asks you to imagine that a mad scientist (or another entity) has taken your brain from your body and placed it in a vat of some life-sustaining fluid. Electrodes have been connected to your brain, and these are also linked to a computer that generates images and sensations. So the brain can still think and act as if it were still in a skull, but all the information it processes comes from the computer, which has the ability to simulate your everyday experience. Assuming this was scientifically possible, how would you ever know whether the world around you was real, or just a simulation generated by a computer? From the point of view of that brain, it would be impossible to tell.
The experiment – also called ‘the brain in a jar’ – has been discussed both amongst philosophers and more widely, in film and literature. The Matrix is a well-known example. In philosophy, the exercise reminds us of Descartes’ Meditations, where he questions whether his sensations were really his own, or just a dream, or an illusion caused by an “evil demon”. (Note that this is only a stage in Descartes’ line of interrogation and not the conclusive one).
Discuss:
What view of reality and knowledge can this thought experiment be used to support?
If someone told you today that your brain was removed at birth, put in a vat and attached to electrodes, and that nothing you’ve seen, heard, or done was real – it was all simulated, what argument could you invoke against this?
What if we don’t even know if our brains are real? What if our minds are stimulated directed by an evil demon? What could we say against that?
Now, think about the version of scepticism presented in The Matrix. Is it more similar to –
Plato’s cave,
Descartes’ dream or demon hypothesis, or
The brain in a vat scenario?
11,
REMEMBER DEATH EVERY DAY
SEPTEMBER 24, 2018
One must remember death every day. Always keep it in front of your eyes. This is a fundamental stage on the spiritual path, according to an old Orthodox tradition.
Thousands of wise people have believed in this for two thousand years. Why would they? And what does it actually mean, to remember one’s death? What should one do, when one does?
.doc file
.doc file
RUBRIC |
||||||
Excellent Quality 95-100%
|
Introduction
45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Literature Support 91-84 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met. |
|||
Average Score 50-85% |
40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided. |
83-76 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration. |
52-49 points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met. |
|||
Poor Quality 0-45% |
37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided. |
75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration. |
48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met |
|||
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow
Leadership and Religion Philosophy |
Leadership and Religion Philosophy