There are lots of people in the world that does not acknowledge God or spirit, so without knowing God, Berkeley is saying that people who do not believe in God does not exist. However, ironically it is these people that do not think God exist. Also, there is a question of is this does this actually exist? How can we prove that God exist? What does he or she looks
They said that they were getting their homework out of their book bags. The teacher knew something fishy was going on. She noticed Margot’s sad expression and pulled her out of the classroom and asked her what really happened. She said that the kids locked her in the closet so that she couldn’t see the sun. The teacher and Margot walked back into the class.
What if we believe that God is something else? Then Pascal’s argument falls flat because then we don’t know if the payoff will be worth it or not since we do not know what the payoff will be, due to our lack of understanding who God
Through our understanding we can come to learn that the existence of conscious self is not enough to support the claim of a thinking thing, and that he solely exists on the basis of thinking and being a thing being. And so the mediators claim that “ I exist as a thinking thing,” is correct as it can be supported with evidence throughout our
Students will take the chance to pick a fight with a person they just so happen to dislike, and if they just so happen to be the last people at their lockers a argument or a fight can take place. Students will also use lockers to their advantage. Students will use going to their lockers as an excuss to get out of class and just walk around the hall letting their teacher just think they are at their locker. My first reason on why Middle schools should not have all purpose lockers is because of fights. It was my 6th grade year in middle school, I had just got out of class to go get a few books from my locker.
The dispute over the degree to which we depend on sensory experiences on gaining knowledge had been continued between few philosophers. René Descartes, John Locke, and David Hume each had difference stances on this issue. Descartes, who asserts for human’s innate reasons, does not believe the accuracy of sensory perception. Contrary to Descartes, Locke and Hume are more likely to explain the phenomena through sensory perception than Descartes as they emphasize the ‘real experience.’ However, Hume does not completely agree with Locke as Locke admits the innate capacity to some extent, whereas Hume totally denies the existence of any innate capacity and at last denies the experience itself. Before moving on to Locke and Hume’s perspectives, Descartes’s stance toward sensory experiences should be discussed.
History does not exist, only present, as past is all myth While history is written by humans, it is difficult to distinguish between right and wrong due to various factors. Human beings in all ages and places have always had different arguments and viewpoints towards the similar issues. To illustrate, historians cannot agree that a specific type of issues is the main aspect of the time and location as most of historians worked under power. Therefore, historians could not write the truth which can confront the power above them. Additionally, various triggers cause the historian to interpret the events in a way which serves their objective as they provide examples which adjusts their argument and neglect some other facts.
We frequently give these questions to ourselves who I am, why I live, what identity is and in every occasion we think deeply , sweat over these but consequently cannot get an authentic and a conscious answer. Identity is something indicates what or who someone or something is, including our characteristics, personality, beliefs, feelings. Some people think identity forms individually not by influence of anything though it doesn 't seem conscious. Albeit these, there are many reasons which directly prove that people 's identity shape by impacts of circle, society. Firstly, Our circles,
While Socrates never answered the former of these questions definitively, by focusing on the latter, Socrates hypothesized that virtue cannot be taught but is learned through divine inspiration and cannot be handed down. And although Plato’s final hypothesis on the definition of virtue, that virtue is the power of attaining goodness with justice, is true, it is not complete. In addition, his conclusion about the teachability of virtue is mistaken. In accordance with Plato’s definition, virtue is excellence, but in contrast to Plato’s view, virtue can be taught through the Scriptures. Although Socrates never stated his personal hypothesis on the definition of virtue, instead focusing more on whether virtue can be taught, he considered multiple definitions of virtue presented by Meno, all of which he derided as problematic.
Another strong strength is that emphasis is laid on individual’s own experience and viewpoints. Looking at the major weaknesses of existentialism, it can be pointed out that it is based on philosophical concepts that are not practical and are somehow vague. Because of this, it is not empirical in nature, and it is non scientific and hard to confirm with science. Therefore it is problematic to many people as they believe that it is impossible to know how true or how well its works if it is not scientifically proven. I found it appealing when Sartre mentioned that there is “no proof of souls or spirits or ghosts or deities and thus their existence is nothing other than what people make a decision to believe”Pecorino (2000).