Innate knowledge is a view (that rationalists share) that claims that humans are born with information about the world which isn’t learned through sense experience, we gain this knowledge a priori. Empiricists (like John Locke) say that innate knowledge and ideas do not exist, when we are born the mind is a tabula rasa (blank slate) and we gain knowledge and Ideas through sense experience and if we have no experience of the world therefore it is impossible for us to possess any knowledge. Kant argues that we need innate knowledge and sense experience. Kant was a transcendental idealist. He was an idealist in the sense that we are aware of the real world and a transcendent because he thought that ultimate reality goes beyond our sense experience.
Data’s “brain” is no different than Picard’s; it is a component of their physical state and not linked to a soul that is given by God or another higher power. Humans are machines that are born of parents whose characteristics and attributes combine to create a child. Data is a machine that was born by scientist that developed algorithms to allow him to make decisions and choices that it believes are right. The decisions that Data or a human make are based on what was “input” into them when they were born or created. As a materialist Picard sees no difference between Data and himself because they are both have the same mental and physical capabilities.
They both argued that the fact of motion needs a prior agency to motivate it and this mover itself would not need a further mover itself as it would be a prime mover, a necessary being. Aristotle said ‘the series must start with something since nothing can come from nothing’. Plato identified many different types of motion such a growth and decay so he argued that the power to produce motion is prior to the power to receive motion and pass it on, therefore there must be a first cause which itself is uncaused and is the origin of that movement. Aristotle separate the prime mover from the material world stating it must be good, perfect, non-spatial and eternal. A prime mover such as this could not fit in an ordinary chain of material causes.
Existentialism is a philosophical theory that states that each individual has absolute freedom of choice and each has the responsibility to regulate one’s own actions. Existentialists believe that life has no universal meaning thus the pursuit of any greater truth is unnecessary and trivial (Existentialism). In slight contrast, absurdists believe that in the trivialality of a universal meaning, but that the pursuit itself may contain greater truths (Belanger). However, both believe that the world as a whole is purely nonsensical and illogical (Existentialism). Camus’ philosophical beliefs are evident throughout his first work, The Stranger.
By being independent individuals we don’t have to wait on other peoples support or permission to do certain things. We don’t have to go out of our way to please somebody else because we do as we want. When we are independent our confidence meter starts to rise up, it gives us that extra boost of motivation we desire to achieve new things. I believe that we are the creators of our own life, that we all have the same power to start and finish new goals but only a few have the actual strength and correct mind set to do it. Equality 7-2521 says that “the guiding star is within me” and that it points to just one direction, and that direction is “me”.
Secondly, Aquinas concludes that common sense observation tells us that no object can create itself. In other words, some previous object creates it, but there cannot be an endless string of objects causing other objects to exist. Aquinas believes that ultimately there must have been an uncaused first cause that begins the chain of existence for all things. I quite assent to the idea that there must have a first unmoved mover to put the universe into motion. As we all know, everything has a beginning and an end, so as to the universe.
Simpler questions would be “Is Dr. Smith’s intentional practise of omitting important information relevant to his client’s treatment ethical?” or “Is Dr. Smith’s failure to report his client’s actions to the authorities morally justifiable?” Both would be good questions, but I believe the question the study guide asks us to consider embrace both of these questions. The possible answers to the question are “yes” or “no”. I will be using rule-based utilitarianism and Kantian deontology to analyse this case study. There is not enough information to consider act-based utilitarianism: Act-based utilitarianism essentially says that one should perform that act which will bring about the greatest amount of good (“happiness”) over bad for everyone affected by the act. Each situation and each person must be assessed on their own merits (Thiroux, 2004, p. 42).
The difference Jung has with Freud’s theory of infantile sexuality and libido. Jung refused to accept that sexual instinct is the main psychological drive which led him to develop his own theory and therefore his own school of analytic psychology. The two characteristics of these theories I agree with are Alder’s four types of people and dream interpretation aided the treatment of patients. The two that I disagree with are Jung’s analytic psychology and Displacement is one of many defense mechanisms which are when a person is upset or angry with someone else and when he or she comes around other people they are still upset taking their anger out on people that had nothing to do with why she or he is
In the rant called “The Smart Gap,” Eric Maisel explains his personal opinion on brain power of individuals. Grit, however, isn’t something that he believes will help people find success. Although some may not agree with what was stated, Maisel brings up many persuaded key points to help get his point across. Throughout Eric Maisel’s rant, many key points are brought up. First, he explains that we will experience emotional pain when we recognize that the work we would love to do might just be unavailable enough to make us doubt that we can proceed.
A moral relativist would believe that there is no definite set of rules that apply universally. Instead they believe that all decisions should be made upon circumstances at the time and more importantly why the action was made. This is called cultural relativism. The theory of relativist morality was first established by Protagoras who asked questions such as, “what is good for you?” He did not believe that our knowledge was all fixed or that it extended depending on our experiences, as Plato did being a moral absolutist. He stated, “Man is the measure of all things”.