Hentoff proves that they misinterpreted the codes for Brown mentioning inappropriate behavior, abusive threatening or demeaning actions is prohibited. Hentoff believed that "hate codes" was used in Hann's expulsion and only violated the first amendment and Hann's right of freedom of speech. The hate speech code was one of the codes but no one had never been expelled for violating that code until Hann. If the University was following the codes then expelling Hann wasn’t the right option for the reason of, forbidding speech is not apart of the codes, he didn’t
Russell argues that universals exist. To do so, he first considers the argument from Resemblance Nominalism which denies that there are universals. Both Realists and Nominalists agree that a Particular is a certain way. To explain why each Particular is a certain way, Resemblance Nominalists claim that Particulars resemble other Particulars which are the same way as them. Thus, a Particular is ‘a certain way’ in virtue of its resemblance to one or more Particulars that are the same way.
TOK-Essay What I know about: Yasir Arafat This essay is different from other essays. Writing a paper on such unstable grounds, as this, where the facts quickly turn into doubts and doubts into certain false, is nearly impossible to preplan. I was lost as to what subject I wanted to write about, until I had a flash of understanding, this paper was not about something else, it is about us, each individual student asking questions about a truth in their lives. The assignment is not to write an essay; it is to take something you hold to be true and to analyze it and doubt the very facts it is based on, which we take for granted, to prove its value. The essay is merely a documentation of the process.
Teleology is the study of purpose, ends, and goals in natural processes. A teleological explanation accounts for natural processes in accordance with purposive or directive principles. 1. Thus, if Thomas' argument is correct, the degree of the truth of the conclusion should be comparable to the conclusions of the findings of modern science. It is important to see that since no claim is made as to the certainty of the conclusion but only as to its probability, the argument cannot be criticized on the grounds that the conclusion does not follow with absolute necessity.
Plato's doctrine of recollection states that rather than learning, what is really happening when people think about something, and in the end discover an answer to a problem, is that they are recollecting things that they already knew. Plato’s doctrine does not solve the problem of Meno’s paradox because there is no evidence of a soul being immortal and having all knowledge but does make interesting points on learning and teaching. Someone can have knowledge for something as simple as brushing your teeth and knowing those definitions, to having the knowledge of definitions of wide array of academic knowledge in the vast subject areas. The doctrine intends to allow us as critical readers to understand and distinguish the two different types of knowledge. These two types of knowledge are implicit and explicit knowledge.
These tests are created to only measure a small portion of knowledge students have acquired in their lifetime. The technology of testing cannot accurately measure numerous important attributes such as creativity, critical thinking, persistence, leadership, and resourcefulness. This is creating superficial thinkers, teaching students to see the quick and obvious answer; the tests don’t measure the ability to think deeply or creatively. Students are being taught to memorize instead of further strengthening their skills to solve real-world problems. These scores are highly unreliable because they can vary from day-to-day, based on the testing conditions or students mental/physical state.
Morals, at least to the majority of the worlds population are a set of rules that we the people ought to obey, they tell us what is right or wrong. Judgments of obligations house insights about the formal choice and the foundation for belief of choice of actions or omissions. One might say, “You really ought to write her a letter. She has written you several letters sever times, and you promised if she wrote that you would reply.” Or one might say, “You have the obligation to to attend the football game. Your younger brother is playing, and he will be quite disappointed if you are not present.” People speak for the right thing t do.
It goes against everything I believe” (Carter 171). This means that Ramdas thinks that his beliefs are important and that he will not compromise his beliefs just because it may be hard to stand up to them. Ramdas had a word that represented this belief in non-violence, it is “Satyagraha”. Later, the captain of the football team, Kenneth sees the defensive end’s actions against Ramdas and he believes it’s wrong. His first reaction is that somebody should hit back, even though there is a risk that he may end up getting beaten up by the defensive end, Bill.