Take one of your original discussion posts, something that you felt you connected with, something real and interesting that resonated with you, and build upon it—expand it, perhaps even change the initial

Answer all three of the following questions, Each quedtion is to be answer with 2-3 pages each:  

1. Take one of your original discussion posts, something that you felt you connected with, something real and interesting that resonated with you, and build upon it—expand it, perhaps even change the initial, original direction of your thinking. For that change represents ‘learning’.  

Part of the point here is for you to have an opportunity to realize that understanding takes time, and often changes over time, and that is as it should be: it is what we call ‘learning.’ You can, if you choose, also address/discuss/highlight the difference that may have emerged between your original thoughts and the perspective that opens up for you now, as you revisit those thoughts at this later time. If there is no substantial difference from your original views, just take them further, add other considerations, elaborate and develop the original ideas.  

Expand your original post to 2 pp. minimum and not more than 3 (12-point font, 1.5 or double space). Refer to and cite from readings (for open-source readings, use the author, ‘Martin’, as reference) to support your arguments. If you refer to a specific point in a video, indicate the time reference, ex.: 2:34 = two minutes and 34 seconds into video). Refer to my lecture notes as (Baker, Week 5).  

Here are links to 2 videos to help with the answer:

This is the discussion post you need to respond to for question 1:

Do you have some sense of a final cause in your own life? Do you have a sense of what the point might be of your own life? Do you believe such a final cause in one’s own life is possible? Is it necessary to have such a sense of purpose? What would be the benefits of having some sense of your own telos? What would be the consequences of not having that sense of purpose

2. Analyze the argument of the following short article, “Ghosts in the Machine” (see also pdf. on D2L). Write 2 – 3 pages.  

https://www.historians.org/perspectives-article/townhouse-notes-ghosts-in-the-machine-march-2023/ 

1. Sketch out an overview of the main assertions/thesis and of the argument, together with its supporting claims (premises).  
2. Evaluate the argument: Is the reasoning cogent? Do the premises support the thesis? If not, where/how does it break down?  
3. Find the main fallacies in Grigoli’s argument; explain how he uses them, the function/role they play.  
4. Using Grigoli’s argument as a point of reference, develop your own interpretation of the phenomenon of AI and its possible impact on our writing, thinking, and possibly larger society. To what extent, if any, is it a good idea to outsource our thinking/writing to something other than ourselves?  

3. The short reading from Alasdair MacIntye’s After Virtue (D2L, Week 5) didn’t make it directly into our discussion as such, but it addresses something that is critically important: The vocabulary of ethics, of virtue, may still exist, but only in fragmentary form. The world of which it was a part is gone. What is MacIntye’s point? What does the novel (which is very good, very funny) suggest, according to MacIntyre, about the place of ethics in modern society? Does this claim make sense in your own experience? Does it help you understand the present day? (Ethics is something that we can all speak about; we don’t need to be scholars and experts to have opinions about what is right or wrong. In this, you and your thoughts are as important a source as the experts and authorities of our readings. The rather long explanation in the module notes for week 5 (also 4) may also be a useful resource in this.)  I will attach this short reading to help as a separate document.

Write 2 -3 pages.