When Keynes rejected the scale of reparations placed on Germany and resigned from his post at the Treasury, he lead the way for what many leading politicians were to understand later on. Keynes supported the approach of Lloyd George that for economic and political reasons, Europe needed a successful Germany, which would be seriously difficult to achieve whilst the excessive reparations were placed on them. Furthermore, his book The Economic Consequences of the Peace (1919), was successful in influencing the view of Britain that a weak Germany would only make the recovery of Europe after the war, a lot more difficult. On the other hand, from taking this view, politicians were criticised for being 'too lenient' towards Germany. Even Lloyd George, who took a much tougher political approach towards the reparations, received criticism.
According to Nagel, there is a paradox in moral responsibility caused by two concept: moral luck and the Control Principle. Moral luck designates blame on someone for actions outside of their control. The Control Principle, on the other hand, is the belief that blame should only be designated on someone for actions within their control. These two ideas are in direct contradiction of one another and it would be foolish to believe both. However, Nagel argues that we cannot plausibly reject either of them.
I disagree with certain idea and issue Rene Descartes argues about in his passage. His beliefs of skepticism at points were valid at times but every human has a right to believe, do anything or create what they want to believe in their mind. To make it feel real is up to the person because we control our emotions which control our mind set to think if we are being trick to having ten fingers or to believe there is no god that created this world we call earth. The scope of knowledge in this reading "Meditations on first philosophy" by Rene Descartes is the truth of doubt. Doubt causes people to believe that you do not know something when you actually do.
While the invisible hand cannot guarantee efficiency, it is better at guaranteeing equity. ANSWER: F TYPE: T KEY1: D SECTION: 2 OBJECTIVE: 7 RANDOM: Y [cxx]. The two broad reasons for a government to intervene in the economy are to promote efficiency and to promote equity. ANSWER: T TYPE: T KEY1: D SECTION: 2 OBJECTIVE: 7 RANDOM: Y [cxxi]. Market failure refers to a situation in which the market does not allocate resources efficiently.
According to Hume we build up all our ideas from simple impressions by means of three laws of association: Resemblance, Contiguity, & Cause and Effect. Hume distinguishes between relations of ideas and matters of fact; he says that relations of ideas are, for the most part, mathematical truths, so denial of them would result in a contradiction. Matters of fact are the more common truths that we learn from experience (for example the sun rising in the morning). Hume also says that that there is no rational justification for a belief in miracles. There are many contradictions in Hume, but there is little agreement on what these contradictions show about Hume's thought in general.
Critically assess two arguments in support of widespread local skepticism. Skepticism may at first seem like a fruitless field of study, for how can the study of a topic which claims knowledge is impossible provide any greater insight into the philosophical realm as any conclusions themselves are knowledge. It could be said this is true yet discounting this view totally would be ignorant due to the arguments that have been put forth in its favour over its time in existence. Local as opposed to global skepticism differs in that a local skeptic does not believe all knowledge is impossible but that certain kinds of knowledge such as about time, the external world, other minds and of empirical generalisations. The Spanish philosopher Miguel De Unamuno said “The skeptic does not mean him who doubts, but him who investigates or researches, as opposed to him who asserts and thinks that he has found.” On this basis it could be said that the skepticism is the deepest of all the philosophical areas of study as no true conclusion can be drawn fully meaning it will be explored more with time.
Now, it is so hard to trust in whatever came out of his mouth. There is the difference between using deception because it’s necessary and for a major good, or because you like it. I would like to believe that I
British poet Samuel Butler once said, “God cannot alter the past, though historians can.” This sarcastic comment accurately reflects what historians so often do with the history of their respective civilizations. They are constantly searching for why things happened the way they did. However, the sooner after the event, the more romanticized it becomes in their hypotheses. War becomes a duty to uphold honor and human rights, and peace is a proverbial olive branch, created purely for its own sake. Then, historians analyze events many decades after their spawning and discover, especially in a capitalist country like the United States, that the true causes are less wholesome.
October 2012 “Guarding the Golden Door” by Roger Daniels is an exquisite explanation of the American immigration system through history and in recent policies. Since 1882, the United States has claimed that their immigration goal was to prevent it from happening, while ironically enabling just the opposite. Consequently, the only true policy that has been applied to American immigration is that it is on a continuous loop of inconsistent policies, which are altered based on the current disposition of cheap labor for American industry demands. Most of the United States immigration policy has been created by individuals who failed to understand the effects of the plans they desperately tried to create, and who have created open door policies only to shut them. Perhaps one of the biggest flaws in the U.S. immigration policies over the past two centuries has been the fact that it is expensive to enforce immigration laws.
Warren G. Harding once declared, "America's present need is not heroics, but healing; not nostrums, but normalcy; not revolution, but restoration; not agitation, but adjustment…” A Democratic leader, William Gibbs McAdoo, called Harding's speeches "an army of pompous phrases moving across the landscape in search of an idea. "1 Their very murkiness was effective, since Harding's view on the League of Nations remained unclear. As it turned out he was against the League of Nations, but this was not found out until after he became the twenty-ninth president. As a result of rarely taking a stand on an issue, he had few enemies to make any. Who would have suspected that the man to succeed Woodrow Wilson, America's most visionary President, would be a man who some considered one of the worst?