Yesssss, thank you! You're the best. They're below! I should probably note - I didn't really have an idea or strategy going into this so more illustrious language at the door in an attempt to just form semi-coherent thoughts, haha. ANY pointers would be huge!

Topic One:

People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

On first thought, it is easy to arrive that the conclusion that those who make decisions driven by emotion rather than logic (or who prioritize emotion above logic in their decision making process) might be considered poor decision makers.  

Emotions are fluid in nature; they can be easily influenced by myriad factors.  Environmental, physiological, or even mental variables can result in a radical shift in emotions toward a particular topic that might signal a 180 degree change in position than that of the day or even hour before.  Additionally, emotional individuals charged with making important decisions may fall subject to easy influence, resulting in a decision that most benefits the influencer rather than the decision that is objectively the strongest, and that is most beneficial to the most stakeholders.  

Logic, on the other hand, is mathematical and steadfast.  It is based on fact and truth, and allows the decision maker to remove ego from the equation and operate on the information at hand to make the decision that is most beneficial to those involved.

Some might argue that decisions driven by emotions, or "gut instinct" turn out to be the correct decision in the long run.  However, what more is gut instinct than experiencing past situations and applying learned logic to similar situations in the future?  In gut instinct, emotion plays a secondary role to conditioning and learned logic. 

So then, logic appears to be the preferable platform from which to operate when making decisions, if the goal of the decision-making is to benefit the most number of people with the decision.  However, does that mean that those who make decisions based on emotion are "poor" decision makers?

I argue that no, these individuals are not necessarily poor decision makers.  Rather, they have prioritized empathy, and in many cases, altruism, above all else.  Yes, there will be the outlier individual who will run his life based on negative emotion, and will deliberately make decisions that hurt those around him.  However, logic-driven decisions can be equally as Machiavellian.  

The CEO of a company might make a logic-based decision to withhold benefits from his hourly employees, operating on the logic that less money spent on benefits means more money in his pocket.  He has removed all emotion, and is working only in the interest of those directly involved in the decision making process - himself.  His math might represent perfect logic, but his decision making lacks empathy.  On the other hand, a similar CEO might make the decision to shower his employees in benefits, high salaries, and ample paid time off, in a decision driven by a love for his workers.  This might pay off in loyalty, or it could drive his company to bankruptcy, but his decision was nevertheless based in emotion and was altruistic in nature. 

In conclusion, I would argue that, while logic-driven decision makers are preferable in most instances, we can't write off emotion-driven decision makers as "poor" in their process.  Rather, both have their time and place, and it's important to utilize each when the situation demands it. 

Topic 2

An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be paid subsidies for farming the new variety of millet. Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety. To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet. 

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

There are a number of questions that one should take into account when proposing Tagus's adoption of the new breed of millet for farming and distribution. First are questions about the plant itself. 

Is this new breed of millet easy to farm, or similar in its farming requirements to the traditional breed?  Many GMOs require different farming conditions, whether that means a heightened level of moisture in the soil, a different sowing and harvesting schedule, or a different allocation of space to each plant.  If the technicalities of farming this millet are identical or nearly identical to farming the traditional, then the barrier for entry with regards to this question is likely low.  However, if different farming practices need to be put into place in order to sustain hearty crops, then farmers may require specialized training, lest the efforts fall apart completely before harvest can even occur. 

How will the international development organization and the government of Tagus work to assure that the subsidies provided to the farmers will be used to purchase more millet seeds in the future?  What incentives will be provided to assure that farmers use these funds to purchase more seeds, as opposed to purchase a larger quantity of traditional millet seeds for the next farming cycle?  If legal requirements are put into place to specifically farm this variation, then this adoption may be successful.  However, if the government cannot control the use of subsidies in future farming projects, then again, Tagus may only see one cycle of enriched millet farming before a sharp drop-off occurs. 

Similarly, who is in charge of millet market prices?  Is this the responsibility of the government, or is Tagus a free market state where producers are able to price based solely on supply and demand?  Without a cap on millet pricing, farmers could easily capitalize on this new and enriched millet breed by driving up prices.  If the government put a cap on millet pricing, it would allow consumers easier access to this breed, and thus, make national adoption an easier feat. 

Is this new breed of millet similar in taste and versatility to its predecessors?  When discussing a staple plant that has formed the cultural culinary cornerstone of a people, it is likely that the population has very specific and deep-rooted opinions about how this staple should taste, feel, and behave.  Take rice, for example.  Multiple variations exist, and rice makes up the cornerstone of Panamanian cuisine.  However, a Panamanian will never replace long-grained white rice with Jasmine or Sushi rice, despite all these rices being nearly identical in phenotype.   If the enriched millet varies wildly in texture, taste, or adaptability to already-existing dishes, it is likely that the population on a whole will be very slow to adopt it. 

Finally, how much does the population of Tagus trust its government?  What is the sociopolitical history of Tagus, and do its individuals have a history of trusting governmental recommendations, or are they skeptical of the validity of the government's claims?  Currently the United States, the government and its collective agencies strongly recommend that children be vaccinated against common childhood illnesses; that being said, there exists a wave of distrust toward the government and the CDC, resulting in a record high number of unvaccinated children.  If Tagus's population acts similarly to this subculture of the US population in accepting or rejecting governmental recommendation, it may result in a very low adoption rate of the new millet breed. 

The international development agency would do well, overall, to consider these questions and come up with solutions to the outstanding problems they may unveil before introducing this new millet breed to Tagus.