An important aspect of philosophical thinking is the ability to do conceptual analysis. Greta Christina’s paper is a great example of this. Throughout her paper, she proposes a definition of sex, discusses how that definition captures several cases that intuitively count as sex, but then discusses some more complicated cases that either show that the definition is too broad (i.e., it includes or counts some case as an instance of sex when intuitively it should not) or too narrow (i.e., it excludes some case from counting as an instance of sex when we intuitively think it should count).
Expand on one of Greta Christina’s several different definitions of sex and explain how that definition is problematic. For example, Christina says, “Perhaps having sex with someone is the conscious, consenting, mutually acknowledged pursuit of shared sexual pleasure.” You might explain this definition (or one of the other ones that she considers) by giving a (fictional) example and showing how it exemplifies each of the features listed in the definition. Then, you should explain why that definition is problematic. For example, you could explain how there are cases that we intuitively count (or don’t count) as sex but aren’t (or are) counted as sex according to the definition (i.e., state whether the definition is too broad or too narrow, or both, and show how).
This part has two options. The first is less challenging than the second, but the second, if done well, can score higher points than the first.
Option 1 : Clearly articulate a second definition from Christina that attempts to address some of the problematic aspects of the definition you discussed in part one. Then, as you did in part one, explain how even this second definition could be problematic (Is it too broad? too narrow? both? Show how).
Option 2 : Propose your own definition — a definition of sex that Christina does not consider. Show how that definition might handle some of the complicated cases that she discusses. Then, clearly state what the shortcomings of your proposed definition might be.
Africa has become a mind boggling landmass with a long, luring history. Quite a bit of this history characterizes how Africa works today. By taking a gander at the past financial, political, social, profound and social elements, we can decide why the mainland works the manner in which it does as of now. Africa’s economy has consistently comprised of exchange and creating as its fundamental elements. Most exchange early Africa was done locally, because of troubles with transportation. Residents would regularly exchange fish for vegetables, for instance. Iron and copper were likewise normally exchanged. Be that as it may, there were techniques for long separation exchange that permitted high worth merchandise to be passed along. Long separation exchange was completed via trains that for the most part comprised of camels. Salt was one of the most exchanged merchandise. It was routinely exchanged for grain and gold. People were additionally exchanged to fill in as slaves all through the mainland. Since long separation exchange was generally held for all the more high worth products, residents needed to turn out to be inventive crafters. Metalwork, garments and different specialties were regularly exchanged inside networks. Making certain products was frequently an inherited expertise, went along inside family gatherings. Africa’s political framework began with the development of chiefdoms and realms. A few realms got their beginning by utilizing long separation exchange to assess the merchandise that went through their domain. They utilized the riches picked up from expenses to develop armed forces, and boss were selected to assume responsibility for neighboring towns, which in the long run framed a realm. Different realms were framed when town bunches named rulers who utilized their armed forces to vanquish different towns. Some were conformed to hallowed holy places, which strict specialists utilized for political force. The rest of these realms were framed by peaceful gatherings who moved all around assuming control over specific populaces of ranchers. Status and riches were colossal factors in African culture. Heredity was the reason for most statuses. For instance, if a dad was notable and famous in his locale, his high status would be passed down to his child. At the point when a man effectively increased a high status, an after and incredible riches, he could build up his own gathering in a general public and become a “Major Man”. As a Big Man he would be required to have meals where he offered his visitors nourishment and beverages. A lot of his status depended on an increasingly material perspective. By and large, as in any general public, status and riches decided how charming one’s public activity was. Regardless of the way that there were a huge number of various societies and convictions in early Africa, all Africa>GET ANSWER Let’s block ads! (Why?)