Date of publication: 2017-08-25 23:00
Paragraph 6 : Dramatic re-telling of a personal story of picking up my cell phone and then realizing that I am going to crash into another car. Stop the story right before the crash.
Paragraph 8 examines the tenuous connection between complaints and limited use of the river for recreation. Complaints about water quality and odor may be coming from only a few people and, even if such complaints are numerous, other completely different factors may be much more significant in reducing river usage. Finally, paragraph 9 explains that certain geologic features may prevent effective river clean-up. Details such as these provide compelling support.
logical form of the problem. Given this implication and using Evans and Manis’ discussion of the logical problem (pp. 659–668, noting especially his concluding paragraphs to this section), how might you respond to McCloskey?
Understand that it is highly imperative to state the references that you are using for your research. Keep a separate section for citations or include them in the write-ups wherever relevant. Altogether, the introduction to the thesis topic should be presented in a manner that is easy to comprehend for the prospective readers who at least have a background in general science. You can consider your classmates as examples.
Specifically, you should address the following questions in your paper:
6. McCloskey refers to the arguments as “proofs” and often implies that they can’t definitively establish the case for God, so therefore they should be abandoned. What would you say about this in light of my comments
Paragraph 6 offers reasons why the first assumption is questionable (., residents may not have the necessary time or money for water sports). Similarly, paragraphs 7 and 8 explain that riverside recreational facilities may already be adequate and may, in fact, produce additional income if usage increases. Thus, the response is adequately developed and satisfactorily organized to show how the argument depends on questionable assumptions.
(Agree) I agree with Johnson because I have observed many people driving dangerously while talking on cell phones and have even been in an accident myself while talking on the phone.
(Expand on an assertion made in the essay ) I agree with Johnson’s assertion that cell phones are dangerous, but I’d go even further than she does because I think we cannot control this problem by merely educating the public. We need to have laws prohibiting the use of cell phones while driving.
However, this essay does not rise to a score of 5 because it fails to consider several other unstated assumptions (., that the survey is reliable or that the efforts to clean the river will be successful). Furthermore, the final paragraph makes some extraneous, unsupported assertions of its own. Mason City may actually have a budget surplus so that cuts to other projects will not be necessary, and cleaning the river may provide other real benefits even if it is not used more for water sports.
already learned about free will in the course, and what Evans and Manis says about the free will theodicy, especially the section on Mackie and Plantinga’s response (pp. 668–666) and what he says about the evidential problem