Review current research and policy on this topic. At least 3 credible sources are required. If no policy exists, is there proposed legislation regarding this issue? Summarize your findings. Explain the main issue, and define relevant terminology. Briefly note any differing positions; be objective in describing the concerns of the opposing viewpoint(s).
- Present your own suggestion for a policy that is consistent with research on human sexuality, explaining and supporting why this would be a reasonable approach
In Meditation One Descartes gives three separate contentions. From these specific contentions one can infer that we can't profess to know with sureness anything about our general surroundings. Everything may appear to be plausible however in all actuality that does not imply that it needs question. In the event that we can never be sure how might we know anything. This is the principle purpose behind Descartes bring this issue up. Fundamentally his whole contention depends on Skepticism. Suspicion is essential and is viewed as an endeavor for our insight and comprehension of the world. It is actually difficult to question that somebody truly exists yet it is extremely unlikely that one could dispose of the possibility of incredulity The one thing that we know is that Descartes does not simply haphazardly question everything. He gives exceptionally solid motivations to the things that he questions. As he sets up this uncertainty he must be extremely sane about it. On the off chance that he doesn't, at that point his contention isn't getting down to business. The KK proposition that Descartes utilizes is to demonstrate how these contentions work. The KK proposal pursues: on the off chance that a realizes that p, at that point a realizes that a realizes that p. fundamentally this implies on the off chance that I realize that there is snow outside, at that point I realize that I realize that there is snow outside. The issue with this contention is that in the event that we don't know about our faculties, at that point it is extremely unlikely that we can make sure about the learning that we have. In making this proposition work one must have a solid comprehension of what "knowing" truly implies. In any case, it is highly unlikely that one can really have this comprehension. One must have self-information or fundamentally one should truly know himself/herself. Accordingly on the off chance that you don't have that idea of self, at that point you don't have any information. As should be obvious the KK proposal works in support with what Descartes is stating in the majority of his contentions. The main issue is that he doesn't trust that his contention about God is that solid. He feels that on the off chance that there is an Omnipotent God, at that point it is extremely unlikely that he would ever mislead us. It is highly unlikely that he could be all knowing and make us question the things that we do. Then again it is highly unlikely that there could be no God in light of the fact that our faculties must be made by somebody. Hence there probably been a malicious evil presence that has deluded us. However, since he questions everything then he isn't misdirect into the bogus accepting of an evil presence. Along these lines, in a later contemplation he demonstrates that there is a God and that he isn't a swindler. We swing to Liebniz and we keep on observing the world disappearing as he talks about the monad. In taking a gander at the things that Liebniz said it is trusted that monads (Entelechy) are not physical or mental but rather natural. Consequently, a definitive gear-teeth of the world are organic components or Entelechies. In doing this there is no refinement made among lifeless and energize objects, which would make everything, vitalize. On the off chance that these monads are actually only natural it is highly unlikely that they can make changes in one another. The main route for this to happen is if God made these progressions occur. The reason that monads can't acquire changes bodies is on the grounds that that isn't what they were modified to do. They were made with the goal that compound substances could be made. The organic idea of Monads makes their basic characteristics to be apperception and appetition and even movement itself. Their connection is to a greater degree a last reason than an effective motivation. This is the reason he considers last causes as the guideline of effective purposes and offers need to conclusive causes. Subsequently, this frantic>GET ANSWER