AMAIZING OFFER GET 25% OFF YOUR FIRST ORDER CODE FIRST25
Each week you will submit a response post of approximately 400 words engaging with the entire week’s assigned readings. These posts are an exercise in identifying your own questions and attempting to answer them. Each post should include at least 2-3 pieces of evidence for your ideas from the readings; at least 1-2 statements of your own analysis of the readings; and at least 1-2 questions that you have identified as thought-provoking or interesting to you in the readings. If you are writing a seminar paper on one of the cases assigned for that week, please focus your response post on the other readings from the week. For the first week’s post, consider the following questions, along with your own:1) For the Beardsley case, what is the rule for determining whether he owes her a legal duty, according to the court? What is the outcome in the court’s ruling on this particular case?How would this case be decided if we based our decision on economic efficiency (i.e., how can we attempt to incentivize behavior that maximizes value and disincentivize behavior that does not)?
How would this case be decided if we based our decision on ideas of justice (what is the “right” thing to do)?
2) For Nudge, what is “choice architecture”? Can you think of any examples you’ve seen of this kind of choice architecture in your normal life?What is “status quo bias”?
What is the importance of the default option (i.e., why is there no such thing as a “neutral” decision structure)?
Requirements: .doc file | MLA | Discussion | 2 pages, Double spaced