This essay will provide an analysis of Descartes ' philosophical theories expressed in passage three of the "Second Meditation." The passage emerges with the meditator trying to find a source for his existence. The meditator begins by asking ‘but what am I then? A thing that thinks. What is that?’ (He concludes that he is not only a thinking substance, but he is also able to doubt, understand and will; along with being able to have ‘sensory perceptions’.
My perception of my body and matter in general is that it is in its essence divisible (Descartes,1641) This essay here will insert a reference to ‘Leibnitz’s Law’ or otherwise the relatively intuitive principle that for two things to be the same thing, they must share all the qualities of each other. Descartes does not specifically do so, but it is heavily inferred from his argument. Descartes now concludes that since minds are indivisible and bodies are, that according to the Leibnitz’s law they cannot be the same thing and hence: Conclusion: The mind is substantively different from the body and indeed matter in general. Because in this conception the mind is substantively distinct from the body it becomes plausible for us to doubt the intuitive connection between mind and body. Indeed there are many aspects of the external world that do not appear to have minds and yet appear none the less real in spite of this for example mountains, sticks or lamps, given this we can begin to rationalize that perhaps minds can exist without bodies, and we only lack the capacity to perceive them.
Both Jane Bennett and Rebekah Sheldon’s essays attempt to differentiate new or vital materialism from object-oriented ontology (OOO), two recent philosophical developments generated by the nonhuman turn (193, 225). For Bennett, OOO as a philosophical school represents a post-system-oriented theory that is committed to a “non-relational conception” of things, or their negative capacities to withdraw from any attempts at human apprehension or use (227). At the same time, objects are coy and make themselves manifest as a “sense” or “call” (227). The ethical gain implied is OOO’s resistance to human hubris. Yet, for Bennett, new materialism has the same ethical potential; one does not have to be committed to OOO to dethrone the human or re-value things.
Sartre brings up a lot of different topics in his writing, but they all relate to the main idea of existentialism. Existentialism is that it is up to us to find our purpose or our essence by being authentic to our own nature. Existentialism says that existence precedes essence, so we are born first and it is up to us to find our purpose in the world. Self-deception and psychoanalysis is the ability to lie oneself and to others to create positive reinforcement to oneself. Sartre also writes about being-in-the-world and taking up a role that affects our freedom.
Some believe it takes away from religious values. " Those who are imbued with the "technological spirit" find with difficulty the calm, the serenity, the inwardness essential for discovering the way that leads to the Son of God made man. They will even go so far as to belittle the Creator and His work, pronoucing human nature a defective product, where the necessary limitations of the human brain and other organs stand in the way of the fulfillment of technological plans and projects. Still less are they fit to understand and rightly es teem those very deep mysteries of life and of the divine economy, such as for example the mystery of Christmas, in which the union of the Eternel Word with human nature brings into play realities and marvels quite other than those of technology. Their thought is along different lines and follows other patterns, under the one-sided influence of that "technological spirit" which only recognizes and reckons real what can be expressed in mathematical formulas - They think that thus they are breaking up reality into its elements, but their knowledge remains on the surface and deals with but one aspect.
While logic is firmly rooted in reason, perceptions are just as firmly rooted in one’s senses and can easily be corrupted. Many kinds of faulty logic or perception interfere with our ability to think critically, for example, superstition, argument from ignorance, false analogies, irrelevant comparison and fallacies. Therefore, I believe that perception is certainly not reality and most mistakes in thinking are inadequacies of perception rather than mistakes of logics. Perception is defined as the ability to see, hear or becomes aware of something through the senses (Nature of Logic and Perception). However, since the senses are susceptible to personal interpretation, they are therefore potentially unreliable sources of data.
The controversy arises when the advocates of formal value supports have sometimes been quite aggressive in their attacks on non-formal value. In turn, the non-formal value supporters often have accused a too abstract understanding of humanity that vacates or confuses some of the central issues of morality. Reith 2006, Timmons 2010 have begun to reexamine the non-formal value and its possible role within a contemporary understanding of the moral life. I suggest, a distinguishing feature of moral value is in other features of the moral life, such as moral decisions and moral problems, similar questions can be asked. What is the difference between moral decisions and non- moral decisions?
Yet “something living somehow burns” through the worst translation. Nevertheless, it is more than that. It is a stimulating intellectual drama, and a challenging one because of its unconventional theme wherein Lowell examines the psychology of the rebel in the character of Prometheus. Compared to the usual dramas there is an obvious lack of
The issue of universal versus the particular is quite prevalent when reading MacIntyre’s The Virtues. He states that there is an “empirical untidiness in the way that our knowledge of the virtues is ordered, more particularly in respect of how the practice of each relates to the practice of all the others”(178). This type discord between the masses causes confusion within a society, and the idea of what is right and virtuous can become lost. When faced with this issue a universal truth is necessary to combat the particular, and the fundamental truths. Having these universal truths one is able to able to look at the core of an action or belief that may subjectively seem virtuous, and examine whether or not it is truly an act of a virtue.
It relativizes to the human condition, Schopenhauer 's prominent view that the world is Will. This entails that his stance on diurnal life as a brutal and violent world — a world produced by the solicitation of the principle of sufficient reason, is founded on a human-conditioned awareness, explicitly, the direct, double-knowledge of one 's body as both subject and object. So along these lines, Schopenhauer 's pessimistic concept of the world can itself be seen to be substantiated upon the subject-object distinction, i.e., the general root of the principle of sufficient reason. As mentioned above, we can see this fundamental dependence upon the subject-object discrepancy exposed in even the title of his book, The World as Will and Representation, which can be interpreted as, consequently, The World as Subjectively and Objectively