The purpose of this paper is to show that there is no inconsistency between Apology and Crito as A.D. Woozley and many others suggest. Woozley and Kraut both agree that the works aren’t consistent and present many solutions to resolve it, however they overlooked a simpler solution: to argue that the works are consistent. Woozley provides the persuade-or-obey to explain Socrates’ stance in Crito when the argument could also have been used to make the works consistent. As Kraut’s article was a review, none of his proposed solutions are fully developed. If my claim is accurate then there is no longer a blemish on Plato’s record, with regards to consistency.
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). This is such appealing because I keep wondering why such things keep coming up without any backing to convince one to
A name that can be named is not enduring a name.” (1). This signifies that if one can decipher his or her way of life through the medium of language, then his or her lifestyle holds simplistic, materialistic qualities that do not follow the Way. Due to this statement, one can conclude that spoken or written language that has the ability to be easily described maintains mainstream characteristics, hence deeming a societal, constructed impact on one’s life; a fatal flaw to practicing Daoism. Though not directly stated, this establishes criticism to Western civilization, for those individuals place high esteem on their social standing, lexicon, and singular impact on society.
A person is driving and stops at a red light. Suddenly a strange man approaches the window begging for money because he had lost everything. Does the driver hand over money to the seemingly distressed stranger who needs a helping hand? Or are they being played like a violin? Did that person really lose all he had?
If the law did decide to permit euthanasia, however, they may allow doctors who are against the practice to opt out, and instead other medical practitioners will be written into the bill, as is the case with abortion in many societies. If this was included in the Bill, then this would be an instance where the law has taken the backseat to the autonomy of medical practitioners and allow their moral viewpoints to override the law, therefore it is clear here that the law has a connection with morality and therefore it is far from being morally
In subjective truth, there is persistent striving wherein all competition and finality will be postponed, which is in opposition to Hegel’s idea that one can reach a point wherein they are complete. Kierkegaard’s criticism of objective truth is a critique of existentially detached thinking as he holds that to be abstract/absent minded, means there is no ethics. Despite his high regard for subjective truth, he does not deny truths of logic and mathematics as he does not refer to experiential subjectivity, rather he speaks exclusively of religious truths or existential subjectivity. Furthermore, even with regard to ethics and religion, he is not a subjectivist as he does not claim that religious truth is subjective in a relativistic way for his notion of subjectivity relates more to existential action rather than individual perception.
When it comes to supporting humanistic theories claims, the empirical evidence lacks. Academics, for example Maslow has widely criticized the same way because of the absence of scientific empirical evidenc. Strengths: Humanism gives importance to responsibility and individual choice which is one of the greatest strength. It appreciates fulfilment and personal ideas, therefore it satiesfies many people's understandings of what it is to be human. Besides, humanism gives a wider scope of framework for observing the behaviour of humans because it considers a person including his perspectives and emotions.
Consequentialism asserts that the ends justify the means or that if the results are good then the actions taken to obtain the result is irrelevant. In contrast, Deontology states that actions that are based on a moral code are moral even if their results are detrimental. The worst examples of ambition fall to closely to these two categories. The South Sea Bubble aligns with Consequentialism. Mccarthys direct actions against communism were based on a moral code however the entire situation was immoral.
Based on the article, “Why Honesty Isn't Always the Best Policy,” which she wrote, she believes that being honest to tell the truth is often a veiled form of self- indulgence, for honesty is just like a knife which will hurt other people. Telling a truth can let the person will not feeling guilty, but it will hurt other people’s feeling; in addition, the relationship can be broken more easily through telling the truth with angry expression. Because of the reason, Jamie Turndorf against that honesty is the best
According to Stirling (1999), Hume was also a great philosopher. From an epistemological point of view, he questioned the notions of identity that was personal and argued that that there is nothing as ‘self’ which was permanent and progressive. Hume dismissed the belief of casualty and argued that our concepts of case-effect concerns were based on thinking rather than in causal forces