Act of Justice: Lincoln’s, Emancipation Proclamation and the law of war. Lexington University Press of Kentucky, 2007. http://www.netlibrary.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/urlapi.asp?action=summary&v=1&bookid=202158 (accessed May 17, 2010). 117-125. Henretta, James and David Brody. America: A Concise History, Volume I: To 1877.
“Hume’s criticisms of the cosmological argument do not succeed.” Discuss (10 marks) I believe that David Hume’s criticisms against the cosmological argument are insufficient. Hume’s argument is based around two main points, the idea that explaining the parts of the universe is sufficient instead of an explanation of the universe as a whole and that the causal principle is questionable. Hume states that if you can explain the parts of something then you don’t need to explain the process as a whole or that there may not be a cause there for the process in total anyway. For example if there are twenty eggs, Hume states that you can explain the eggs individually and not need to explain the eggs as a whole. However there are flaws here that make Hume’s argument fall apart.
It is impossible, though, that the series of causes should extend back to infinity because every cause is dependent on a prior cause and the ultimate cause is thus dependent on a previous cause. So if there is no first cause, there will be no intermediate causes and no final cause. But the absence of such causes clearly does not square with our observation, and so there must therefore be a first efficient cause, which everyone
What if there is no level of “maximal greatness” in one world? What if the difference of “maximal greatness” between worlds is vast? Both of these questions and many more raise doubts to the truth of the argument presented by Garcia. The larger issue that resonates in my mind is that there is no logical rebuttal to defend against these accusations. With such a complex and difficult topic to discuss and articulate, I have difficulties believing that there is such a “maximally great” being in every world with no differences between the
I feel that this argument fails to prove the existence of God. There is no real proof that God created the universe or people based on the teleological argument, although it is a valid argument, I just do not think that it is plausible that God created the earth. There are many other theories that give more evidence and better proof that counter the teleological argument. Works
Meanwhile, McCloskey believes that the only conclusion we can reach is that something caused the universe to exist. From reading his article, I feel that he does not formulate a valid argument as to how the power exists or how it created the universe. He goes onto to describe any creator that could exist is either a powerful being or a muddler and is not a god, but an evil spirit or a being that had very disastrous consequences due to their limitations ( McCloskey, pg.64). McCloskey closes his argument of the cosmological argument by stating that belief in either is not a source of strength or security ( McCloskey,
This view is largely accredited because Pitt came into office in a difficult time but events around him seemed to benefit him rather well. Britain was entering the industrial revolution at the time, industry rose up and trade would boom due to expansion of the industries at home and abroad, the advancements of technology meant that Britain was going through a natural change that arguably Pitt was able to captain through leading to better fortunes. The natural opposition from the Whig party against the king led by Charles Fox meant that Pitt naturally had the Kings support against any opposition which could be thrown at him, the king would back him up. The American Revolution and his lack of connection to it meant that he was seen as a new politician not one of the previously failed governments who’s lack of control and rule in a situation. And lastly the regency crisis of 1788 meant that Pitt could use this to gain favour with the king and gather support from his own party and draw it away from the opposition.
Hitler may have found himself very successful in his endeavors, but Hitler is not regarded as a success whatsoever. The dictionary definition of success is “ The accomplishment of an aim of purpose.” One may argue that simply setting a goal and reaching it is success; this is not the case because people forget that the goal must have purpose. Purpose is more than simple things that we all want as individuals. A purpose is something that has meaning to it, something important. Having large amounts of money is not a purpose in that of itself, because you have done absolutely nothing with it.
“Do not give way to pride. For brief while your strength is in bloom but it fades quickly,”( lines 1761-1763). Here Hrothgar is using this to reflect his previous statement in lines 1743-1746 but only here he's also adding to it for Beowulf to know when that time is. Hrothgar believes that Beowulf will become king, he loves Beowulf as his own son and wants him to leave them with more than treasure, but with advice that will help him become an even better rule. In part of the book it does leave you wondering how Beowulf will take the crown of the
http://library.thinkquest.org/17120/data/essays/am_imp/ (accessed February 25, 2009). Kipling, Rudyard. “The White Man’s burden.” Rudyard Kipling, The White Man’s Burden (1899). http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~wldciv/world_civ_reader/world_civ_reader_2/kipling.html (accessed February 25, 2009). “American Foreign Policy in the Late 19th Century: Philosophical Underpinnings.” The Spanish-American War Centinial Site.