Mindfulness Meditation Impact Stress Levels in Working Adults:Discuss?
Answers to the following questions may be included in your reflective essay:
Would you prescribe any medications at this point? Why or why not? If so, what?
What would be the choice for second-line therapy?
What are the parameters for monitoring success of the therapy?
Discuss specific patient education based on the prescribed therapy.
List one or two adverse reactions for the selected agent that would cause you to change therapy.
What would be the choice for second-line therapy?
What lifestyle changes would you recommend for this patient, in addition to medication?
Describe one or two drug–drug or drug–food interactions for the selected agent.
1) In the first paragraph, you should clearly explain the ways that hunger affects human and societal development. The basic question here is, Why should we care whether others go hungry? What are the effects of world hunger on the population as a whole?
2) In the second paragraph, you should clearly explain ways in which non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are addressing this issue. What are some of the ways that faith-based organizations are seeking to make a difference … and what motivates them to do so? What are some of the structural changes that these NGOs are fighting for, and why? What leads faith-based organizations to be involved in addressing hunger issues?
3) In the third paragraph, choose a religion (one of those we have studied in this course). Explain how this particular religion would address world hunger. Do the teachings of the religion you have chosen lead its followers to try to be involved? Or does the religion you chose see hunger as a “fact of life” that needs to be accepted? Be specific about how the teachings of the religion you chose would address this issue.
4) In the third paragraph, you will do the same thing—with a second religion. Choose another religion that we have studied this semester and assess how that religion views the issue of world hunger. Ideally, this will be a religion that has a different perspective; either
(a) it sees the issue in acompletely different way, or (b) it has very different reasons for the perspective that it has adopted.(Making sure there is a clear difference will make the last paragraph easier.)
5) In your final paragraph, you will explain the differences between the approaches that you have identified in the previous paragraphs. What are the fundamental differences in these two religions that lead them to view the issue of world hunger as they do? And which of them seems to be the way that we ought to think about this issue? Which of the two religions that you chose seems to have the better approach? Explain why we should prefer one perspective to the other.
Select one of any of the articles we have covered this semester (for instance Aristotle, Kant, Bentham, Mill, Nietzsche etc) and describe what you take the principal argument[s] to be.
The Sankhya Philosophy
How does evolution take place according to Sankhya philosophy ? Is evolution really possible if Purusa and Prakrti are separate ? give reasons in support of your answer
Explain, in your own words, one of Thompson’s arguments for the permissibility or impermissibility of abortion. Is the argument convincing to you? why or why not?
Nietzsche’s fundamental insight or assertion seems to be that in order to understand morality we must look at history and human culture. For him morality is not natural in the sense of already being there but is created by humans and evolves. His example is the evolution of what he calls master and slave morality. Describe what he means by these terms. Do you have any objections to his theory?
First Paper: Reconstruction (Plato's System)
What we are assessing?
How precisely does your essay reconstruct Plato’s conception of Philosophy?
Does your reconstruction reflect a good grasp of the dialogues as a whole?
Does your reconstruction reveal a complex understanding of the “Socratic Dialogues”?
How clear is you explanation of Plato’s concept? Is your writing precise, concise, articulate, and direct?
Do you mobilize appropriate textual evidence in support of your interpretation? Do you cite the text properly whenever you quote or paraphrase?
How well have you understood and how well can you explain Plato’s conception of Philosophy?
The Ethics of Immigration
Do wealthy and freer nations have a duty to admit citizens from poorer and more oppressed countries if doing so would improve their quality of life? Why or why not?
Which moral factors should a country consider when deciding who can and can’t immigrate to its lands?
1. Knowledge & Knowing
In the Mediations, Descartes was concerned to find knowledge that was true, certain, and well-justified. Three centuries later, A. J. Ayer wrote that to know something is have a justified true belief about it. Gettier objected to Ayer’s characterization of knowledge by offering a counterexample.
In your view, are the criteria of justification, truth, and conviction necessary and sufficient conditions for having knowledge? In other words, can we claim to know something if we meet Ayer’s criteria? Do we need to meet all of them in order to have knowledge? Even if we have a justified true belief, are there any criteria missing, as Gettier seems to have thought?
Answer this question succinctly as possible. Your answer should (1) explain
what Ayer means by justification, truth, and conviction (belief), (2) the details and reasons for Gettier’s objection, and (3) your assessment of the debate. Be sure to offer reasons for and against your view, providing your own examples as needed to clarify your meaning.