With respect to the first expostulation in the last paragraph, it is exactly because Sextus desires to formulate Skepticism in a completely non-dogmatic manner he is open to the chance that doctrine could be appropriate. Despite this plausibility, the dogmatic philosophers have not yet found truth. The consistent Skeptic therefore does not assert there is absolutely nothing true, nor that it cannot be found, only that we cannot know until it has been provably found. Stough put that the Skeptic’s language correctly perceived, has no truth . Dogmatist’s affirmations have within them absolute truth, but this truth cannot be proven.
In this paper I will examine both moves by explaining them and finally I will end my paper through logical conclusion about the existence of the material world. In order to prove Descartes first move we should impose the ideas that he passed through. Descartes introduced four possible causes as sources for our ideas of material objects. The first is the most obvious one that states that the person himself is the cause of his own ideas about the material
Why in society should we be putting anyone down, just because we do not agree with them? The thing is we should not stifle their creativity and rights, only because they do not have the same life as you and will never have the exact same mindset on beliefs and life. Hate speech is interfering with others rights, trying to make everyone the same, and not accomplishing anything. Hate speech interferes with another right of ours; the pursuit of
In realising he is a ‘thing that thinks’, he is discovering an ontological truth – his model of knowledge fails when applied to others. He cannot proof someone else’s existence because he thinks, and whether or not they think is irrelevant because he cannot project thought from their perspective. Truth is only known to Descartes because he concluded it in his own conscious mind and this subjective reality does not lead to objective reality beyond his own mind. His claim for self-realization proves little to some other self-conscious being. To say “I think, therefore, I am’, cannot be proven my anyone other than him.
Justified, true belief knowledge is only real if there is no conceivable doubt, but nothing can truly be inconceivable fact. In “Mediation I: What can be Called into Doubt”, Descartes tries to find solutions to this, but he only raises more questions about the world. Skepticism arises to challenge the idea of a perfect knowledge and to question the human mind and the world. Descartes reflects on the countless falsehoods he believed that became his knowledge about the world and wipes everything out of his mind to begin anew. Descartes starts with the foundations of knowledge, deciding only to accept opinions as truths when there isn't any conceivable doubt in his mind.
However, the fact that determinists also believe that there is no such things as human responsibility makes it difficult for us to accept. The logic may be adequate in the theory, yet it goes against the human disposition to assign blame. The next step would be to deny regret since the individual had no choice in doing what he did. The theory seems to have put the 'human' out of 'human action', leaving humans as some sort of pawns of destiny. Moreover, our 'actions' might also lack our 'doing something' since they are just results of conditions and events (Solomon, 2002).
Question: Why does discrimination happen? My answer: To me discrimination is a really big word. To me discrimination means to not include someone in something because of how they are, their raise, their skin colour, their sex and their age is. Which in my opinion isn’t really something right to do against people because they aren’t a certain type of person which society calls “perfect.” One of the biggest questions that people ask while reading/talking about discrimination is well why does it happen? My answer to that would be that because some people in our society believe that just because you aren’t a certain raise, age, sex, and skin colour that they have the full right to tell you what you can do and can't do.
Many ancient philosophers such as Boethius and Seneca do not think agree with the previous statement. Both have advocated for a life disconnected from the lust of external goods. Boethius makes a strong case against specific possessions in life. To him, the problem with the pursuit of happiness is that such a concept is very vague, people simply end up end up being misguided and find false truth in external goods. Notably, Boethius does acknowledge that the quest for happiness is a natural habit for human beings, but people are simply trumped by false expectations of what happiness truly is .
We will not accept the fact that we can and need to raise our level of assertiveness. So we make excuses like “I’m doing ok as I am right now, so why should I bother” or “I’m not aggressive - let the aggressive types change. I don’t need to.” • Fear Of Relationship Break-Down. Perhaps we think our assertiveness may make others feel uncomfortable. We fear to appear demanding, insistent or rigid.
Therefore, self-control is not self-gratification, indulgence, weakness and unrestraint. All of these practices lead a person to sin because they are seeking to please only themselves and not God. Those who seek to gratify themselves do not seek the needs of others. Many people seek things that will make them feel better about themselves which may lead to serving others but their motivation is self-centered. Selfishness is a large obstacle to self-control.