Subsequently, I will proceed to form an argument on the first part of Mackie’s argument from queerness, the metaphysical component. I will show that although the conclusion follows from the premises, not all the premises are true. Similarly for the epistemological component of Mackie’s argument, I will prove that the premises from his argument can be refuted. With the failure of both components, I will show that Mackie’s argument from queerness does not succeed in proving that objective values do not exist. Mackie’s argument from queerness is founded upon a naturalistic account of the world.
It shows the sensitivity of traditional leaders to outside interference on customary laws. Given the experience of African people with colonisation, imposing decisions on discriminatory practices is inappropriate (Charter, 2003). African issues must be solved by African means. The concept of universal human rights has been criticised as a Western ideology imposed on non-Western cultures (Sjoberg, Gill and Williams, 2001). Writers acknowledge that universalism is a product of European history that denies communitarian values thus undermining African culture.
I. Descartes – Evil Genius Problem A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF DESCARTES’ THEORY The Doubts about the Evil Genius Doubt 1. Does the evil genius exist? Although it may seem trivial to question the hypothetical being, Descartes’ arguments are also phrased cunningly to avoid questions. While Descartes is clearly considering even the most remote possibilities in his method of doubt, all he offers is the claim that such a being could exist. However, this is not seen as a solid basis upon which absolute doubt, required by Descartes, can be built.
Jackson tries to fill the gaps of Todorov’s theory of the fantastic. She reveals that this structualist critic fails to “fails to consider the social and political implications of literary forms,” in a way that his theory remains “limited to the poetics of the fantastic” (). Thus, she tries to sensitize the reader of “the politics of its form” () maintaining that “[f]antasy violates the real, contravenes it, denies it, and insists on this denial throughout” (emphasis is mine).Gone is the idea of hesitation or ambiguity as the central aspect of
Good and Evil Are not Real The concept of good and evil is one of the most foundational apothegms ever known to humankind. It was a crucial stepping stone for other morals, and it is what averts society from pandemonium, by providing structures for laws. But, one may ask oneself; where did the conceptualization of good and evil arise? I believe that good and evil does not exist and are entirely artificial. Ludicrous is what one might be thinking after I’ve stated such a radical exposition, but I disagree and can justify my argument with factual evidence.
In contemporary western society, how could we define the Sambia of Papua as either heterosexual or homosexual; we cannot. This brings us to the question of gender. In contemporary society we have developed a social organization of gender that creates and prescribes our sexuality. This dominant discourse has perceived sexuality as a natural phenomenon, when in reality it is made through social practices. Sexuality is developed based on the social context of what is normal, which is why we socially create different definitions of sexuality like heterosexual, homosexual, lesbian, and bisexual.
All in all, one can sense a sharp disconnect in the purpose for which the theory is created and how Mackinnon’s arguments can be discredited with reference to accomplishing those lofty goals. It may not just be post-modern criticism that might have undone her work. It may just be the scope of her
It is usually easy to identify the discrepancies which subsist in one period of political thought from another but explaining the divergence of postmodernism from its predecessor, modernism, may be a lot more complicated than usual. This is because first, etymologically, postmodernism does not necessarily mean “the period right after modernism” but rather an “effective reappropriation of memory” (Brann, 1992). More than that, it is a reaction to modernism (ibid). According to Lyotard, postmodernism should be understood in the context of the paradox of the future coming after the just now in a sense that the work is not “composed in accordance with any previous universal rules, or, as he calls it, any metanarrative” (ibid). Simplified, postmodernism
Second, when Kant’s theory is interpreted as two object interpretation it seemed that the theory implies a radical form of skepticism that traps each of us within the contents of our own mind and cuts us off from reality. According to Kant’s, things in themselves are real while appearances are not, and hence we cannot have experience or knowledge of reality. But Kant denies that appearances are unreal: they are just as real as things in themselves but are in a different metaphysical
The result of this was that the indigenous peoples and the enslaved Africans were classified as not human in species, but viewed as wild animals. Lugones adds to her argument that the distinction between human and non-human is accompanied by a dichotomous hierarchical distinction between men and women. She points out that Quijano makes a mistake by assuming that gender and even sexuality are structuring elements of all societies. That is why she introduces a systemic understanding of gender constituted by colonial/modernity in terms of multiple relations of power (Lugones, 2007: 185-187). Lugones argues that gender itself is a colonial introduction, which is used to destroy peoples, cosmologies, and communities as the building ground of the “civilized” West (Lugones, 2007: 186).
The inability of justice programs to work as they are intended to is seen as one of the significant problems facing the justice system. Welsh and Harris (2013) seeks to explain the inability of the justice programs to not work in stating, “The problem is that many criminal justice interventions fall short of their goals because of poor planning, poor implementation, and poor evaluation. It is fair to say we have not yet discovered “what works” to reduce crime.” From this, it is clear that the development of interventions is not the issue and not the cause for them to not succeed in their mandates but the problem is within their planning. Welsh and Harris (2013) believes that in order to
The majority of American might argue that they should not be held accountable of their ancestor actions, which make perfect sense, but also needs to understand the system was created against minority groups. The inequalities, less opportunities, and unfair system of injustices of minority group had led to a divided nation. Slavery is a complicated and sensitive topic to talk about in our political correct society, it might invoke feelings of self-disgust, shame, guilt, humiliation, along with embarrassment for some