Background: A physical account of how we experience the external world fails to capture the â€˜raw feelingâ€™ of those experiences. The following are drawn from Nils Ch. Rauhut Chapter 6 The Mind/Body Problem, (2011:129). Essay Claims (2 options): Option one: â€œAlthough scientists can understand the composition and nature of clouds, planets, black holes, and other physical objects, they will never understand the true nature of emotions like anger, love, or hateâ€ (Rauhut, 2011:129). Do you agree or disagree? Provide an argument to defend your position using the essays listed in the Essay Research Required Articles folder below ? Options two: â€œSometime in the future computers might have consciousness and self-awarenessâ€. Do you agree or disagree? Provide an argument to defend your position using the essays listed in the Essay Research Required Articles folder below. ? References: Please use the article that I provided (attached). There will be six articles need to use in the essay. Six of the articles MUST include in the essay. NO addtional references needed. Thanks. Chicago Referencing: Please see the Philosophy Referencing Guide (Attached) Writing Format: Please follow the Position Paper Writing Guide (attached). Thanks. Here is the link to view the file https://www.4shared.com/office/2dBnZuCSba/Article_6_RauhutMindBody.html C) Paper Format In this project, you will write a 1,500 word paper about a topic in visual culture or art history that interests you deeply. While you are free to follow a format of your own choice, the most successful papers usually follow the format provided below: I The Introduction of Topic What is your paper about? This part is pretty basic. Write a topic sentence letting the reader know your paperâ€™s focus. This is a good place to note time period and geographic parameters of your topic. (e.g., fashion in 19th century Germany, photography in WWII, etc.) II The Question/ Hypothesis What did you want to know about your topic? State the question you were curious about in one to two sentences. (e.g., Why was Stonehenge built, how did the Romans get their drinking water, etc.). Your question should be interesting, but it does not need to be too complex. For example, you might just ask: â€œhow did this artwork come to be?â€ III The Methods Where did you get your information? Tell us briefly (1-2 sentences) the names of the works and resources you read (e.g., I consulted the Smithsonianâ€™s web site, and read articles by B.White, P.Worth, and H. McGregor.) You will talk more about these texts later. IV The Object (Description) What does your object (or piece of technology, media, or design) look like? What is it made out of, how big is it, where was it found? This is where you describe an object or work of architecture that relates to your original question. Since your research question is about something related to media and/or material culture, you should be able to find an example that you want to explore in some detail. The idea of the description section is to get your reader engaged with the topic. This is important in an art history paper because it gets your audience on board with your topic in a concrete way before you launch into the history, culture, and other abstract values and components that surround it. In other words, it is much easier to care about the Standard of Ur when you know what it looks like and what itâ€™s made of. The description can range in length, but I would aim for 200-300 words. There is no need to use excessively flowery language; a simple, clear description will do. V The Analysis (Evaluation Of Sources) What did you read? This is the part where you analyze what you read in more detail. The easiest way to deal with your resources is to write a quick summary of each. For example: B.Whiteâ€™s essay is about this and he concludes that; P.Worthâ€™s paper was about this and he says that. For each author, include: 1. The authorâ€™s purpose with the article 2. The evidence the author presents to make their case You may also use this section to judge which author seems the most convincing (if they disagree) and how useful you find the information (e.g., does it solve your research question or not) This section will be the longest part of your paper. I would suggest 200-500 words per author. VI The Conclusion Did you solve your research question? In this section, recap what you wanted to learn and indicate whether or not youâ€™ve reached a satisfactory conclusion. It is ok if youâ€™re not completely satisfied with the answer your sources provide; you can say that here, too. Final additional reminders: 1. Make sure your paper is 1,500 words 2. Check for spelling and grammar errors. I take a few points off for major issues, and they tend to add up.