Current Business Issue(this Is Just An Example) You Have To Choose The Topic As Well

[Name of the Writer]

[Name of Instructor]

[Subject]

[Date]

Mexico and the United States Barrier

Introduction

When we talk about the Mexico and the United States barrier, which also goes by the name of the Border Wall, it is basically a chain of vertical barriers which are along way the US and Mexico border. The foundation of the barriers was laid down under the presidency of Bill Clinton in 1994. The main purpose of the wall is to restrict illegal crossings from Mexico into the United States. The barrier is not exactly one adjoining structure; it is, in fact, a discontinues sequence of physical obstacles. They are variously characterized as "Walls" and "Fences." Talking in regards to the middle of the physical barriers, there is security which is being provided by a virtual fence, which consists of cameras, sensors and various surveillance tools. This surveillance is being used to dispatch the United States Border Patrol agents to the suspicious crossing of the migrants. As per 2009 January, The United States Customs and Border Protection has given the report that around 580 miles of the barrier have been put to place. In this paper, I will be discussing the current business issues in regards to the US-Mexico barrier followed by the ethical paradigm that addresses the issue in the best manner.

Discussion

The thing that most people will have in mind when the topic of the border is discussed is the fact that; what exactly is it bringing on the table for the US? In accordance with a study that was carried out by Dartmouth and Stanford, the expansion minimally had a reduction on the illegal Migration by the Mexicans and was largely impacting the US workers negatively. The construction cost of the wall is estimated to be 2.3 billion, which means that around 7$ per person residing in the US. The study also made it clear that building the wall had a negative impact on the US workers who had a college degree by $4.35 per individual. It was also seen that the US workers who were less educated benefited from it by an average of 36 cents. The study also suggested that instead of the building of the border wall, if the US had merely made a reduction in its trade costs with Mexico so they would come nearer to the domestic costs, all of the workers in both Mexico and the United States would have benefited considerably (Miller and Nevins 145-151). The complex manner in which the border wall expansion has impacted the economy has made things worse off for the majority of the working citizens. The people who are in fact benefitting from the wall are doing so by a very less amount.

Another thing that should be kept in the mind is the fact that the wall was mainly built to reduce the amount of the migrations from Mexico to the United States. The study with the help of the confidential data that was taken from the Mexican Government found out that the wall expansion brought a reduction in the Mexican-born workers only by 0.6%, which is hardly 83000 people. The researchers of the study also put stern on the fact that if the goal of the policy is to in fact reduce migration, it is essential to understand that what actually makes people migrate on the first place. The Mexican citizens opted to migrate based on higher wage rate in the US, which did not change.

Ethical paradigms

When Donald Trump was running his campaign the main promise that he made was that he would be building a great wall alongside the United States and Mexico Border. There are specific issues that have always been in the limelight for both the US and Mexico, which are; immigration, unemployment and drug trafficking. Let us start by discussing the recession dated back to 2008; the economy of the United States has still not recovered fully. The unemployment rate is quite high; it is estimated to be as high as 15% in certain parts of the country. There are concerns that have been highlighted that state that the immigrants are lowering down the local wage rate. The money is being diverted from the US and taken back to the Mexican families in Mexico. It was mentioned in "Times Magazine," the project of the wall alone in the construction face will be bringing about 25000 job opportunities. Further, in accordance with "CareerRide," it was stated that the US economy is not in the position to take any more illegal migrants that it already has. It is also a fact that the existing illegal workforce takes back around 25000$ per single household via welfare and government benefits. When the border wall will be constructed the American tax-payers will be getting the economic opportunities that they once used to get and deserve. Further, a wall will also bring about a change on the opposite side as well; the economic opportunities will stretch across the border (Plaisance 83). The Mexican companies that will be contributing to activities like supplying material and clearing roads will also be getting a platform to further progress.

The Mexican Government stated that around 13000 people were killed in 2011 due to drug violence. The wall might be able to reduce and dismantle the drug violence if policed strategically. The construction of this wall will instil a sense of security for both the United States and America. The argument that is discussed above, when is applied in the "utilitarian ethical context," it points that social and economic benefits are pretty substantial which overshadow the potential negative side effects of building the border wall. The wall which was built in 2006 was inclusive of various urban areas like El Paso, Nogales and Tijuana. This in return sidetracked individuals to take a more dangerous route, which is the mountainous terrain and open deserts route. These routes led to an increase in the death rate. The wall which will be built in the future is estimated to be 30 to 50 feet tall, hence making it almost indestructible. The proposal of the wall will ultimately be in favor of the public safety due to it deterring the migrants from climbing the wall and making a dangerous journey to cross the border. So, considering the “virtue ethics,” constructing this wall in regards to the engineer’s code of ethics will prevent stoppable danger to the safety of health of the people, hence proving that it is an ethical act. It was stated by the engineering council that engineers would commence only professional tasks for which they carry competence, and further remove the curtains from relevant restrictions of competence. It should be kept in mind that it is beyond the capability and competence of an engineer to understand and pass judgement on the political and consequences of the wall (Peters et al., 740-743) The engineers should rather have a consultation with the professional governing body or HR to express their concerns. This also is in favor of the “virtue ethics framework.”

However, the United States and Mexico border spreads across 3100km. Building a wall that big is going to cost a lot of money. Apart from being expensive and requiring a huge engineering feat, the question that arises is that should it be done? The 3100km on which the wall is said to be constructed are a home to mountains, valleys, plateaus, rivers and animals and plants. The wall can have a huge impact on all of these factors. Majority of the business nowadays should have an awareness of how they are impacting the environment. This wall can influence the environment on a great deal. The most important factor is that the California border is home to a variety of animal and plant species. There are eighteen of those species that are federally protected alongside them are thirty-nine species that are federally endangered, candidate or threatened species besides the Arizona border. This wall can have a huge impact on them, an impact so profound that can lead to extinction as the breeding of these species will be put to risk. Now the question that arises is, that is a wall more important than the potential loss of a species? In my opinion, no. No business or political agenda is big enough to eradicate a whole species from the surface of the earth.

The United States and Mexico border path is inclusive of drylands that are in requirement of runoff routes in order to avoid floods while preserving and maintaining the natural environment. This fact exponentially causes an increase in the complexity which further leads to the rise in the cost as well. One of the most important things that need to be stern upon is the fact that this step of building a wall will influence the climate change. Climate change is one of the most dreaded and an issue of concern lately and should be taken seriously. It is an undeniable fact that building a wall means that there will be a lot of cement required and the production of cement the material that joins together solid concrete is one of the major causes of the greenhouse gas emissions. Constructing a border wall between the US and Mexico is no joke; it is a big task. This means that an unmeasurable quantity of cement will be produced leading to the emission of the greenhouse gases. The production of these gases at such a large scale can be very damaging and an issue that carries high magnitude.

Making use of the “Kant’s university principle,” the main examination to be done is that; whether the engineers responsible for the building of the wall will construct and design structures while being fully aware of the fact that the construction can have severe consequences on the environment. This fact can be universalized. It really is an ethical dilemma and one that carries great importance. If the engineers behind the project ignore the impact that their work will bring about on the environment, it can potentially cause the loss of various animal and plant species and even put human lives on risk (Harriss 32-37). It should be kept in consideration that engineers are required to protect the public. They need to be well aware of the consequences their actions can cause. The public health, welfare and safety is an ethical priority, and they are to prioritize it in their work. This proves the fact that building this wall will indeed be deemed an unethical act.

Significance

It is a fact that only 35% of the people who voted for Donald Trump were in favor of the wall. It is the responsibility of the engineers who are tasked to build the wall to keep in mind that they are responsible and accountable for the safety and opinion of these people along with the majority of the people in Mexico who are against the construction of this wall. In light of the care ethics, it should be kept under consideration that there is moral value in our relations and we should always keep these values under the loop when making any kind of decision. Citizens from both the countries are putting their trust in the engineers behind this project. They expect the decision that is made by them to be ethically right and something that satisfies both the communities (Ast). They believe in the rise of a just society and expect nothing less from the people who carry authority. It is necessary that awareness is created in every way possible so that this trust can be upheld.

Conclusion

Border or no border this idea of a wall between the two nations carry great loopholes that cannot be avoided. They are so evident in the picture that it is sad that people are blinding themselves from looking at the bigger picture. Our relationship with the great majority of the people who do not have a say in all of this is of great importance. It is necessary that we make their voices be heard based on the social standing that we have in every way possible. These people are vulnerable and will be further marginalized by the construction of this wall. There are around 25000 illegal workers in the United States that work in the country's agriculture industry. The Mexicans are responsible for forming the backbone of the largely Southern Industry by fitting in the low wage jobs while hoping for a better living. Making a physical barrier alongside these farms and disrupting them will result in strangling the free movement of the workforce. This will end in causing harm to this workforce and jeopardizing the prospects of both the owners of the farms and the workers. This will lead to the betraying of their trust. This indeed is an ethical dilemma, and it needs to be sorted strategically in a manner that both the nations can have a win-win situation. There are issues on both the ends which can only be resolved by showing a little flexibility as the cons are higher than the pros.

References

Peters, Robert, et al. "Nature divided, scientists united: US–Mexico border wall threatens biodiversity and binational conservation." BioScience 68.10 (2018): 740-743.

Miller, Todd, and Joseph Nevins. "Beyond Trump’s Big, Beautiful Wall: Trump’s plan to wall off the entire US-Mexico border is just one of a growing list of actions that extend US border patrol efforts far past the international boundary itself." NACLA Report on the Americas 49.2 (2017): 145-151.

Harriss, Robert C. "Trump's Wall Threatens Wildlife Ecology in the United States–Mexico Borderlands." Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 60.1 (2018): 32-37.

Plaisance, Patrick Lee. "5 Journalism Ethics." Journalism 19 (2018): 83.

Ast, Federico. "The Moral Dilemmas of Global Business." Globalization. IntechOpen, 2018.

D'Holbach Is A Determinist About Free Will (i.e. He Thinks It Is An Illusion), And Stace Is A Compatibilist (i.e. He Thinks Free Will And Determinism Are NOT Incompatible). Which View Is More Plausible And Why?

Author’s Name

Instructor Name

Art 101

19 November 2018

Research Essay: Determinism vs. Compatibilism

The debate between determinists and compatibilists has continued for decades. In this research paper, we will discuss and examine the major claims made by both sides and give a balanced understanding of the issue.

The hard deterministic explanation of free will, according to Holbach, can be explained by stating that since human beings are purely material , and all material changes are governed by laws of science, therefore, all decisions by human beings are governed by scientific laws ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"GtIGyPGs","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Hoefer)","plainCitation":"(Hoefer)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":101,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/DTmO0ro3/items/ZZZNZNFG"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/DTmO0ro3/items/ZZZNZNFG"],"itemData":{"id":101,"type":"chapter","title":"Causal Determinism","container-title":"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy","publisher":"Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University","edition":"Spring 2016","source":"Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy","abstract":"Causal determinism is, roughly speaking, the idea that every event isnecessitated by antecedent events and conditions together with thelaws of nature. The idea is ancient, but first became subject toclarification and mathematical analysis in the eighteenth century.Determinism is deeply connected with our understanding of the physicalsciences and their explanatory ambitions, on the one hand, and withour views about human free action on the other. In both of thesegeneral areas there is no agreement over whether determinism is true(or even whether it can be known true or false), and what the importfor human agency would be in either case.","URL":"https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/determinism-causal/","author":[{"family":"Hoefer","given":"Carl"}],"editor":[{"family":"Zalta","given":"Edward N."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016"]]},"accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",11,26]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Hoefer). Furthermore, to be free, an action must be independent of physical causes, and since no human action is independent, therefore no action is free.

According to hard determinists, the illusion of free will is caused by the inability of human beings to identify the causes of our actions. Walter Terrence Stace was a British civil servant and philosopher who argued that the philosophers who follow the hard-deterministic approach to explain free will, make the semantic mistake of redefining the term “free will”. He postulates that we can reach absurd conclusions by misunderstanding the meaning of a certain word ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"X2P7A6mY","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(McKenna and Coates)","plainCitation":"(McKenna and Coates)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":103,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/DTmO0ro3/items/48A923JQ"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/DTmO0ro3/items/48A923JQ"],"itemData":{"id":103,"type":"chapter","title":"Compatibilism","container-title":"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy","publisher":"Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University","edition":"Winter 2018","source":"Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy","abstract":"Compatibilism offers a solution to the free will problem,which concerns a disputed incompatibility between free will anddeterminism. Compatibilism is the thesis that free will iscompatible with determinism. Because free will is typically taken to bea necessary condition of moral responsibility, compatibilism issometimes expressed as a thesis about the compatibility between moralresponsibility and determinism.","URL":"https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/compatibilism/","author":[{"family":"McKenna","given":"Michael"},{"family":"Coates","given":"D. Justin"}],"editor":[{"family":"Zalta","given":"Edward N."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]},"accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",11,26]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (McKenna and Coates). According to Stace, the definition of free will should be determined by the daily use of the word. Free will is thus defined as,

“Freely done acts are the ones that are caused by the psychological conditions of the actor. Acts that are not free are the ones which are caused by the external states of affairs to the actor.”

Using this definition, W.T. Stace made the case for soft determinism that there are scenarios where a human being can, despite having a causal chain, choose to do a different thing. His explanation accounts for moral responsibility to be given to humans.

I agree with Stace’s explanation as it is more practical and factually correct. Hard determinism creates a lot of moral problems for us to solve and has semantic issues as well.

Works Cited:

ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Hoefer, Carl. “Causal Determinism.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Spring 2016, Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, 2016. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/determinism-causal/.

McKenna, Michael, and D. Justin Coates. “Compatibilism.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Winter 2018, Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, 2018. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/compatibilism/.

Deal With It

Deal With It

[Name of Writer]

[Institutional Affiliations]

Deal With It

Baruch Spinoza was a Dutch philosopher of the 17th century. He is one of the earliest philosopher of enlightenment and contemporary biblical criticism. His philosophical studies are branched into politics, ethics and human mind. His emphasis on the concept of desire that it is the essence of a man’s ethical pursuit. In his essay he has mentioned the ontological principle of desire and has mentioned the definitions of affects that how our desires affect all the things in this world the very modes of this universe. Every action that a man does has a significant dynamic striving or conatus that continues to exist in this world. Every determined action driven by human desires possess different stages of power and it is based on its ability to persist in being ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"kPO7YI8K","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Nadler, 2001)","plainCitation":"(Nadler, 2001)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":460,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/UDZECMAJ"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/UDZECMAJ"],"itemData":{"id":460,"type":"article-journal","title":"Baruch Spinoza","author":[{"family":"Nadler","given":"Steven"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2001"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Nadler, 2001). The impact of the decisions and emotions associated with these are divided into either happiness or sadness and it changes the level of our powers. Joy is the journey that leads a being from a lesser position to a greater perfection and eventually the level of power alters with it while sadness is the entire opposite of it. Desire is the quality of one’s imaginations and the level of intellect and human beings desire for things that will maximize their degree of power. While dealing with the desires, humans struggle to believe that their actions are morally appropriate meanwhile they wish to increase the bodily powers and think that they have all the will to control their actions. Spinoza believes that desire is an essential power of existence and it results in the moral virtue and spiritual blessedness ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"GA37LTuh","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(De Dijn, de Spinoza, & Spinoza, 1996)","plainCitation":"(De Dijn, de Spinoza, & Spinoza, 1996)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":461,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/IJHCFDSC"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/IJHCFDSC"],"itemData":{"id":461,"type":"book","title":"Spinoza: the way to wisdom","publisher":"Purdue University Press","ISBN":"1-55753-082-3","author":[{"family":"De Dijn","given":"Herman"},{"family":"Spinoza","given":"Benedictus","non-dropping-particle":"de"},{"family":"Spinoza","given":"Baruch"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1996"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (De Dijn, de Spinoza, & Spinoza, 1996).

Rene Descartes was a natural philosopher, metaphysician and a mathematician of the 16th century. In his work Passions of the Soul, he mentions that passion of desire is basically a distress for the soul that define the desires. He believes that soul works mysteriously as it projects what it believes is agreeable and can be prospected into the future. According to this theory, the essence of mind is thought. The purpose of mind is much more significant than mere existence and duration. It has two important powers and faculties that are intellect and will. The intellectual power is mainly the power of perception which can be categorized into different manners of wholesome intellect, vast imaginations and sensual perception. The pure intellectual powers work independent of the bodily functions and the capacity of brain. The power of sense and perception strongly depends on the operations performed by the body such as corporeal memory. However, the will constitutes of different modes that include the desire, denial, doubt, contention and abhorrence. The desires of a self being require the intellectual part of the mind whether it is pure, imaginary or sensory. These elements combined together define the desire and it can be controlled by mind. Descartes expresses that mind is an intellectual substance and has the capacity to control what it should demand for. Perhaps, he believes that fundamentally mind has its own will, however, the powers of intellect and perception substantially are more basic. He also concludes that will depends on these factors to perform its operations ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"qlYjI8sf","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Hatfield, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Hatfield, 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":454,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/2CSVP4VE"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/2CSVP4VE"],"itemData":{"id":454,"type":"chapter","title":"René Descartes","container-title":"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy","publisher":"Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University","edition":"Summer 2018","source":"Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy","abstract":"René Descartes (1596–1650) was a creative mathematicianof the first order, an important scientific thinker, and an originalmetaphysician. During the course of his life, he was a mathematicianfirst, a natural scientist or “natural philosopher” second, and ametaphysician third. In mathematics, he developed the techniques thatmade possible algebraic (or “analytic”) geometry. In naturalphilosophy, he can be credited with several specific achievements:co-framer of the sine law of refraction, developer of an importantempirical account of the rainbow, and proposer of a naturalisticaccount of the formation of the earth and planets (a precursor to thenebular hypothesis). More importantly, he offered a new vision of thenatural world that continues to shape our thought today: a world ofmatter possessing a few fundamental properties and interactingaccording to a few universal laws. This natural world included animmaterial mind that, in human beings, was directly related to thebrain; in this way, Descartes formulated the modern version of themind–body problem. In metaphysics, he provided arguments for theexistence of God, to show that the essence of matter is extension, andthat the essence of mind is thought. Descartes claimed early on topossess a special method, which was variously exhibited in mathematics,natural philosophy, and metaphysics, and which, in the latter part ofhis life, included, or was supplemented by, a method of doubt., Descartes presented his results in major works published during hislifetime: the Discourse on the Method (in French, 1637), withits essays, the Dioptrics, Meteorology, andGeometry; the Meditations on First Philosophy (i.e.,on metaphysics), with its Objections and Replies (in Latin,1641, 2nd edn. 1642); the Principles of Philosophy, covering his metaphysicsand much of his natural philosophy (in Latin, 1644); and thePassions of the Soul, on the emotions (in French, 1649).Important works published posthumously included his Letters(in Latin and French, 1657–67); World, or Treatise onLight, containing the core of his natural philosophy (in French,1664); Treatise on Man (in French, 1664), containing hisphysiology and mechanistic psychology; and the Rules for theDirection of the Mind (in Latin, 1701), an early, unfinished workattempting to set out his method., Descartes was known among the learned in his day as a topmathematician, as the developer of a new and comprehensive physics ortheory of nature (including living things), and as the proposer of anew metaphysics. In the years following his death, his naturalphilosophy was widely taught and discussed. In the eighteenth centuryaspects of his science remained influential, especially hisphysiology, as did his project of investigating the knower inassessing the possibility and extent of human knowledge; he was alsoremembered for his failed metaphysics and his use of skepticalarguments for doubting. In the nineteenth century he was revered forhis mechanistic physiology and theory that animal bodies are machines(that is, are constituted by material mechanisms, governed by the lawsof matter alone). The twentieth century variously celebrated hisfamous “cogito” starting point, reviled the sense datathat some alleged to be the legacy of his skeptical starting point,and looked to him as a model of the culturally engaged philosopher. Hehas been seen, at various times, as a hero and as a villain; as abrilliant theorist who set new directions in thought, and as theharbinger of a cold, rationalistic, and calculative conception ofhuman beings. Those new to the study of Descartes should engage hisown works in some detail prior to developing a view of his legacy.","URL":"https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/descartes/","author":[{"family":"Hatfield","given":"Gary"}],"editor":[{"family":"Zalta","given":"Edward N."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]},"accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",10,14]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Hatfield, 2018).

The famous British philosopher G.E. Moore has presented his idea on desire arguing that there are two theories of desire that should be defined and distinguished clearly. One theory is of John Stuart Mill that defines pleasure as the central object of all desire. The idea of pleasure develops a sense of desire in a living being. If an object is thought to be providing pleasure, the desire for its attainment is developed and increased after some time. When the pleasure is achieved, the desire is fulfilled. This suggests the pleasure is the motivating factor and sole object of desire. Moore presents another alternative theory according to which the desire for object contains an actual pleasure within it, and the desire is then for the indirect pleasures fulfilled from attaining it. The first theory suggests that a living being is not always conscious about the pleasure while desiring for an object. He may only be conscious about the object that we wish for, and is may be impelled to achieve it regardless of the thought whether it would bring him pain or pleasure. The second theory suggests that even if we expect some pleasure from attaining an object, it is rarely the pleasure that we wish or desire to be fulfilled ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"hHNALETk","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Hurka, 2005)","plainCitation":"(Hurka, 2005)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":458,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/SUZ4X5JU"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/SUZ4X5JU"],"itemData":{"id":458,"type":"article-journal","title":"Moore’s Moral Philosophy","source":"plato.stanford.edu","URL":"https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moore-moral/","author":[{"family":"Hurka","given":"Thomas"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2005",1,26]]},"accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",10,14]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Hurka, 2005).

Sigmund Freud is the philosopher of 19th century and is considered as the creator of psychodynamic approach of psychology and explained the unconscious desires of human mind in order to explicitly explain the human behavior. He believes that mind has all the capacity and control over the conscious and unconscious decisions made on the basis of a human’s desires. He explained this concept by his three theories id, ego and super ego. The id theory explains the concept of desire and how human mind regulates its decisions. According to him id is the part of the unconscious brain that has desires and longs for pleasure. It contains the basic and primal instincts of mankind’s life. It is the most impulsive part of the mind that is dependent on the desire to seek pleasure and satisfaction ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"t6YAglWl","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Lapsley & Stey, 2011)","plainCitation":"(Lapsley & Stey, 2011)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":457,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/DMMDPQQT"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/DMMDPQQT"],"itemData":{"id":457,"type":"article-journal","title":"Id, ego, and superego","container-title":"Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, 2nd Edition. Ramachandran VS (ed): Elsevier","page":"1-9","author":[{"family":"Lapsley","given":"Daniel K."},{"family":"Stey","given":"Paul C."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2011"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Lapsley & Stey, 2011). It does not have any control on the consequences or choice of the desires that may occur in the prospect of fulfilling the desire. When id takes control of the mins, people cannot distinguish between the right and wrong while making the decisions in order to satisfy their needs. Id is the part of mind that cuts off human beings from the real external world rather the dwells in its own world of perceptions and imaginations. Id only follows the inexorable pleasure and mind simply goes numb for taking any moral decisions. Freud believes that people are basically actors in the drama of their own minds and are pushed by desires and pulled by coincidence ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"oleVCuzE","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Freud & Freud, 1992)","plainCitation":"(Freud & Freud, 1992)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":456,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/8AXBIXKB"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/8AXBIXKB"],"itemData":{"id":456,"type":"book","title":"Letters of Sigmund Freud","publisher":"Courier Corporation","ISBN":"0-486-27105-6","author":[{"family":"Freud","given":"Sigmund"},{"family":"Freud","given":"Ernst L."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1992"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Freud & Freud, 1992).

Immanuel Kant was the German philosopher who presented his idealistic and causative views in the age of enlightenment. Desires, in Kant’s opinion, is a representative of things that are not present and technically not at hand. He also calls it a preservation of objects that are already presents, along with the desires that do not appear at hand. This also includes those desires whose impact can impact the system in an adverse manner. Both the moral and the temporal values that are often associated with the empirical world, which gives rise to events and relations that have a place in these matters. Such desires often operate as forces that one has no control over, just as one cannot control any of the laws of nature, and these are often the laws that regulate desires in the first place. Desires, in Kant’s opinion makes us passive in a number of ways, subjecting us to heteronomy. As heteronomy is deeply dependent on the various external factors involved, people with desires are often plaything for the laws of nature and can have no sovereignty over them ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"8qsKcqs7","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Packer, 1989)","plainCitation":"(Packer, 1989)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":453,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/KSL6HISY"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/OnfrXiA2/items/KSL6HISY"],"itemData":{"id":453,"type":"article-journal","title":"Kant on Desire and Moral Pleasure","container-title":"Journal of the History of Ideas","page":"429-442","volume":"50","issue":"3","source":"JSTOR","archive":"JSTOR","DOI":"10.2307/2709570","ISSN":"0022-5037","author":[{"family":"Packer","given":"Mark"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1989"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Packer, 1989). Thus, one can term desires as the passive forces that most of us endure despite the circumstances we are in. The control us to the point of enslaving us. In Kant’s point of view, an inclination towards an object makes us submissive to it, whether one takes kindly to the idea or not. Even when the concept of morality is brought into question, the reason behind it must solely adhere to practical reasoning. However, Kant also warns people to disregard any form of inclination in favor of empirical causalities and completely disregards any and all forms of inclinations. Here, freedom is purely based on this reason alone and must, in no way, be restrained by a force of nature that one cannot control and even has the potential to bind us.

References

ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY De Dijn, H., de Spinoza, B., & Spinoza, B. (1996). Spinoza: The way to wisdom. Purdue University Press.

Freud, S., & Freud, E. L. (1992). Letters of Sigmund Freud. Courier Corporation.

Hatfield, G. (2018). René Descartes. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2018). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/descartes/

Hurka, T. (2005). Moore’s Moral Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moore-moral/

Lapsley, D. K., & Stey, P. C. (2011). Id, ego, and superego. Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, 2nd Edition. Ramachandran VS (Ed): Elsevier, 1–9.

Nadler, S. (2001). Baruch Spinoza.

Packer, M. (1989). Kant on Desire and Moral Pleasure. Journal of the History of Ideas, 50(3), 429–442. https://doi.org/10.2307/2709570

Death Penalty

Death Penalty

[Author]

[Institution]

The Abolition of the Death Penalty

According to Utilitarianism, sacrificing life for the greater good is justified. However, what it fails to quantify into the statement is what form of sacrifice is justified. If the answer is “all kinds” then a father sacrificing his own son in belief that he will be a tyrant ruler is justified as well.

Unfortunately, the world is filled with dual standards. It believes in sacrificing for the greater good. However, it would not move a finger to do what it needs to take to make the world a better place. It calls a person, that goes out of his way to kill murderers, rapists and killers, a killer as well since he took human life. No body thinks, for even a second, that these are the sort that if left to their own devices, would leave havoc all around them. If the world operated on means to an end, under the utilitarian principle, such an individual would be applauded for being a hero, which is not the case.

With regard to the death penalty, using the utilitarian principle is flawed, since it does not address the issue completely. Here, Kant’s moral theory would be better applied, since it keeps human being and their humanity as the ultimate endgame.

One may argue that abolishing the death penalty would mean that many innocent people would suffer as a result. However, what they fail to recognize is the fact that those being given the death penalty are human too. All human life, no matter how formidable, deserves to be saved. Besides, the killing of the innocent that could follow is just conjecture until it actually happens.

Furthermore, there may be a risk of losing human life regardless, since we will be endangering the society by letting a killer live in their midst. However, this risk can be minimized. Through proper reformation procedures, this can be prevented by rehabilitating the individual away from society. This way, the root cause of their affliction can be studied, and they could be returned to society as a fully functioning part of it. This is the only moral solution to save a life through reformation and save innocent lives from being needlessly subjected to death.

Descarte Or Marion/Falque

Name

Professor name

Subject

May 06, 2019

Descartes

The mere happening of res Extends vs the event of flesh

Descartes has used two kinds of substances including res Extensa that extends in the space and res Cogitans that is purely mental. He relied on the concepts of physics for explaining these two substances. The mental connections are not linked to does not require scientific description because they cannot be measured. The central reason behind it is that they lack physical extensions. Descartes has attempted to resolve the dilemma of distinguishing between the two substances. He claims that things that receive praise for physical appearance cannot be extended at all. He claims that a lack of physical extension does not exclude res Extensa. He has further explained that res is a substance that exists individually and it does not have a relationship with any other substance. It lacks the properties of atoms and is indistinguishable. He used the two substances ‘res cogitans' and ‘res Extensa' for presenting them as the thinking substance. This is also used for claiming that dependence is not an impossibility. This emphasize on differentiating between the physical and the external world. Descartes has provided comparison of thee primary objects by categorizing substances as res Extensa and Cogitans. This concept is used for determining if the objects exist in the world. Primary objects according to him are distinctive compared to the conceiving objects. He argues that own mind does not include the idea of imagination, sensation or the emotions. If an individual continues in the same manner he ends in an impoverished manner. Without a mind it is not possible to think or use imagination.

Descartes substance dualism explains that mind and body are completely distinct entities. He supports his claims by stating that the nature of mind is entirely different from that of the body. It means that the characteristics of both vary thus making them independent and separate. Descartes considers mind-body distinctiveness because his theory reflects that the mind is made of different matter. Gretchen thinks that even with the existence of souls the theory of personal identity is illogical. She claims, "because we have great ways of telling whether two people are the same over time. But we have no way of telling whether two souls are the same over time” CITATION Ale18 \l 1033 (Moreira-Almeida, Araujo and Cloninger). Bodies are the same as souls because the same souls are attached to the same bodies. It also states that one body has one soul of the soul of another persona cannot enter that body. Similarly, the same souls exhibit similar personalities. It indicates that the personalities of a single body cannot be changed thus making body and souls are one entity. The souls of people never change making the argument of Descartes invalid CITATION Ale18 \l 1033 (Moreira-Almeida, Araujo and Cloninger).

We cannot guarantee the sameness of immaterial self when we observe sameness of psychological characteristics. To understand the problem, it can be considered if mental phenomena can or cannot be reduced to physical phenomena. The sameness of the psychological characteristics can be guaranteed because the human functioning and properties of experience such as intellectualism, thinking and creativity depend on one's mind-brain relationship. People having active minds can perform thinking activities efficiently. However, we cannot find sameness of immaterial self because we are unable to identify the functions of the soul. We cannot explain the experiences of the soul or what's going on in the inner world.

Marion has less of explicitly contrasted flesh with a cartesian body that links to the term in-resistance. Res Extensa is important as it plays a vital role in identifying the role of objects. Descartes has set clear boundary for determining the primary imaginative objects and uncovering their distinction from others. According to him the distinct idea of own mind does not suggest the purposeful body movement. All above explained by the philosopher is linked to one’s own body. He also suggests that the reverse is not true because it former body cannot be considered as merely of the body. Things appear to be different when considered from the perspective of mind. This can be used for linking it with the sense of pure thought. The distinction is only possible when essential modes are providing claims for the separability of mind from the body. Disconnection between mind and body is also essential for identifying the role of soul. Cartesian internalism is used for meshing with the materialistic thinking of the current state. This claims the location for the mind-body dualism. Having a location means need for drawing line between inside and the outside boundaries. It also suggests that metaphysics is equal to the geometric points.

Marion has focused on the contemporary interpretation of Cartesian that suggests appealing location of mental states with respect to the boundaries. Descartes has struggled for adding adequate expression to his concept of union of the mind and body. The current topologists attempts to build connection for identifying the relationship between person and the physics. This also reflects the concept of organism bound individual. The scientists that are materialist minded have accepted that persons mind is inside head that also refers to internal location claim. The arguments of Descartes are provided for substance dualism and Res Extensa. Nothing outside person’s body is constitutive and he puts brain in a vat for presenting the difference between the two substances. Mental properties are normal according to him when they are embodied in subject that abides in the normal circumstances. Individuals dependent on the external or environmental factors refers to content-externalism. Cartesian intuitions used by Marion explains that anything that happens inside subject’s head or mind is capable of altering the mental states. The difference in the mental state or type also reveals what the person is thinking. There is limitations to the content externalism and possession claims. Subject’s relation to the environment is determined for understanding its exact state. This is used for uncovering the difference between subjects.

The discussion of Marion depicts that flesh needs to be understood by the sense of the meaningful event. Descartes discovered the ego explaining full consciousness. This reflects that the ego is part of individual identity. He claims that we cannot doubt the existence of our own ego. Every individual existence is capable of denying that the ego exists. This also reflects the role of consciousness. Descartes has referred to Cogito ergo sum that refers to ‘I think therefore I am’. He also explained that the discovery of ego occurred at the time of childhood and birth. The argument of Marion states that meaningful event is crucial for understanding flesh and its needs. This reflects the presentation of subjectivity and the exposed mode of giveness that rests on the outside intentionally. Counter-intentionality is also a related term used for understanding the sense of a meaningful event. This reflects that Marion has demanded experience for relating it with anticipation, control and manipulation. The interpretation of phenomenology's own aims. He has managed to discover the saturated phenomena and configured the understanding of philosophy. His analysis states that phenomena is crucial and contributes to philosophy. It is not possible to understand philosophy by neglecting the phenomena. He has attempted to reinterpret reduction and giveness that is also referred to as pure from the call. His principle of as must as reduction as giveness explains the forms of appearing. His rich phenomenal folds the meaning of giveness and is not constrained to the objects. His entire discussion has emphasized on revisiting powers and identifying thee aspects of knowing.

Falque on the incarnate suffering of the Christ

Falque argues that "Christ's flesh is the element or the medium of the humanity". The event of suffering explained by Falque has a theological basis. Human flesh according to this claim is identified as the instrumental medium that confirms the presence of divine life. This is used for distinguishing between the flesh and the spirit. Falque explains that the same thing is experienced by the soul and the flesh differently. this proves that human flesh was acquired through the soul.

Lieb and Korper build the argument that there are two alternatives to resurrection. It is not appropriate to trust the biblical accounts as legends replaced the factual information in the disciples. Leib lacked a semantic equivalent in modern English and explains that there is an understatement in explaining the transition. While the argument of Korper emphasize on the soul. He explains that death occurs only when the soul separates from the body. In understanding this perspective it is also important to determine if Eucharist is Korper. The Catholic analysis stresses on the distinction between substance and accident. The church's purpose is also examined for understanding the argument.

The resurrection of Leib is different from that of Korper. To deal with resurrection it is important to deal with the authenticity of the Gospel. The alteration in the facts makes it less reliable or authentic. For Christians to claim their edge over truth, they need to be certain about the religious events existing in Christianity. The Christians today rely on the knowledge presented to them by the legends, whose authenticity is doubtful. One claim regarding the unreliability of the Gospel is that it originally contained everything and the embarrassing details while the legends remove those details. The removal of the controversial information makes Bible a transformed version, lacking many details of the original book. The common example of these details is the point when Jesus referred to Peter as Satan, the cowardly nature of the disciples becoming apparent at the time of the crucifixion, also that the disciples refused initially to believe the rise of the Jesus CITATION MAS13 \l 1033 (Sekatskaia).

Falque emphasized on the subjective, live and self-aware experience of the Christ. The reason for the exclusion of these facts may be to show the positive side of the disciples but it makes resurrection different from what was told in the Gospels CITATION JPM09 \l 1033 (J. P. Moreland). The story of Alamo explains how the legends changed the details making it different from the original event. "Illustrations may even be used to help establish the dating and history of the Bible" (93-99). The actual event worked to change the glorified status of the legends. It altered facts such as 185 Texans taking over 5,000 Mexicans, while the story embellished over time. The contemporary historians also peeled away from the legends. Time played another role in transforming the factual information as legends lacked sufficient time to creep into Easter stories. For the establishment of New Testament documents, the legends needed time for writing the actual events of the Christ. The rime factor made it difficult to include such minute details. In recreating events, the legends failed to focus on required details, demanding time. It is thus unreliable to trust the rising of Jesus. The untruthfulness of the resurrection is also visible in the altered facts of the Synoptic Gospels that was written before the Book of Acts. The fall of Jerusalem and the death of Paul are also missing from the recorded versions of legends while the Acts were written between A.D 60 to 62. The absence of and alterations in these events do not improve the knowledge of the Christians regarding the resurrection of other religious events. The rise of Jesus also puts the followers of the Christian religion into a conflicting situation where they struggle for factual information CITATION Nan14 \l 1033 (Caciola).

Replacing facts in telling resurrection, makes truth unexplored by the Christians. Resurrection without actual historical evidence makes Christians uncertain about how Jesus rose from the dead. The conspiracy theory explains that the legends removed the information about Christ's sufferings; his trial to crucifixion, burial, Roman seal and the empty tomb. The legends find the details of Roman guards beating and whipping as embarrassing, so they remove such information. The Christians relying on legend lacks the details of how bloody torture weakened Jesus and how the massive rock was rolled across the tomb.

I have my body? Or I am my body?

Falque claims “I am my body” that can be related with the theological data of Christ’s suffering. The argument of Falque states that it was Christ's body that saved humanity not his words. He has based his argument on the French phenomenologists instead of authors. The phenomenologists include Husserlians, Heideggarians and Marleau-Pontyians. The roots in different authors have less importance in determining the way of thinking. his central argument states that the word is made of flesh so it is capable of becoming the word. This is used for proving that flesh holds more significance than a word. Falque also emphasized on the power of theology and explains that the philosophers always learn from the theologians. He has thus considered theologians as more powerful and effective than the philosophers. He denies any instinct where theologians could learn from the philosophers. This reflects that Falque has based his beliefs on theology and consider it a strong foundation for explaining the concept of Christ's flesh. The body of Christ means a true body like humans that consist of limbs, hair, stomach and has connections with the contemporary phenomenology. This again leads to the same distinction explained by Leib and Korper. Leib stresses on flesh while Korper relies on the body for presenting their arguments. The Feast of Lamb is related to the spread body that builds an intermediary between the extended body and Descartes ‘lived body'. Hurssel has further revealed that philosophy and theology cannot separate both.

Falque uses ‘I am the body' for explaining the suffering of Christ. This reflects that he has used the phenology of suffering and incarnation. Christ shared his suffering by virtue by emphasizing on Goodness. In his argument, he has attempted to present the human body as a symbol of goodness. The goodness of the body is beyond the finitude and the limitations. He preserved insights and benefits by avoiding the problem of the grand narrative. He has reclaimed the centrality of the immanent material by building a connection between theology and phenomenology. Incarnation remains central to his understanding of humans. He has aimed at relating the human body with that of Christ. This reflects his emphasis on the concepts of human suffering, death, resurrection, finitude and fleshy material being. This indicates that finitude provides reasoning for the reclamation of incarnate humanity and reshaping our understanding of the term. This reveals that the human person is problematic. He maximizes his account by stating the grand narrative of theology is linked with the problems of phenomenological validity. This also indicates his emphasis on human finitude and God-given reality. The desires for the fullness of perfections remains one of the prominent viewpoints of Falque. He mentions, "the desire for fullness or for perfection remains precisely one of the masks which the Serpent bears, and thus also sin. You will be like Gods" (Genesis 3:5). This indicates that finitude is an inherent event before the transgressive journey from a sinful life. The humans that refuse to accept their limitations or imperfections are more like to commit the sin.

Work Cited

BIBLIOGRAPHY Caciola, Nancy Mandeville. "Revenants, Resurrection, and Burnt Sacrifice." Preternature: Critical and Historical Studies on the Preternatural 3.2 (2014).

J. P. Moreland, Tim Muehlhoff. The God Conversation: Using Stories and Illustrations to Explain Your Faith. IVP Books, 2009.

Moreira-Almeida, Alexander, Saulo de F. Araujo and C. Robert Cloninger. "The presentation of the mind-brain problem in leading psychiatry journals." Brazilian Journal of Psychiatry (2018).

Sekatskaia, M.A. Res cogitans i Res extensa: problema svobody (Russian) Paperback – 2013. RKH, 2013.

Descartes Requires That What Count As Genuine Knowledge(as Opposed To What We Simply Believe To Be True Or Have The Opinion That) Must Be Certainly And Immune To Scepticism. Locke Does Not Require That Knowledge Proper Be Absolutely And Free From Doubt. W

Your Name

Instructor Name

Course Number

Date

What is the more plausible theory of knowledge?

John Locke and Rene Descartes are considered modern philosophers of the early years of the 17th century CITATION Cop19 \l 1033 (Copenhaver). Both philosophers have attempted to answer important questions about knowledge, the human mind, reason, and logic. Although the general theme was the same, the two philosophers offer fundamentally different perspectives CITATION Qui19 \l 1033 (Quinton).

Descartes was primarily a rationalist who largely relied on the reason for the righteous guidance in thought, speech, and action. Descartes believed and completely trusted the unique ability of logic possessed by the human race. In an age which was abject with skepticism and people were habitual of appealing to God and other deities, he had faith in an individual's achievements, which are a result of clear thought, introspection, and self-reflection. He propounded that anything can be perspicuously observed by us as reason is the true gist of humanity. Descartes believed that the 'natural light' of the reason is retained by every human, and if every thought was presented logically and methodically, even the least sophisticated person could understand them. Descartes discovers knowledge through the use of innate ideas and reason.

John Locke offered a detailed analysis of the human mind and its unique acquisition of knowledge. He further opines that at the time of birth, the human mind is like a blank slate or an empty paper, and it is only filled by the different experiences of an individual as time passes CITATION Jef19 \l 1033 (Jeffreys). Knowledge is defined by Locke as the connection or discrepancy between the ideas as formed and reformed by humans. Locke also delineates three degrees of knowledge; intuitive, demonstrative, and sensitive. All three are vital for a complete understanding of the ideas and perceptions around us, but according to Locke, only intuitive and demonstrative are considered as true forms of knowledge, and sensitive knowledge is a source of debate and confusion among Locke's followers.

According to this paper, the more plausible theory of knowledge is of John Locke, who stresses the significance of empiricism, imparting that one cannot have enough knowledge without a certain amount of experience.

Works Cited

BIBLIOGRAPHY Copenhaver, Rebecca. "Philosophy of Mind in the Early Modern and Modern Ages." The History of the Philosophy of Mind (2019).

Jeffreys, Montagu Vaughan Castleman. "John Locke: prophet of common sense." Routledge (2019).

Quinton, Anthony M. "The nature of things." Routledge (2019).

Descartes Vs Locke

Student’s Name:

Instructor’s Name:

Class Name:

Date when Due:

Descartes vs Locke

Introduction

The personal identity issue and the detriments have been of concern to most philosophers. There are questions which have been raised including what does it entail being a person every day. The theory of physical identity is the philosophical conflict with the crucial issues of our existence like who we are and whether there is life after the demise of a person (Allison, 41-58). This kind of analysis of the personal identity gives the set of sufficient and necessary conditions for the person’s character in the duration of time. In philosophy, if the mind, the concept of personal identity other times is called the diachronic problem of the individual personality. There are various theories of their own identity or consciousness. In this paper, the review of René Descartes and John Locke on personal identity and consciousness shall be presented.

John Locke

John Locke is one of the philosophers who debated the Cartesian theory which stated that the soul accounts for the personal identity. John (217) questioned that personal identity is the matter of the continuity of the psychological. By arguing both the Augustinian viewpoint of the man as being firstly sinful, which maintains that a man naturally knows the basic logical prepositions? John suggested that the empty mind that is shaped by the experience, reflections, and sensations are the primary source of our entire ideas.

John (217) created the third terms between the body and the soul, and his though might surely be meditated by the people who following the scientist ideology identified the consciousness and brain quickly. The brain while consciousness maintains the same while the body or other substances might change. Thus, personal identity is in knowledge but not in mind. Nevertheless, the theory by Locke reveals the debt he has on theology and Apocalyptic which advanced the excuses any failings of human justice and hence the miserable state of humanity. The issue with personal identity is at the center of the discussions concerning life after immortality and death. For one o exists after death, there is a need to be the person after death who is supposed to be the same individual as to the individual who died. I did not agree with John Locker when he said that the brain while consciousness maintains the same while the body or other substances might change. Thus, personal identity is in consciousness but not in the brain

John (217) kept that consciousness could be transferred from one person’s soul to another’s and that the personal character should be together with awareness. Locke raised the question that is the similar substance that thinks it can be altered, it could be the same individual or maintaining to be the same or it could be a dissimilar person. John answered the questioned in affirmative. The consciousness can be transmitted from a substance to the other and hence, whereas the soul is altered, consciousness maintains to be the same, therefore preserving the individual identity during the change. Contrary, consciousness could be lost in the utter forgetfulness whereas the thinking substance or the body maintains the same. In these conditions, there could be the same soul however two different people. The affirmation concludes the claim that the same thinking substance or soul is neither sufficient nor necessary for the individual identity in over time.

The distinction between the person and man is dubious, John’s (217) distinction between the thing or the soul that thinks is us plus the consciousness is even more essential. The answer is that the difference solves the issues of the dead resurrection. In the case of the cobbler and prince Locke shows the effect of resurrection resolution. In this case, the prince soul plus the thoughts of the prince is transmitted to the cobbler’s body. The outcome of this is that the prince still sees himself as the prince even with the fact that he is in a different shape. John’s distinction between the person and the man makes it possible for a person to be in a diverse body during resurrection while still be the same individual. John concludes that consciousness is essential to the punishment and reward that is meted during Judgment day.

The prince and cobbler case leases to the problem though because the personal identity is founded on the consciousness plus a person could be just aware of his knowledge, the human judges will never know when they are punishing or judging the similar person or the same body. It means, Locke (217) argued that one might be sentenced just for the bodies’ acts; however, one I only responsible for the actions when one is conscious. It forms the basis of the defense of insanity that one is not held accountable for the deeds done when an individual is unconscious.

René Descartes

Descartes (1991) argued that consciousness is axiomatic since one cannot logically be able to deny the mid existence while at the sometimes utilizing the mind doing the denying. Nevertheless, the derivation and formulation of the action are wrong whereby he assumed that one could be aware of the absence of something to cause awareness. Consciousness is the ability which perceives things that are in existence. I support René Descartes that consciousness is the ability which sees things that are in reality. Indirectly and directly each phenomenon of the consciousness is generated from the awareness of the world in external. Some content or some objects are involved in each stage of knowledge. Introspection is the cognition process which is directed outward being the process of the apprehension some of the existents in the external world. Meditation is the cognition process which is directed inward that is the process of the perception of an individual’s physiological actions concerning some existent in the external world the activities like reminiscing, feeling, thinking among others. The contents state of consciousness is the contradiction in the terms.

Descartes (1991) stated that because being conscious is to perceive something, the consciousness needs something that is outside itself for it to function. Consciousness is dependent on existence. Additionally, the consciousness cannot just be the conscious itself as implied by Descartes. To be the consciousness, it needs to be aware of eternal something to itself. Only like after the consciousness of something that is external could identify itself. Just like the car motor which generates the electricity for its usage, it requires to be started by something which is outside it. It involves existence. Descartes provided the physiological usage of the consciousness concept, but he did not offer the concept analysis. Instead, he employed the idea in a manner that is suggestive for the study. The conscious thought is the mental state which is self-intimating.

Descartes (1991) defined consciousness as the thought that makes a clear mind. As people, we are aware of every idea we possess, and we are fully aware of having them though, and we are not in the position to doubt that we have thought. He also stated that consciousness involves reflection. There are the questions on how strong or in which form that Descartes was committed to this. Is the consciousness significantly constituted by the clear perception from the real perception?

Descartes (1991) stated that conscious thought is also intentional which means we can distinguish the thinking as the mind mode from the content. The thoughts represent the things which appear to be on the outside of the mind. In the Sixth and Third meditation, Descartes utilized the structure of representation to infer the Gods existence and the presence of the mind-independent material. Most Cartesians used Descartes philosophy in defining the terms consciousness. One of the Cartesians stated that inner knowledge, awareness and the perception which every one of us goes thought directly in ourselves during when we are aware, of what happens and what we are doing. Another one is the thought nature compromise of the inner sensation, testimony, and consciousness whereby the mind is aware of the things that it suffers and does in general of everything that happens immediately when it is acted on or when it acts.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Descartes argued that consciousness is axiomatic since one cannot logically be able to deny the mid existence while at the sometimes utilizing the mind doing the denying. Additionally, the consciousness cannot just be the conscious itself as implied by Descartes John (217) stated that the brain while consciousness maintains the same while the body or other substances might change. Thus, personal identity is in knowledge but not in mind. I support René Descartes that consciousness is the ability which perceives things that are in existence. I did not agree with John Locker when he said that the brain while consciousness maintains the same while the body or other substances might change. Thus, personal identity is in consciousness but not in mind. Indirectly and directly each phenomenon of the consciousness is generated from the awareness of the world in external. Some content or some objects are involved in each stage of the awareness

Work Cited

Allison, Henry E. "Locke's theory of personal identity: A re-examination." Journal of the History of Ideas 27.1 (1966): 41-58.

Descartes, Rene. "Meditations I: Of The Things of Which We May Doubt." Meditations on first philosophy (1901).

Locke, John. "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (London, 1690)." Chapter XXVII: Of identity and diversity 29 (1975): 217.

Descartes's Myth Response

[Name of the Writer]

[Name of Instructor]

[Subject]

[Date]

Descartes's Myth Response

One of the major points that has been talked about here is that how the notion of the foundations of the mind body dualism are something that are rather mistaken. There is suggestion on the part of the Ryle that the mind and the body are needed to be looked at as a substance. Thinking of the process that how the mind and the body are substance are further augmented by the fact how dualist also tend to look at the whole thing in a pretty much similar manner. The other argument that is raised later on by Ryle is that how the official doctrine of the mind and body dualism is something that is quite false in its nature. The main assertion that is being made here is that there is confusion with regards to the way two logical types are supposed to be worked out. Even the underlying categories are quite different in this regard and how they made to be compatible. The statement that is made by him is that how it tends to represent the mental aspect of the life of the person. The idea is that how they tend to belong to one logical type or category and how they are supposed to be belonging to each other is supposed to be false. There are issues in terms of how compatibility tends to work out in these sorts of issues. The assertion that is being made on the part of Ryle is that how the official doctrine is something that does not have the one logical type and category. This is despite the fact that the assertion is being made that they tend to belong to one another. The dogma is thus represented as the myth on the part of the philosopher. The concept has been brought into the wider conscience of the public in form of some other works such as the “The Ghost in the Machine”.

Describe What Russell Claims Are The Benefits Of Philosophy. Why Is Philosophy Different From Science?

[Name of the Writer]

[Name of Instructor]

[Subject]

[Date]

Describe what Russell claims are the benefits of philosophy. Why is philosophy different from science?

Russell claims the benefits of philosophy by discussing nature of the philosophy. Philosophy cannot feel physical or determine because it covers different aspects in mind. For instance, people achieve money, jobs, and necessities to satisfy their needs. However, even after achieving goals, there remains some space for more. In the case of philosophy, satisfaction comes in mind that is people can achieve a maximum level of satisfaction through philosophical thoughts and outcomes. Philosophy does not require practical, and conclusions can be drawn without it. Besides, judgments can come much faster than the conclusion drawn from other sorts of experiments. It is beneficial for practical individuals because they all are more interested in answer rather than the process of obtaining it. Philosophical thinking can go beyond basic awareness about the world and daily life understanding.

Russell explained that philosophy is different from physical science because philosophy benefits the individual himself first then others. On the other hand, physical science benefits everyone and depicts the same utility for all. Another difference is the definite knowledge. Philosophy provides limited definite knowledge due to the personal point of view or general discussion. Whereas, physical science provide more accurate knowledge as it is based on random experiment and specific assumptions.

In truth, science currently even denies that it can answer the fundamental “How” by the advancement of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Belief in an ultimate deity is an attempt to answer "Why" not "How" where people find it difficult to equate "Why" with "How" For instance, there can be scientific answers to "how to kill somebody" or "how to save somebody from death," but there will never be a scientific answer to the “why” Death penalty or warring or abortions are killings, but whether they are good or bad cannot be decided by science.

Dialogue

Name of Student

Name of Professor

Name of Class

Day Month Year

Dialogue

Primary Question: What do the number of thing in the room and their nature reflect about persons? Is there an interpretation beyond the apparent sights and decorations?

Andy: Hey Harry!

Harry: Hi Andy!

A: Let us engage in a critical conversation pertaining to simple things.

H: Sure, I will love it too. Go ahead and I will contribute to the best of my abilities.

A: How many things are thee in your room?

H: What sort of question is this? I have not counted them ever.

A: Relax mate! Just highlight the things that are closer to your heart and imagination.

H: Ok then! I will call them out and you can count them for me.

A: Go on!

H: A portrait of a dark black horse, an ashtray, a vase on near to my bed, television, bunny and sofas.

A: I count them 6. Is that it? If yes, I shall analyze your personality based on the association you have with the things in the room.

H: I would have loved to ask you the same and count the number of things in your room. Since I possess no skills or experience to assess the personality of a person based on the number and type of things in the room, I shall continue to hear from you and respond to your assessment.

A: I am glad to hear that you are interested. To be honest, I do not aim at assessing your personality. Instead, we will talk about these things and the emotional and philosophical views pertaining to them.

H: The portrait of a dark black horse hung in the wall of my room, let us begin with it.

A: Harry, the portrait can be deemed your reflection. The dark black horse is the problems you faced and the portrait reflects the will power to stay motivated and tall.

H: Is not every person faced with the same set of instances in life? I believe so! Similar things can be said about any person.

A: Yes, you are right Harry. The comprehension of philosophical dogmas is contentious and critical at the same time. The propositions of free will and the aspirations of human are diverse.

H: I am always interested in exploring the true meaning of these things placed in my room. I believe the lack of things in my room indicate I adore space both in my life and the room ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"6n7zT06X","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(\\uc0\\u8220{}Dialogues\\uc0\\u8221{})","plainCitation":"(“Dialogues”)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1947,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/H8YOvGFC/items/6FSDK2L3"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/H8YOvGFC/items/6FSDK2L3"],"itemData":{"id":1947,"type":"webpage","title":"Dialogues","container-title":"TeachingEnglish | British Council | BBC","URL":"https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/dialogues","language":"en-UK","accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",2,2]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (“Dialogues”).

A: You have hit the nail, Harry. Yes, you may have noticed for how long we intend to keep these things in the room. Your character is manifested in these things. If I am not wrong, you prefer not to depend on others and utilize your potential to harness the space and time you get in life. Well, I may be deviating from the original topic which was the number and nature of things in your room.

H: You are exactly on the right track, Andy. We cannot restrict our thoughts to a certain dimension when it comes to analyzing the essential nature of things. The assessment you gave is absolutely perfect. I am really amazed how these little things can speak volumes about nature and values e nurture in our life.

A: Harry, the attachment with such things is very critical as per the philosophical dogmas. It is a never ending debate.

H: You seem to have a strong command of the philosophical domain. I shall be looking forward to engaging with similar but comprehensive conservation in the near future.

A: I will be thoroughly pleased to hear from you Harry!

Works Cited

ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY “Dialogues.” TeachingEnglish | British Council | BBC, https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/dialogues. Accessed 2 Feb. 2019.

Differences Of Love Marriage And Arranged Marriages.

Arranged Marriages

Bianca

[Institutional Affiliation(s)]

Author Note

[Include any grant/funding information and a complete correspondence address.]

Arranged Marriages

People live according to their societal values, they follow them, and if they deny following these values, then they will be considered as deviant. Marriage is a societal norm, which has to be followed, while, it is an ethical dilemma that, arranged marriage leads to a successful life.

Ethical Dilemma

Ethical dilemma is a problem in decision making between two possible parties who are in which there is only possibility of accepting one decision and rejection in second decision. In philosophy, this dilemma is also called ethical paradox. When there are two choices and individuals have to choose one option, then it becomes a confusing situation, individuals cannot differentiate unethical and ethical choices ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"rcynjmDI","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Figar & \\uc0\\u272{}or\\uc0\\u273{}evi\\uc0\\u263{}, 2016)","plainCitation":"(Figar & Đorđević, 2016)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":798,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/F0XOCTdk/items/FDWWF9LU"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/F0XOCTdk/items/FDWWF9LU"],"itemData":{"id":798,"type":"article-journal","title":"Managing an Ethical Dilemma","container-title":"Economic Themes","volume":"54","source":"ResearchGate","abstract":"An ethical dilemma is a situation of making a choice between two or more alternatives. An agent is in unpleasant and difficult situation because he/she often needs to make a choice between ethical and unethical alternatives, and when it comes to the ethical alternatives, he/she should choose the best one. Selection reflects to a large number of principals, so this situation causes conflicts between different levels of ethical dilemmas, but also the conflicts within the same level. These conflicts can be solved by applying the hierarchy and priority rules which are incorporated in the procedure and, in particular,in the strategy for solving the ethical dilemmas. Through many case studies this paper points out the importance of an ethical dilemma in making business decisions, the so-called business ethical dilemma. It is the result of the incompatibilities between altruism, egoism and the common good. Neglecting the need for establishing the compatibility not only creates an ethical dilemma, but it becomes deeper, which is firstly manifested through the loss of reputation of the company, then through decreasing the financial results, and, in the worst case, in closing the company. Therefore, an ethical dilemma must be continuously managed.","DOI":"10.1515/ethemes-2016-0017","journalAbbreviation":"Economic Themes","author":[{"family":"Figar","given":"Nadica"},{"family":"Đorđević","given":"Biljana"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016",6,2]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Figar & Đorđević, 2016). Ethical dilemmas can be avoided by rational and logical thinking while decision making. Ethical dilemmas can be solved by making a simple priority list and appropriate strategies to avoid any conflict in decision-making. To differentiate between wrong and right actions, our society has set some standards to follow, and these standards are called ethics. These ethical standards are put in terms of duties and rights of individuals, societal benefits, just systems and societal virtues. These terms make a framework about right and wrong actions in communities and societies.

Arranged Marriage and Ethical Dilemma

Marriage is a social contract between two parties who agree to live together with their consent and they decide their living standards. Arranged marriage is a type of marriage, which is done with consent of families of both parties. While, this type does not involve decision-making based on personal wishes of individuals, they only have to accept decisions made by their families. Arranged marriage is the opposite of love marriage in which both parties accept decisions with their consent, while their families accept their choices made by both parties.

Ethical dilemma in an arranged marriage is that they lead to a successful life, and there will be better understanding between two parties. However, this can be only an ethical dilemma because arranged marriages do not involve decision-making of parties with their consent. In traditional areas, there is no such concept of arranged marriage, so individuals have to accept those options, which are available. Both parties do not get a chance to communicate before their marriage, and a communication gap starts taking root in their relation. There has to be an interpersonal relationship between two parties to make a clear understanding of their relationship.

Interpersonal problems are caused by communication gap, which leads to misunderstandings between two parties after their marriage ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"bMwhw1Vh","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Akhtar et al., 2017)","plainCitation":"(Akhtar et al., 2017)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":801,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/F0XOCTdk/items/ZRYK2PGY"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/F0XOCTdk/items/ZRYK2PGY"],"itemData":{"id":801,"type":"article-journal","title":"Interpersonal Problems in Arranged and Love Marriages","page":"18-22","volume":"15","source":"ResearchGate","abstract":"Marriage is often considered to be the cornerstone of a healthy social structure. The stronger the quality of a marriage, the healthier the social structure of society. The present research investigated the interpersonal problems among arranged and love marriages. The sample of this study comprised 100 couples who had married for love, and 100 couples whose marriage had been arranged by their families. The age range of participants was 20 to 40 years (Mean = 28, SD = 5.2). Inventory of Interpersonal Problems-32 (Horowitz, Alden, Wiggins, & Pincus, 2000) was administered to assess the nature of interpersonal problems experienced by the sample. The findings of present study revealed that the couples whose marriage was arranged by their families were more domineering and vindictive, compared to couples who had married for love.. However, couples in love marriages were more socially inhibited, non-assertive and intrusive when compared to arranged marriage couples. This research has important implications for social psychologists, marital counsellors and families.","author":[{"family":"Akhtar","given":"Nasreen"},{"family":"Khan","given":"Anum"},{"family":"Pervez","given":"Aneeza"},{"family":"Batool","given":"Iffat"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017",3,21]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Akhtar et al., 2017). These issues of communication gaps give birth to issues and conflicts, which sometimes become the reason for abuse, violence, and divorce. Parties do not understand appropriate decision-making to avoid any further complications in their marriages, and this confusion in decision-making may be considered as an ethical dilemma. Arranged marriage is not more than a forceful marriage because none of both parties can make any appropriate decisions to make their marriage successful. Arranged marriages only raise sensitive issues of social, cultural, traditional, and economic issues, and these issues are the result of intersecting questions ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"xPMIz9lk","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Clark & Richards, 2008)","plainCitation":"(Clark & Richards, 2008)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":805,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/F0XOCTdk/items/X57G4YYQ"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/F0XOCTdk/items/X57G4YYQ"],"itemData":{"id":805,"type":"article-journal","title":"The Prevention and Prohibition of Forced Marriages: A Comparative Approach","container-title":"The International and Comparative Law Quarterly","page":"501-528","volume":"57","issue":"3","source":"JSTOR","archive":"JSTOR","ISSN":"0020-5893","shortTitle":"The Prevention and Prohibition of Forced Marriages","author":[{"family":"Clark","given":"Brigitte"},{"family":"Richards","given":"Claudina"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2008"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Clark & Richards, 2008). These intersecting questions later result in misunderstandings and unclear communication, which leads to problems between parties.

However, these ethical dilemmas, which are vague, and not based on rationality and logic can be avoided with effective strategic planning. To be in a successful arranged married, both partners should be asked about their consent and there should be no communication gap, otherwise, this societal formality may lead to immoral actions. Ethical dilemmas may also create sensitive issues in society by raising possibilities of intersecting questions.

References

ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Akhtar, N., Khan, A., Pervez, A., & Batool, I. (2017). Interpersonal Problems in Arranged and Love Marriages. 15, 18–22.

Clark, B., & Richards, C. (2008). The Prevention and Prohibition of Forced Marriages: A Comparative Approach. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 57(3), 501–528. Retrieved from JSTOR.

Figar, N., & Đorđević, B. (2016). Managing an Ethical Dilemma. Economic Themes, 54. https://doi.org/10.1515/ethemes-2016-0017

Discussion

Name

Institution

Course Code

Dated

Discussion

Emotions play an important role in ethics and morality. Philosophers have long observed that ethics and morals are the derivations of emotions. Two great moral philosophers who wrote on this were David Hume and Adam Smith. In particular, they suggest that the ability to empathize with others is the source for many of the ethical principles. Recent research provides strong evidence that the “moral sentiments” are part of human nature and the result of millions of years of evolution. We, human, are born with a sense of fairness and other feelings that lead to ethical principles. Jonathon Haidt has shown that there are fundamental moral sentiments among all people regardless of culture. The innate sense of right and wrong has served humans well as a species and we have come to dominate the earth.

The problem is that what worked for humans in pre-history and early civilization does not always work in a contemporary global society. Much human progress over the last several millennia has entailed building cultures and political systems to put constraints to the emotions. People cannot rely too much on their feelings to guide their moral behavior. An individual’s personal code of ethics — those rules that each of us use to guide how we live — is important, however, those ethics need a solid grounding. There is danger in basing them just on how people feel or what is best for them individually. Developing the groundwork that allows people to have a personal code of ethics that works for them and their fellow humans are what philosophy is all about.

The emotions play a pivotal role in most of the ethical decisions people make. Emotions such as shame, guilt, and embarrassment which are inner-directed negative emotions encourage people to act morally. On the contrary, outer-directed negative emotions serve the sole purpose of punishing people. For instance, more often than not people direct their outer-directed emotions such as contempt, anger, or disgust at those who behaved unethically. Positive emotions that include admiration and gratitude prompt people to become a helping hand for others. Besides, sympathy and empathy are the derivations of suffering, and such emotions would also prompt people to help others and act ethically towards others. So, it is beyond any doubt that emotions are pivotal in ethical decision making.

Discussion

Usefulness of moral Theories- Do we need morality ?

Do we need morality ? This question has long been debated by evolutionary biologists and theologians alike. Presumably, the more complex human societies became, the more urgently needed a set of values and conventions for these communities to function. It was important for individuals to pull together without direct monitoring, to renounce others and to contribute to the well-being of the group - which indirectly also increases the success of the individual.

Morality can only exist if the world is such that the question of why a certain moral norm should really be valid can be answered in principle. The foundations of morality date back to the era of the tribal social system (Fabian & Fordyce, 1990). This period is characterized by the power of nature, sensory experience, the peculiarity of conceptual thinking and the understanding of reality in a fantastic way. There are various types of magic, totemic, fetishism, a system of prohibitions, certain rites, rituals, mythology

Kant, it is freedom and equality that are the defining signs of the categorical imperative: “Do so that you always relate to a person both in your person and in the face of any other, as well as to your goal, and you would never relate to it only as a means. C. Marx and F. Engels very accurately and colorfully described capitalism: “The bourgeoisie, wherever it gained dominance, destroyed all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. Ruthlessly, she broke the motley feudal bonds that bound man to his “natural masters” and left no other connection between people except for sheer interest, a heartless “pure-minded” (Warnock, 1993).

Compliance with moral rules promotes one's own reputation. Similar arguments are used to explain the emergence of religion : today, there is a consensus that morality is older and that ethical principles were later poured into stories about helping or angry gods who critically eyeball our actions.

References

Fabian, B., & Fordyce, D. (1990). The elements of moral philosophy. Georg Olms Verlag.

Warnock, G. (1993). The object of morality. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 2(3),

255-258.

Discussion

Discussion

[Author Name(s), First M. Last, Omit Titles and Degrees]

[Institutional Affiliation(s)]

Author Note

[Include any grant/funding information and a complete correspondence address.]

Discussion

Classmate 1

The response shared by one of the classmates is about a ‘survival lottery' that was proposed by John Harris in 1975. In this experiment, he wanted to show the better side of human beings and focus on the kind and wellbeing nature of humans. It is about how a single person can be helpful to create happiness among people. This lottery explains that any individual's name it announces would have to donate his or her organ to the dying persons and in this way he/she can save more humans at a time. This is considered good because in the end, it would only promote happiness and pleasure. According to the ‘principle of utility', if an action cause pain among people than it is considered as a bad action, and if an action becomes the reason of happiness among people than it is a good action. However, this theory has flaws as in, it would be a matter of grievance for the family of the donor. Because a lot of people are attached to the giver and it would be wrong if the one accepting the organ is a loner in this world. This theory is flawed because it is applicable on everyone and deals equally with everyone. Therefore most people think as their lives are less important than the ones who need the organs ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"ds0c97jK","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(\\uc0\\u8220{}John Harris: The Survival Lottery,\\uc0\\u8221{} n.d.)","plainCitation":"(“John Harris: The Survival Lottery,” n.d.)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":69,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/bWNXhCgk/items/DB23NTMJ"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/bWNXhCgk/items/DB23NTMJ"],"itemData":{"id":69,"type":"webpage","title":"John Harris: The Survival Lottery","URL":"https://global.oup.com/us/companion.websites/9780199997275/stud/Part4/self/Harris/","accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",10,17]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (“John Harris: The Survival Lottery,” n.d.).

Classmate 2

The principle of utility is discussed in the second response which is based on the happiness an action causes; despite all the rules and regulations. This is applied to broaden happiness but, in many cases, it cannot be applicable because of the violation of an individual's rights. But if more people are gaining happiness then it is okay to violate rules, no matter if the individual is right. This principle does not bother to into the past or the records of the crimes a person did rather it focuses on the present and the happiness it brings along. The survival lottery is faulty because it is directly infringing the rights of the donor. No matter how important or greater the sufferers are, it does not make the donor's lifeless important. No one has the right to judge the worthiness and unworthiness of a person's life. It is not him/her who made other ill. Thus, it is not fair to suffer because of other’s mistakes.

References

ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY John Harris: The Survival Lottery. (n.d.). Retrieved October 17, 2019, from https://global.oup.com/us/companion.websites/9780199997275/stud/Part4/self/Harris/

Discussion

Replies discussion post

Reply class mate #1

Thank you for your post but it is hard for me to understand your opening sentence in which you says, “theories are the key concept of moral theories”. Remaining post is good in flow and well organized. Speaking of philosophical ethics, I do not mean philosophy as an ethically rich and ethically oriented philosophy and do not presume to evaluate ethics as part of philosophy. These are undoubtedly interesting questions for discussion. However, it is important to determine what we mean by philosophical ethics as such, as well as applied ethics. I proceed from the fact that the subject of philosophical ethics is morality and moral phenomena at the level of general, abstract definitions. Strictly speaking, morality is a philosophical concept. As such, i.e. denoting the totality of moral phenomena, it takes shape historically and philosophically relatively late, much later than the word "morality" itself.

Reply class mate #2

Thankyou for your interesting and informative post. I can see your good understanding of this topic from your post. You provided us different reasons of morality and why it is significant in our daily lives. Based on the most general ideas about philosophical ethics, I can’t say that I see any symptoms of its extinction, and therefore I don’t feel any reason to worry about its fate. If we talk about world philosophy, the indicator may be the journal "Ethics". According to Mackie, Aristotle, Saint Thomas , Hobbes, Mill, & Thomson, (2003). , Thus, morality is not only possible for us; to a large extent, it is natural for us (194). Over the past few decades, the number of articles of ethical and applied orientation there has increased slightly. But in comparison with the growth of the scope and thematic variability of ethical-applied research and the number of researchers involved in them and, accordingly, potential authors over this period, it increased slightly.

References

Mackie, J. L., Aristotle, Saint Thomas (Aquinas), Hobbes, T., Hume, D., Mill, J. S., ... &

Thomson, J. J. (2003). The right thing to do: Basic readings in moral philosophy. J. Rachels, & S. Rachels (Eds.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

Discussion

Final Film Critique

Martin Gutierrez

[Institutional Affiliation(s)]

Author Note

Discussion

As long as an action or behavior gives happiness, it will be right, and as soon as an action or behavior promote unhappiness, it is wrong. This is the principle of utility states. The principle of utility is the act that brings happiness to most people. It put a focus on giving happiness and pleasure. Utilitarianism would ask to give away most of the things a man has. We all have goals and dreams that make our lives meaningful. “But an ethic that requires us to promote the general welfare would force us to abandon those endeavors ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"YmnJiGtd","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Rachels & Rachels, 2012)","plainCitation":"(Rachels & Rachels, 2012)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":110,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/WcSf8WB9/items/QB37ET72"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/WcSf8WB9/items/QB37ET72"],"itemData":{"id":110,"type":"book","title":"The elements of moral philosophy","publisher":"McGraw-Hill","publisher-place":"New York","number-of-pages":"205","edition":"7th ed","source":"Library of Congress ISBN","event-place":"New York","ISBN":"978-0-07-803824-2","call-number":"BJ1012 .R29 2012","language":"en","author":[{"family":"Rachels","given":"Stuart"},{"family":"Rachels","given":"James"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2012"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Rachels & Rachels, 2012).” Utilitarians believe that consequences are important. They believe that a person should look for consequences for the action he wants to perform. The consequences will decide whether the person will be happy or not. So the person must choose the path which leads to happiness; otherwise, the choice will be wrong. There are some limitations to the principle of utility. The most common is that happiness is subjective. Utilitarians believe that do those things brings happiness, but as soon as one starts feeling unhappy, he should then move to another thing. It can be discuss with an example of a student who gets good grades and he is happy but in final examination he got failed, so according to the principle of utility, that student should stop studying. One can say that Utilitarianism provides incalculable outcomes. Similarly, the survival lottery says that a man must decide, if he wants to save two lives for cost of one, or one life in cost of two. And the best choice according to survival lottery, would be saving two lives for cost of one. Survival lottery shares the same idea with the principle of utility in a way that, if two lives are saved by killing one life, then it will create more happiness because happiness depends upon the number of people. More number of people will create more happiness.

Reference

ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Rachels, S., & Rachels, J. (2012). The elements of moral philosophy (7th ed). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Discussion

Virtue Ethics

Siria

[Institutional Affiliation(s)]

Author Note

[Include any grant/funding information and a complete correspondence address.]

Virtue Ethics

Virtue ethics is concerned with the notion of honesty and excellence of individuals; ethics should make humans and help to be better, and good people in society. Sometimes virtue ethics fails to guide individuals so that they would perform good actions, and virtue ethics does not function appropriately ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"1zd8SGky","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Wood, 2017)","plainCitation":"(Wood, 2017)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":622,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/F0XOCTdk/items/USH5M529"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/F0XOCTdk/items/USH5M529"],"itemData":{"id":622,"type":"thesis","title":"The problem of demarcation in contemporary virtue ethics","publisher":"uga","author":[{"family":"Wood","given":"Nathan Michael"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Wood, 2017).

The complexity lies in the notation that, what is good and what is bad, same is the case with the good and bad actions by individuals. After the period of Renaissance (1400-1650), the divine law replaced with the Moral Law. While answering to the questions of good and bad, these led the philosophers to develop theories, such as the Ethical Egoism, the Social Contract Theory, Utilitarianism, and Kant's theory. Modern Moral Philosophy is considered as the "law without the lawgiver," and the concept of obligations, duties, and rightness are self-contradictory ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"0JTJ1mIB","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Rachels & Rachels, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Rachels & Rachels, 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":245,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/F0XOCTdk/items/DE8J95F6"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/F0XOCTdk/items/DE8J95F6"],"itemData":{"id":245,"type":"book","title":"The Elements of Moral Philosophy","publisher":"McGraw-Hill Education","number-of-pages":"224","source":"Google Books","abstract":"The Elements of Moral Philosophy 9e by James Rachels and Stuart Rachels is a best-selling text for undergraduate courses in ethics. Thirteen thought-provoking chapters introduce readers to major moral concepts and theories in philosophy through clear, understandable explanations and compelling discussions. Chapters are written so that they may be read independently of one another thus providing greater flexibility for students and instructors.","ISBN":"978-1-260-09167-0","note":"Google-Books-ID: k2w7tAEACAAJ","language":"en","author":[{"family":"Rachels","given":"James"},{"family":"Rachels","given":"Stuart"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",3,20]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Rachels & Rachels, 2018).

According to Aristotle, virtue is the trait of an individual’s character, and this character is manifested in habitual actions. Virtues can be bad and good as well, so there is a possibility to consider virtues as a commendable trait. The main issue with the Ethics of Virtues is the incompleteness, and there are three issues, which can be considered for the discussion. The first issue is that the Virtue of Ethics cannot explain the causes of moral conflict. Another issue is that it cannot explain the feelings of an individual for his/her kindness and care towards the other humans. It does not tell the interests of others and a complete interpretation of the ethical virtues. One can never assume about the implementation of the interests of the individuals, and one would never know when they would react to a particular event. Most importantly, the Virtue Ethics fails to answer why something should be a virtue and why it is a virtue for individuals.

References

ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Rachels, J., & Rachels, S. (2018). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. McGraw-Hill Education.

Wood, N. M. (2017). The problem of demarcation in contemporary virtue ethics. uga.

Discussion About Oppression

Discussion about Oppression

Name

[Institutional Affiliation(s)]

Discussion about Oppression

           It is undeniably true that the word oppression is multi-dimensional and target both males and females. But it is harder to identify that men are oppressed in the same dimension as women. In my perspective, the oppression of women and men is unsymmetrical. As men are deemed to be the women oppressors while women are not termed as such. The rate of oppression among women is increasing these days which is alarming. However, the sad part is that in many cases, women are mistreated by the family members as well. 

Indeed, women are mistreated on various dimensions, they are targeted by both men and women. The oppressed situation is considered when an individual shapes and defines someone else’s life by applying barriers to their activities. This penalized the motion of an oppressed person and give them the feeling of being caged. In actual, the oppressor not only imprisons the person but also enclosed their vision and thinking. The term oppression towards women is still not recognized because most of the researchers handle this issue with extreme care. However, confining someone’s life and restricting them is also an inhuman act (Marilyn Frye, Oppression.pdf, n.d.).

Women are also targeted on a gender basis as well. For instance, if a young girl is involved in a heterosexual relationship, she is stigmatized, while if a boy is involved in any heterosexual relationship, then he is praised (Kreager & Staff, 2009). In short, men undoubtedly abuse women in various ways. Women get harassed in many ways and places as well. They are sexually exploited by men, beaten by them and in some cases, women are even killed in the name of honor. In some categories, women are also exposed to sexual and racial discrimination. The pressure is also induced on women to meet the expectations as a mother and wife while also completely relying upon males (Marilyn Frye, Oppression.pdf, n.d.). The intensity of oppression might be different because of class and race but overall, women in the entire world face oppression. 

References

ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Kreager, D. A., & Staff, J. (2009). The sexual double standard and adolescent peer acceptance. Social psychology quarterly, 72(2), 143-164.

Marilyn Frye, Oppression.pdf. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.filosoficas.unam.mx/docs/327/files/Marilyn%20Frye,%20Oppression.pdf

Discussion Board

Discussion Board

Bruna Sequeira

[Institutional Affiliation(s)]

Author Note

Discussion Board

Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics

In his discussion about ethics, virtues, and vice, Aristotle examines the ways Individuals are held responsible for their choices and actions by exploring the idea of moral responsibility. He argues that human beings can be praised or blamed on the basis of their character dispositions, traits, or their actions. Aristotle views human decision to be a certain form of desire that occurs as a result of his/her deliberation and reflects that Individual’s personal concept of virtue. Therefore, Aristotle proposes that such an Individual is deserving of blame or praise for his/her action insofar as those actions are performed on a voluntary basis. Aristotle’s view is based upon the notion that each voluntary character trait, disposition, or action is based on two fundamental features; the control condition and the epistemic condition. The control condition requires that the character trait or action should originate in the agent and on basis of that trait, the agent is free to decide whether to retain that trait or perform an action based upon it. Any external compulsion would violate the control condition. The epistemic condition requires that the agent should be aware of what he/she is trying to bring about or make happen. Hence, for Aristotle, virtues, and by that condition vices, are voluntary because Individuals themselves are responsible for the states their characters are in CITATION SEP14 \l 1033 (SEP, 2014). This is because the habits or states of an Individual’s character stems from his/her repetition of particular types of action. Therefore, both virtues and vices are voluntary in nature and because of it, it would not be rational to praise someone for performing noble acts, but blaming external circumstances, and not holding someone morally responsible, for performing base acts.

 St. Augustine's Confessions

In Confessions, St. Augustine attempts to reconcile a physical formulation of time with biblical descriptions of Creation. In doing so, Augustine proposed that when the Heavens and the Earth were created by God, He also created time itself. Augustine attributed the creation of the World and time itself to a word that God spoke. However, for an eternal deity, words cannot die like that of morals, therefore Augustine suggests that God may have created time before the Heavens and the Earth so that the Speech of God occurred within the motions of time. However, time does not physically exist in the material world as a chair or rock does but exists within the conscious mind. It is something that human beings know that exists, and are familiar within it, but cannot adequately describe or define it. Nevertheless, human beings continually experience time as moving into one of its phases: past, present, or future. Aquinas views time as a created entity by God and it is a means by which other created beings exist. As time is experienced by human consciousness, therefore an Individual’s temporal perception of the future and the past is also dependent upon that consciousness. However God is eternal and has atemporal foreknowledge about everything, therefore events which appear to humans as successively occurring in time are part of God’s timeless plans. In that sense, it can be said that God plan may constrain but not eliminate the free will of humanity. Human free will exists within the boundaries of God’s timeless plans which are independent of the distinction between present, past, and future.

Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologiae

Thomas Aquinas holds that there are certain theological truths which human reason alone cannot reach, such as faith in eternal salvation; however, there are other certain truths associated with religion that are attainable without faith but in an incomplete form. Aquinas saw reason to provide justification for faith and can be used to prove the existence of God and any apparent conflicts between reason and faith are resolvable in principle. Any philosophical argument that conflicts with faith would either not be sound in itself or the thesis under attack by the argument may not necessarily be a part of sound faith. Thus any such philosophical arguments can be answered and refuted within their own terms without the need to bring in concepts from faith or revelation. Aquinas saw reason to be potentially able to reach objective truth, however, it is faith that perfects reason and helps the agent not go astray. Therefore, it can be suggested that any lines of thought developed in guidance of revelation are attainable through reason but not necessarily so in the absence of guiding revelation. However, Aquinas still holds that the mortal intellect is not able to comprehend God an object, but still use that intellect to get an indirect grasp of the idea of God’s existence. Since observing the effects of an event can lead one to grasp its cause, similarly, one who observes reality may use his/her intellect to understand the existence of God by means of analogical knowledge CITATION Ceg16 \l 1033 (Ceglie, 2016). Nevertheless, the finer aspects of faith such as the Incarnation or Trinity lie beyond the intellect’s capacity and lie within the realm of faith.

Descartes' Meditations

In Mediations, Descartes argues that information that one receives through his/her senses are not necessarily reliable or accurate. Descartes skepticism was based on his dream argument wherein he proposed that everything that an Individual comes to believe may be false as may have been generated by a dream. Since dreams occur regularly in people and are highly similar experiences to that of real life, therefore it is possible that the objects an Individual sees in front of him/her may not be real but a product of his dreams. The proposition was based on the claim that real life and dreams can potentially have the same content and any close similarity between the two experiences may deceive one into believing that they have experienced something when they may have, in fact, been dreaming about it. A closely tied argument was Descartes' evil demon hypothesis wherein he proposed that anything that an Individual comes to believe may have been a deceptive idea fed into his/her brain by a malevolent demon. Through these arguments, Descartes indicated the possibility of the five senses being prone to deception. However, it is commonly known that experiences in dreams are scenarios that we imagine, and thus, our real-life beliefs may not be necessarily undermined by what we see in our dreams. Descartes argument was based on the presumption of the dream world and real world being the same to undermine the reliability of the sense, however, modern scientific knowledge and observations all stem from the same senses. However, there are recent scientific theories related to quantum mechanics that indicate a lack of trust in the senses and suggest that objective reality may be an illusion.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY Ceglie, R. D. (2016). Faith, reason, and charity in Thomas Aquinas’s thought. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 79(2), 133-146. doi:10.1007/s11153-015-9513-6

SEP. (2014, March 26). Moral Responsibility. Retrieved July 7, 2019, from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-responsibility/

Discussion Classmate

Response Paper

Name

Institution

Response Paper

Classmate # 1

The author presented his idea exemplifying the movie that was based on a scenario where individuals where allowed to commit crime once during a year. This example is quite well- suited with her idea that laws are very important to maintain order in the society and we need them in major contexts and that if rules and regulations are not present, we are not going to regress to the state of nature. This is because if we are allowed to commit crime even for a single day, many of us will not do so and many of us will be doing it without waiting for that specific “day.” In other words, regression towards state of nature is only partially true because we must take individual differences into account before generalizing any opinion or thought. This is how things work in the real society; and I somewhat disagreed author’s point of view because it had tottering practical implications.

Classmate # 2

The author suggested that taking away rules and regulations will simply lead us towards the state of nature where we would be treating each other violently and savagely whenever there is lopsided distribution of resources in the society. For example, the ones who have enough money can buy medicines according to the pre-established laws but if this law was absent, people would be killing each other for the sake of attaining best treatment. Hence, the author strongly agreed with the thesis statement proposing that taking away rules and regulations will push us towards the state of nature where we would be reacting comparable to the animals. I personally liked his view point because it is much closer to the reality and makes a great sense particularly with respect to the current societal mindsets.