Since the creation of the universe was a unique event, we cannot say anything about it. The existence of pain cast serious doubt on the existence of a benevolent Intelligence. In his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion the three main characters Philo a skeptic who sees inconsistencies in every line of argument, Demea pose arguments for the two others to discuss and Cleanthes skeptic who is aware of the limitations of logic but do not believe in the mental picture; argue about the Argument from Design. Philo win the discussion arguing that the appearance of order in nature could simply derive from the nature of matter itself (Hume). In general Hume show a general idea that the Argument from Design is useless because it only shows that there is intelligent design in the universe; it does not validate any theology beyond deism.
First and foremost, the modern human is an individual. He is not an organic part of the society, but a basic independent unit of knowledge. Human’s most important feature is reason. Rationality is what distincts us and makes us a human being. In his theory of moral Kant puts aside emotions and disregards human body.
“On Truth and Lie in an Extra-Moral Sense” What is a metaphor? The Greek etymology of metaphor is ‘to carry over.’ Authors such as Friedrich Nietzsche carry over words to compare and equalize ideas. In “On Truth and Lie in an Extra-Moral Sense (1873),” Nietzsche uses a metaphor to define truth saying, “What is truth? A mobile army of metaphors, metonymies, anthropomorphisms, in short, a sum of human relations which have been poetically and rhetorically intensified, transferred, decorated and . . .
His position in regards to his argument is directly outlined at the beginning of the text to insure that readers are aware of the author’s intensions. He uses examples of situations in which the current principle of alternative possibilities is faulted and concisely pulls apart each situation to determine exactly what constitutes the excision of morally responsibility. The article clearly outlines Frankfurt’s arguments, however it becomes evident in particular sections that Frankfurt’s arguments become slightly repetitive as he tries to, perhaps over simplify his arguments to ensure his reader understand his position. As someone who has never been exposed to the principle of alternative possibilities and its implications of moral responsibility for ones actions I found Frankfurt’s arguments were well illustrated and provided strong persuasion with appeal to reason. Frankfurt not only provides sound reasoning behind his arguments about how the principle of possible alternatives is false, however, he does suggest possible ways to revise the principle so that it is more accurate.
One of his key insights, presented in the preface to the Phenomenology of Spirit, is that of the identity of the subject and the object. He states: “In my view, which can be justified only by the exposition of the system itself, everything turns on grasping and expressing the True, not only as Substance, but equally as Subject” (Hegel, 1977: 9-10). In other words, the object and the subject are identical ??? "the absolute substance which is the unity of the different independent self-consciousnesses which, in their opposition, enjoy perfect freedom and independence: "I" that is "We" that is "I"" (Hegel, 1977: 110).
Kant also believed that people cannot know everything. Similarly, Pooh always mentions that he has a very little and acknowledges that he does not know everything. He also believed that “the difference between right and wrong was a matter of reason” (Gaarder 344). Winnie-the-Pooh’s way of reasoning between right and wrong supports Kant’s belief, “I have just been thinking, and I have come to a very important decision. These are the wrong sort of bees…
In the first chapter, Mill compares his philosophy to that of Kant. He uses antithesis when he says “...criticise these thinkers... he most illustrious of them… Kant… he fails… to show… any logical (not to say physical) impossibility (Mill 3).” Mill, in contrast to Kant, then describes how there is nothing certain within his own philosophy due to the popular meaning of the terms he uses; he describes that there are impossibilities.
Writing is hard work and a skill one had to constantly practice. : Zinsser’s writing demonstrates that writing is difficult, he gives clear solutions to issues that plague writers, he also makes a compelling argument for why clutter is an issue that needs to be resolved. Zinsser with his various achievement has proved that he is a competent writer. Zinsser was educated at the esteemed, Princeton University. He worked as the New
In my rhetorical analysis of Immanuel Kant’s “What Is Enlightenment” I hoped to solve some of my own questions that I have concerning this consequential essay. Kant is a cornerstone of philosophy, and while this piece does not relate to one specific philosophic discourse, it is uncontrovertibly written in a philosophic manner. Yet within Kant work, he veers dangerously close to making what seem to be appeals to a to authority. I would like to think that Kant is not making this appeal in order to justify his own argument.
The Enlightenment was a time where people were beginning to find out that they could speak out against their oppressive leaders and bring to light many of the wrongdoings happening within the many institutions at the time. Two main philosophes who argued for the Enlightenment and its benefits to society in the 18th century were Immanuel Kant and Voltaire, also known as Francois Marie Arouet. These two prominent thinkers criticized the current social, political, and religious systems in place at the time. While both philosophers argue that the Enlightenment is essential to human growth, they both use different ideas and criticisms to prove their point. Both Kant and Voltaire argued that Enlightenment is important in mankind’s growth as a whole
The study of philosophy is a path seldom taken by many. Philosophical thinking requires much discipline in the mind of the student. It is through philosophy that the student is able to break free from the grasp of ignorance, and instead turn to the embrace of reason, thus leading to the discovery of many great philosophical truths. This essay will discuss two great philosophical works: Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave”, and Voltaire’s “Story of a Good Brahmin”. In examining each story, this essay will bring forth the philosophical attitudes presented by that of Plato and Voltaire.