The statements of the explanans must be true. All four conditions when met are individually necessary and justifiably sufficient to be considered scientific explanations so D-N explanations are scientific explanations. All D-N explanations are arguments that demonstrate that if the explanans are available prior to the conclusion it is possible to predict the conclusion. So it can be said that every D-N explanation can potentially predict an event. Immediately, based in this information the D-N model suffers from a problem because condition number 2 states D-N explanations require adherence to a general law but predictions can also be made based on correlations.
In contrast, Aristotle's theory of the natural world states that our world is reality. Aristotle thought the world consists of natural forms, not necessarily ideal or imperfect. Our senses can correctly perceive the natural forms. Basically, reality became a debate between Socrates' two worlds and Aristotle's single world reality. Second, Socrates and Aristotle contrast in their view of what knowledge we possess at birth.
The first and most obvious place to look for Aristotle’s view on relativism is Metaphysics I’. Here, Aristotle is mostly concerned with the law of non-contradiction and those who deny it. He includes Protagoras with such thinkers based on his relativistic notions that x and not-x can both be true for different people. A consequence of the law of non-contradiction (Met I’3) is that, if x is contrary to not-x,
Stanley Fish is a modern and postmodern rhetorician but is more of a modern day Sophist; he believes that rhetoric is the only thing that matters and is necessary for civilized life. He agrees with Protagoras in recognizing that only the situated and contingent reality is meaningful (HB, 1608). In his essay "Rhetoric," Fish describes the debate of rhetoric dating back to ancient Greece to the twentieth century. His definition of rhetoric is the art of analyzing and presenting local exigencies (HB, 1615L). Fish starts off his essay by stating that there are three things that oppose rhetoric.
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.
Therefore, learning is actually only remembering what the soul already knew from the World of the Forms. Secondly, the body and soul are opposites: Plato used the example of light and dark – the concept of light makes us aware of darkness. Therefore, in a similar way, life and death are opposites: those who are dead used to be alive, and those who are alive used to be dead but experienced the concept of being born again. There does seem to be a
The design argument (DA) starts from the observations about the world from there towards the conclusion that God exists. This argument appeals to the world as proof of Gods existence and therefore relies on our experiences. The DA is a posteriori argument for the existence of God; it seeks to prove that there is evidence for a designer in the world and used external imperial evidence as its proof. It is an inductive argument, which means it’s based on experience and the most probable explanation. William Paley is a classical contributor to the DA and like St. Aquinas he believed that the world is too complex and well ordered to have happened by chance therefore it must have designed by a greater being, ‘God’.
The final argument, the teleological argument, states that nature is a very complex system whose parts work together to perform a certain function. This is known as a teleologically ordered system. In our experience, all teleologically ordered systems have been created by humans. Therefore, the creator (or creators) of nature must have human-like intelligence. These arguments have similarities, but this essay will focus on what makes the teleological argument fundamentally different from the ontological and cosmological arguments for the existence of God.
(A) Explain Aquinas' version of the teleological argument Design arguments for God's existence are often known as teleological arguments. They are often referred to as teleological because 'telos' comes from the Greek word for the end or result of some course of action. The teleological arguments are a posteriori, they are a posteriori because they are not based on empirical evidence but from our own experiences of the world. Also design arguments are described as being not sophisticated, this is because they appeal to our sense of wonder we get from observing the beauty of our natural world. The design arguments follow a set pattern like this; whenever we see things made by people that look good or complex, we can say that they must have been made by an intelligent designer, the natural word is full of complexity and aesthetic appeal with resemblance to human intervention, therefore the universe must have an intelligent designer, God.
They also stressed that happiness is virtue. Zeno was the first person to teach the Stoic philosophy. It got its name from where they would meet to study, and this place was called Stoa Poikile. Epictetus’ philosophical theory is a near impossible life style that would be amazing to be able to control your mind to actually live it. Epictetus’ philosophical theories were that we only had control over your thoughts, opinions, desires, aversions, and movement towards things.