As a further definition, Mackie posits that an objective moral value has the quality of ‘ought-to-be-pursued-ness’, it is something one should or ought do because it contains an inherently normative aspect. If Mackie’s argument is to succeed, it must prove that this supposed normative aspect has no existence within any act in itself, but has its origin in the agent of said act, and as such, all moral claims are false. Mackie’s exposition of moral relativism comes in the form of two main arguments, the first being his ‘argument from relativity’, the second, his ‘argument from queerness’. It is with the argument from relativity that I shall be here concerned. The argument from relativity is based around the purely ‘descriptive’ idea that it is an empirically observable fact that there seems to be
An adequate account of concepts is especially important (and challenging) for Empiricist philosophers (such as Locke, Berkeley and Hume), as they cannot rely on a Rationalist-style belief in ethereal, inbuilt intellectual content . Hume follows Berkeley in his rejection of general abstract ideas – both arguing that concepts are always connected to one
His book defines each step and thoroughly explains how important the thought process is in developing our reasoning to justify our actions. It is vital to understand that not all actions are justified as virtuous and not all discernments are ethically sound (Tompkins). Carter expands on each step in his book and provides examples where there is a lack of integrity when one or another of the steps are
Open Roads Peter van Inwagen thinks a compatibilists position is confusing, considering that it should be reason and logic how “choices” of an individual will determine free will and how it is that they define free will and a physically possible choice may determine an outcome. It is not clear when free will and determinism are compatible. For this, Inwagen demonstrates two views to understand and clear the confusion about compatibilist position. He says the easiest view to understand is the first one that gives a clear idea about futures that do not have a physically possible connection with the present are “open” to and individual. Second view is more difficult because compatibilist talk about reasonable futures.
Who, the history of important people related to the scientific inquiry. By asking questions we determine what is trying to be discovered or observed. The questions are the foundation and catalyst of scientific inquiry. b. Planning and Carrying Out Investigations: planning is creating a “road map” to be able to answer the questions that were posed at the beginning of the scientific inquiry.
Even more problematic is the ever changing definition of what the term Culture actually means. It is extremely difficult to establish a strong theory for using culture as an analytical tool if culture's definition can not even be agreed upon. It is the lack of consensus that becomes catalyst for Kuper's decision on culture. Kuper's final conclusion is that anthropologists should strive to ultimately rise above using the word Culture. He describes Culture as, “... a matter of ideas and values, a collective cast of mind.” (227) Kuper believes things such as art, education, ceremony, traditions and other factors of societies should be studied for what they are instead of lumping them into the word culture.
The arguments raised by the logical positivists, although on the face of it strong arguments against religious language, fail as they themselves, once subjected to their own criterion, become meaningless. Wittgenstein, at first glance, appears to bear the mark of a more ‘modernist’ approach by providing a puritanically logical reformulation of Hume’s two dogmas: apriori analytic statements are trivial but meaningful and that substantive aposteriori statements are substantive and meaningful. His underlying theory has been called Logical Atomism which is an ideal theory of language which suggests that reality is comprised of fixed ‘atomic facts’ or propositions drawn from sense data which when combined with others of the same variety produce ‘molecular’ facts. Furthermore, each proposition has a meaning independent of other propositions. His early philosophy of language and theory of meaning was based upon Logical Atomism.
As the conclusion follows logically from the two premises and the second premise is essentially indisputable it is clear that the success of this argument depends on the validity of the first premise, it being a statement which is not self-evidently true. This premise uses as its basis Leibiniz’s Principle of Sufficient Reason which states that there is an adequate explanation for everything and that this explanation exists in spite of whether or not we are able to come to know it. A famous version of the Argument from Contingency by Samuel Clarke constructs a sophisticated justification for the first premise based on Leibiniz’s principle. Clarke asserts that 1): since there is an adequate explanation for everything, there must be an adequate explanation for the existence of all contingent things as a whole, for the existence of the Universe. From this he asserts that 2): the explanation for the existence of the Universe cannot come from a contingent thing because contingent things are part of the Universe.
WRITING A CAUSE AND EFFECT ESSAY The cause/effect essay explains why or how some event happened, and what resulted from the event. This essay is a study of the relationship between two or more events or experiences. The essay could discuss both causes and effects, or it could simply address one or the other. A cause essay usually discusses the reasons why something happened. An effect essay discusses what happens after a specific event or circumstance.
History is the systematic and critical search for the understanding of past events, selected and treated with a view to their human significance, and written in a way to bring out and explain their significance to the people living in today’s world. Human significance is constitutive of or affects central elements of human social life such as language, culture, political organization, economic organization, class structure, family structure, or modes of employment and so on. Historians are not interested in discovering and articulating laws of the physical world, but rather that which governs human actions and interactions. Science is the systematic and critical search of understanding law-governed phenomena, grounded in the application of recognized standards of evidence, inferences and sound practice acknowledged by the scientific community. Science can be classified into three types, observational, explanatory or technical science.