Reference no: EM13360357 , Length: 3000 Words
A 2600-3000 word "thought" paper. While a thought paper can (and in this case, does) include research, it doesn't pretend to be objective. Writing a thought paper provides an opportunity to reflect on a topic at length, to turn it over in your mind and approach it from a number of angles. It's exploratory rather than explanatory, and part of that exploration involves trying to increase your level of self-awareness by reflecting on the evolution of your own position. Essays like these aren't written entirely in the first person, but the pronoun "I" is used where it seems natural to do so.
You are expected to address your essay topic using the conceptual framework practiced throughout the assignments for this course, with a relevant sense of history and drawing on library or Internet resources as required. You must include information from at least one Web site, book, and journal article. You must provide a list of all the sources you consult. Discuss the research question as thoroughly as you can. In the process, be self-critical in order to question your own assumptions and to consider other perspectives. In your research, consider resources from both supporters and detractors of your topic. Reflect on how the topic you've selected has been used and/or misused.
Proposal for the Project Exam
A one-paragraph proposal that adheres to the guidelines for the project exam (by identifying a general topic and a specific image and research question). Your tutor will respond with comments and suggestions on your proposed topic of exploration.
TOPICS
What are the differences between science and religion? Include discussion of a topic that illustrates these differences.
or
Considering the potential for politics to adversely affect science, some people have expressed the view that scientists should not be allowed to participate in political organizations. What arguments can you give for or against this view? Can you think of any reasons why scientists might want to become involved with politics? Do you agree that scientists and not politicians should ultimately decide which scientific projects are funded? Can an argument be made that suggests that politicians should become more scientifically minded?
Please provide all references and proper in paper citations. MLA style