It does not seem any obvious contradiction about the idea of zombie’s existence and the things that are conceivable then there is a possibility then that thing can exist. Since there is no problem in conceiving things because inventions are made by conceiving things as somebody have to picture it first imagine the world in something that is not that way and then they try to make it that way. Therefore using these two arguments we can say that Physicalism is false because it is possible for zombie to exist. 2 Knowledge
Internal criticisms of functionalism Robert Merton (1910-2003), an influential functionalist, criticises Parsons’ views, suggesting that Parsons assumes that everything is indispensable when in practice there is a wide range of possible alternatives. Merton also disagrees with Parsons when he assumes that all parts of society are integrated as a whole, and each part has a knock-on effect. Merton argues that it is difficult to see the connection between some parts of society. He would also disagree that there is a ‘universal functionalism’ where everything performs positive roles, arguing that some things are dysfunctional for other parts. The assumption that society is always smooth running is untrue and he also adds that there are differences between the manifest and latent functions.
Moraru’s word choice shows that he believes there are no similarities between zombies and humans. Zombies are more like humans than Christian Moraru claims. The first similarity between zombies and humans is appearance. Christian Moraru states that zombies “are keen on looking absolutely oppos[ite] to how we see ourselves” (107). This statement is completely false.
This indicates that the tragedies are a natural result of Creon’s blatant disobedience of the laws of nature. The natural laws then are gods themselves, visible as such when Antigone describes them as: “the gods / the great unwritten, unshakable traditions” (lines 504-05). Consequently, because the Natural laws are gods themselves, and because the other gods hold them in honor, they deserve a respect higher than them. This is what Herodotus emphasizes throughout The Histories, He abstains from giving an opinion about the lesser divinities, only stating natural law demands
The Problem of Evil “Evil has no positive nature but the loss of good has received the name of evil” said St. Augustine.The problem comes from the fact that if there is a deity that is all good, all knowing and all powerful, how can evil exist? The problem of evil (or argument from evil) is the problem of reconciling the existence of the evil in the world with the existence of an omniscient (all-knowing), omnipotent (all-powerful) and perfectly good God. The argument from evil is the atheistic argument that the existence of such evil cannot be reconciled with, and so disproves, the existence of such a God. Therefore, the “problem of evil” presents a significant issue. Mackie theorizes there is no possibility all three facts can be true and coexist together.
Super Normal, from a conceptual point of view, leans on an intentional and extraordinary ambivalence (Fukasawa & Morrison). Specifically, based on the terminology, it could be taken both as an oxymoron that ‘super’ opposes ‘normal’, referring to ‘beyond’ or ‘above’; also a concept of absolute superlative in which the Super Normal determines the superlative of normality to its greatest degree in its ontological form. Although the etymology of what is considered ‘normal’ relates to ‘ordinary’ with no features, in the context of what Fukusawa and Morrison defined as Super Normal designs are not ‘normal’ any more by making them so ‘normal’, they become both ‘normal’ and ‘exceptional’, pushing the norm to the boundaries of the possible and introjecting a sort of paradoxical coincidence of opposites at the same time (Fukasawa & Morrison). They are so exceptional that seem normal. In other words, they are not perceived or perceivable as exceptional, at least, until they are noticed and co-opted by Fukusawa and Morrison.
Dawkins replied to Lennox on his accusation that the principles of going from simple to complex is the belief of the atheist. By saying that if things were to go from simple to complex they would need explaining why. Lennox says that it makes a lot more sense to believe, that there is an eternal Logos and that the universe and its laws is derivative including the human mind form the Logos, it makes perfectly sense. More sense than to accept that the universe is just a simple fact. Dawkins replies that it makes a hell of a lot more sense to start with something simpler than to start with something more complex.
Nonetheless, he argues that we cannot ultimately assign accountability because we are not free. With accountability being gone, we do not have a difference in kind anymore, only difference in degree. Nietzsche offers the example of a thunderstorm as one does not “accuse nature of immorality when it sends us a thunderstorm and makes us wet … [so we call the harmful man immortal] because … we assume a voluntary commanding free will.” For this reason, Nietzsche claims that we are natural beings and like everything else in nature, we are part of casual determinations. In other words, like a nature force (thunderstorm), we do not relate to
He doesn't say I have a physical body in this way I am. Another point made via Descartes is that just the mind can really get a handle on the idea of something. Senses, for example, sight and touch can give a fractional picture yet just the mind breaks down something totally. Descartes depicted physical things, for example, the body as machines. Physical things are sure to capacity inside of the laws of material science.
Humans cannot create omens; they are prophetic messages from the divine. Even elements that seem human are not- the cult members are not humans, but vampires themselves. They have already been touched by the power (or as they call it “gift”) of the unnamed saint, which has stripped them of their humanity. They even have a divine purpose- to serve as the “pointed nails of justice.” While the origin of zombies is secular and the origin of vampires is religious, the same does not hold true for their neutralization. Warm Bodies has a happy ending; Byzantium has an ambiguous one.