I believe many of you would argue that the law enforcement didn’t need to get a search warrant in order to search DLK’s house, because DLK could easily destroy the evidence. However, you must see that it is very hard to completely obfuscate evidence inside a home, as a house cannot be “moved” unlike any automobile. According to Chief Justice William Howard Taft, “...and a search of a ship, motor boat, wagon or automobile, … where it is not practicable to secure a warrant because the vehicle can be quickly moved…”. I bet all of us understand that although DLK could have tried to “cover up” the evidence, it would be certainly very hard to hide it completely (traces would
We cannot make an infinite cylinder and such things as wormholes and cosmic strings probably do not exist (2011).” Barclay also stated, “Even if they did, they would still be uncontrollable methods of time travel. How can you tell a cosmic string of energy where to take you (2011)?” Certainly we cannot travel through time forward or backwards, in a car or phone booth, a mass of swirling structure or even fall into a pond. We can time travel in a different way,
If cloning ever becomes possible, it will be humanity’s decision as to whether or not it is ethical to use them. Like every controversy today, there will never be total agreement. Eejits are another thing that I thought about. The concept of mindless persons used only for slave labor brought to mind the question: What makes a person a person? If a human has their intelligence artificially destroyed and then reprogrammed to only do specific tasks and nothing else, are they still a person, or are they a thing?
An a posteriori argument is an argument in which at least one premises is an a posteriori proposition. A priori – a proposition that can be known or justified independent of sense experience. An a priori proposition can be known or justified by reason alone (once you grasp the constituent concepts). Truths of mathematics and definitions are often thought to be a priori. An a priori argument is an argument in which all the premises are a priori propositions.
If he has became bad, he must have had experienced different situations that brought the evil alive. Talking about the movie, I personally do not think that Jack came to the island clean. There did not appear that many situations that could have changed him in a such way. In this case, if we become beasts through out our lives, there must be the chance of getting back. If there really is something that attracts us to the dark side, there has to be a light at the end of the tunnel.
Should the flipping of the switch in time of peril become the law for everyone to use? The fact that there is one that would not want the switch flipped is enough to say we would not want it to be law for the switch to be flipped. Therefore In the first case Kantian’s would not flip the switch. In the second case the act is much more morally
I believe that placing these materials in an area which is unstable would just be a mistake. We do not store gasoline in our houses because it could explode. All though the chances are slim of an explosion there is still a chance. Building a facility of this nature at this location is just
Not only any actual misdemeanor, but any eccentricity, however small, any change of habits, any nervous mannerism that could possibly be the symptom of an inner struggle, is certain to be detected. He has no freedom of choice in any direction whatever. (174) This passage sums up the obstruction of privacy by the Party and the Thought Police. In spite of this obstruction, Winston manages to find ways of maintaining a significant amount of privacy. First, there is the geography of Winston’s room: For some reason the telescreen in the living room was in an unusual position.
Those are the three topics that he feels most strongly about. He may not believe in the majority of them but he likes to learn about them and see the crazy ideas people come up with. Gabe does not believe that aliens have come to earth, but he thinks they do exist in outer space somewhere. Alien abductions are very hard to believe for anybody and Gabe definitely does not believe in them either. He does not believe aliens are advanced enough to abduct someone or even know of our existence.
Is Hume’s rejection of abstract ideas sound, and is his theory of concepts adequate? The notion of abstract ideas has been used by many philosophers, most notably Locke, to explain concepts/thoughts with general content, i.e. being about a class or set of objects. For example, our grasp of the word “triangle” as being about all triangles can be thought to rely on an abstract idea of triangles. An adequate account of concepts is especially important (and challenging) for Empiricist philosophers (such as Locke, Berkeley and Hume), as they cannot rely on a Rationalist-style belief in ethereal, inbuilt intellectual content .