1. we’re exploring causation and correlation. Why is it a fallacy to confuse causation and correlation? Provide an example of a statement that confuses causation with correlation.
2. Consider two types moral reasoning: Consequentialist and Non-Consequentialist approaches (and the specific theories involved). Which of these theories, if any, do you find most reasonable, and why? Provide a clear example to demonstrate your thinking.
- Discuss Over under and through by Tana Hoban.
- Managing Xerox’s Multinational Development Center.
- Write a Spireslack field report.
- Discuss “Gates of Paradise” by Lorenzo Ghiberti.
- Describe Mechanical vibrations with viscous damping.
- Discuss Barbara Tyson Mosley.
- Discuss The problems in the global industrialised food system.
- Describe The Roman Colosseum.
- What did Orientalism do to the act of translation?
- Read and critique Hitchcock’s (2015b) paper.