1. Reasoning biases are...

Raspuns: Based on innate inclinations.

2. Give an example and a brief description of a case where an individual act of original creativity
is based on cumulative, social innovation. (Maximum points will be given for original (sic!)
contributions i.e. not discussed in class) (max 500 characters) *
The results of social innovation new ideas that meet unmet needs are all around us. For
example, the Modern Plumbing. Archaeologists discovered the first water pipes in the Indus
River in India, dating back to 4000-3000 B.C. Nowadays, the ability to remove sewage from and
bring clean water into places of dense human habitation makes the modern city possible. Without
it, wed still have cities, but not like the ones we know. A high-rise building would be impossible
without toilets and plumbing.

3. There is a POSITIVE seasonal correlation between birth rates and sales of contraceptives
Raspuns: There is an indirect causal relationship between these 2 phenomena

4. Explain shortly your choice for the question above. (500 characters) *
Paradoxical, even though there should be a positive correlation between birth rates and sales of
contraceptives, there is an indirect causal relationship between these 2 facts. I find this
ambiguous. On the one hand, there is a direct effectthe consumption of contraceptives prevents
pregnancies. On the other hand, exists an indirect effect; contraceptives may induce a behavioral
response which leads to more sexual encounters, and hence, more pregnancies. I think that one
explication might be

5. Arguments are best when they... (check all correct answers) *

Raspuns: - persuade through empirical evidence
- Are better than direct counterarguments.
- Persuade through logical structures.

6. In this section, you need to argue critically AGAINST an argument, any argument, that
you will choose from lectures, readings, or anything mentioned in this course. Even if
you believe it to be good, persuasive, or inspiring, you ought to be able to be reflective
about its weakness or inconsistencies. Begin by briefly presenting the argument you are
going to criticize, and then say why you find it unpersuasive, inconsistent, lacking
evidence or clarity, or any other problems you might offer proof about. *
2000 characters max.

One reading that I found extremely interesting is Do Defaults Save Lives?

Actual decisions about organ donations may be affected by governmental educational
programs, the efforts of public health organizations, and cultural and infrastructural factors.
Relating to this statement, in my opinion, this phenomena cannot have the effect desired by the
authorities as donating your organs is a very personal decision, based on feelings or religions. On
this matter the government logic cannot defeat the peoples beliefs.
Starting with how they choose defaults, we can take into consideration that they relies on
physical, cognitive, and in case of donation, emotional costs on those who must change their
status. I think that the tradeoff for all of these must be made with the knowledge that defaults
make a large difference in lives saved through transplantation and shouldnt involve any cost.
Balancing this aspects with the good done by the lives saved through organ translation leads to
delicate ethical and psychological questions.
I think that actual decisions about organ donations is sensitive subject and should involve only
people concerned, while the government and all the other sectors should focus on finding
incentives as living donors be nationally recognized for their altruism, in a manner similar to
military heroes. In addition ongoing efforts to concurrently increase the numbers of cadaveric
donors are also required.
Given the discrepancy between the number of people that would donate and those who actually
do, I think the gap between intent and action must be closed. For this to happen the question of
organ donation must be actively presented to all members of society by the governmental
educational programs, the efforts of public health organizations, and cultural and infrastructural
factors, but only at an informational level, without any defaults or costs implications.

7. "The human mind is a unitary mechanism" versus "The human mind is a plurality of
mechanisms". Explain in a paragraph which position is better supported by
theory&evidence, and why. Refer to at least one piece of research. (max 1500
characters)

As the concept of mind is understood in many different ways by many different cultural and
religious traditions, I agree with the statement "The human mind is a plurality of mechanisms".
Picture the mind as a big general - purpose computer with a limited number of distinct input and
output links to the world. But on reflection this cannot be quite right. Big general purpose
computers are not simple entities. On the contrary, they are almost invariably decomposable into
a large number of functionally sub-mechanisms. ("The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of
Cognitive Science").
Therefore, the mind is the underlying component of human intelligence, wherein it includes the
acts of thinking, feeling and action. In order the mind to do specific things or activities there are
different aspects to consider which requires complex power.
Moreover, human mind is the sum-total of various mental processes such as observing, knowing,
reasoning, feeling, wishing, imagining, remembering, judging and others. Mind is all these
mental processes which create a plurality of mechanisms.
 8. The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between ones real
and ones declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted
idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.
What does George Orwell mean by this statement from Politics and the English
Language? Based on his text, present in your own words two ways of improving our
linguistic communication. (max 1000 characters) *

Orwell believed that the language used was necessarily vague or meaningless because it was
intended to hide the truth rather than express it. For Orwell, language was an instrument for
"expressing and not for concealing or preventing though. He understood well the power of
language as both a tool and a weapon, believing that language was designed to create a reality
which the state wanted.

I consider that some ways of improving our linguistic communication could be:

Thinking about the perspective of the audience Just because someone have a strong
command of a topic doesnt mean the people he is speaking to have the same knowledge as him,
particularly if they lack the technical knowledge about a subject that he possess.
Being aware of our non-verbal communication cues Our body language significantly
impacts the way others interpret what we say. We have to ensure that the body language align
with the message we are trying to get across.