Holton, on the other hand, argues that the traditional akratic account is flawed. Instead, he argues that an agent displays weakness of will when the agent unreasonably revises a resolution to do some action (Holton, 2009, p. 78).He also states that a person is only weak-willed if they revise their intentions when they were not supposed to revise them. This is what Holton calls
Nietzsche Response Thomas Dahringer In the "Problem with Socrates", Nietzsche says that Socrates was a criminal, as well as a buffoon, and created more problems with the philosophical field than he answered. Nietzsche argues against his ugliness , which appears in both writings on and sculptures of Socrates . If Socrates was ugly and conventional wisdom at the time during which Nietzsche lived was that criminals are ugly , is it not possible to argue that Socrates was not a great man , but , rather , a criminal ? And , because criminals are typically decadent , it is not possible to support , at least by arguments of the times , the statement that Socrates was decadent as well ? If these things are true , then Nietzsche can feel justified in arguing that Socrates was not a great man and that all of the philosophers that followed him through the leadership of Plato were also symptomatic of all that was wrong with Socrates and with his form of reasoning Read more: http://www.mightystudents.com/essay/Nietzsches.Socrates.essay.65984#ixzz2Q4lr9MXm argues against his ugliness , which appears in both writings on and sculptures of Socrates .
Second, he argues that it is only by virtue of something being sentient that it can be said to have interests at all, so this places sentience in a different category than the other criteria: "The capacity for suffering and enjoying things is a prerequisite for having interests at all, a condition that must be satisfied before we can speak of interests in any meaningful way" (175). That is, Singer is trying to establish that if a being is not sentient, the idea of extending moral consideration to it makes no sense. This negative argument is important, because one common criticism of Singer is that his criterion ends up excluding humans who are no longer sentient (like those in an irreversible coma); Singer is content to accept that consequence, but it is important that he show why the exclusion of some humans by his criterion is not problematic, given that he has criticized other criteria
In Plato’s The Republic, there exists a struggle between the characters of Socrates and Thrasymachus to find the correct definition of what justice is. Thrasymachus, being a Sophist, expressed his views on justice in a manner of rash sequences whereby Socrates closely followed behind with his own counter-arguments. These counter-arguments effectively exposed weaknesses in Thrasymachus’s argument for justice, and further crippled it entirely. By outlining and explaining Thrasymachus’s views on justice, I will argue two things; first that the weakness in his argument comes from only himself in abandoning his method. Secondly, that justice may be our deep-rooted understanding and ability to identify good from evil.
The argument concludes with the claim that, despite the supposed infallibility, people are often mistaken in their moral judgements. This would seem like a coherent argument if one took infallible to mean unchanging and constant, as the subjectivist mind would likely move around in moral viewpoint throughout a life and loose its constancy. However, subjectivism suggests that simply the action of believing and thinking a moral claim renders it true, regardless of whether one abandons such an outlook moments
Being the cynical, seemingly unreliable pedophile he was, Svidrigailov at first appears like one of the weakest examples of a character who would trigger positive change in someone else; the author, however, implies otherwise. Throughout the discussions he has with Svidrigailov, Raskolnikov seems to intensely hate the character and consider him inferior in moral sense; Raskolnikov’s ability to recognize Svidrigailov’s “low” characteristics is one of the initiators of his rational thinking process concerning morality (a process that did not seem to exist in him as strongly before he met Svidrigailov). His passionate disapproval of Svidrigailov’s actions (as well as his attempted charitable act towards Dunya to make up for those actions), reveals in Raskolnikov an extremely protective and caring nature as a brother - and above all, the fact that he has a true “sensor” for negative (and positive) characteristics in humans. Even though Raskolnikov’s thoughts and ideas from his half-mad monologues and scenes of delirium are
Assess Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is a consequentialist approach to ethics, meaning the consequences of an act are what matters. The utilitarian answer as to what to do in any situation is that we should always act to maximise utility. There are two different interpretations of utilitarianism; the positive being that we ought to do that which brings about the greatest happiness of the greatest number and the negative being that we ought to do that which minimises pain or suffering. Utilitarianism is teleological, or goal orienteered, meaning that the end matters more than the means used to achieve the end. The various forms present two major problems; the problem of justice, and the issue of having to predict the consequences of an action.
Others argue that free will, which has the capability to act at one’s own judgment, is the main cause of Oedipus’s downfall. 1.2 Definition of Key Terms To completely understand these theories, hamartia, fate, and free will, they will need to be defined to fully understand what has been argued. Aristotle, the founder of term hamartia, defines it as some sort of “mistake” (Aristotle 77).
Emotions, on the other hand, are instinctive thoughts built into human nature, and rely solely on an individual’s gut-feeling or intuition. With these definitions in mind, it is easy to see why emotions would realistically be less effective than reason in constructing and validating knowledge claims. Plato described emotion and reason as two horses pulling us in opposite directions, and while reason drives an individual to make a logical decision or knowledge claim, emotion can do just the opposite. For example, in a fit of rage, you may claim that you hate an individual, as your emotions at that current moment lead you to believe so. However later on, once your mind
The weaknesses of virtue ethics outweigh the strengths, discuss (35) The definition of a virtue is habitually doing what is right; being a virtuous person requires the practice of a certain kind of behaviour. There are a number of arguments for and against virtue ethics, most argue for the formation and growth of us via practical wisdom, which allows us to make the right decisions by using out conscience. Virtue ethics is mainly supported by Aristotle, Phillipa Foot and Alisdair Makentyre. Vitue ethics is based on different virtues which a person should possess in order to reach Eudemonia, Eudemonia should be the ultimate goal in everyone’s life as this leads to ultimate happiness and therefore a healthier and better society. One major strength of virtue ethics is that it allows the moral agent to make ethical decisions based on his or her moral well-being, not just based on what is legally right.