Thus they argue that one of the causes of crime is merely one’s rational choice. Rational choice theorists like Ron Clarke highlight that individuals have free will and the power of reason which assists them in making choices. Therefore they make calculative decisions and if they feel that the rewards of committing a crime overshadow the risk, then they are likely to commit the crime. This suggests that humans are naturally selfish and so it means that we are provided with a negative vision of looking at crime. However, the idea that humans are naturally selfish seems to be radical.
As human beings, we have the rational and irrational side to us. The irrational side of human being is based on motivational and emotional aspects and these forms of persuasion can conflict with scientific interests. We live in an unprecedented time of media, institutional, educational, and political self-interest that uses any means possible to achieve its objectives including deceptive techniques, propaganda, fallacious argument, and fraud. Hence we need to be conscious of these barriers as critical thinkers needs to be mindful of the value and necessity of discernment, and the need to distinguish the truth from the lie. Whilst these emotional aspects provides certain obstacles, the lack of
Comparing Ideologies Human Nature Although linked by the same discussion, each philosopher represented his own distinct Ideology. The debate of man’s innate logical character, is philosophy’s bloodiest battleground. The article offers a basic perception of the ideologies pertaining to renowned philosophers; (Hobbes, Rousseau, and Locke) Hobbes represents the cynical, dark view of human nature. Hobbes suggests humans are born with both passions and reason; our passions cause war and conflict, and our desire for better life persuades us to seek peace. He feels that our instinctive character is to be selfish, only caring of those pertaining to us.
They refer to this minority as diseased or sick. The second group is the hysterical haters. The “hater” envies those who are able to act out on desires that he himself has to repress. The third group is narcissistic hate where unawareness of a group leads to contempt for them. Although Sullivan feels that this definition is not the final definition of hate, but it serves to better define the word and helps understand the true meaning behind the word.
- Emotion is a complex process and an integral part of the human mind with a direct relationship with behaviour - It is no wonder that it was an interest of the psychologists known as the functionalists, it was important to know the function of emotion to understand what it was for. - I will argue the James-Lange Theory of Emotion was not an irrational philosophy and that modern psychology has not only legitimised the theory but has also illustrated that there can be more ways than one for the function of emotion and that both the James-Lange and the Cannon-Bard theory can exist harmoniously together. (A bit about Functionalism) - Functionalism was never a well-defined school of thought with one obviously recognised leader. - They wanted to understand the functions of the mind (interested in the “is for”) rather than merely understanding the contents of the mind (the simply “is”). - Leading functionalists were pragmatic and approached psychology in a practical way.
Hester Prynne exemplifies the definition of human strength as well as the positive outcome of adversity. The difference between the way Chillingworth and Dimmesdale handles adversity from Hester is the ability to hide and express their emotions. Unlike Hester who calmly and thoroughly evaluates every adversity, Chillingworth and Dimmesdale, both mentally weak, allow their feelings to take control of them causing them to lose sight of the goal and fall into disarray. Attitude while handling these grievances are important because of the way they interact with ones actions. Allowing your emotions to overwhelm you displays weakness causing negative traits and habits to form leading to a demoralizing fate.
Second, you will have to catch yourself in acts of selfishness and begin to correct your behavior. Third, you will have to become committed to living a rational, compassionate, contributory life, to look outside yourself and see how your behavior affects other people. Last, you will have to decide, again and again, that being fair-minded is crucial to your identity as a person The basic intellectual skills that critical thinking entails can be the initial point for skills in either a selfish or a fair-minded way. Critical thinking can serve two incompatible ends: self-centeredness or fair-mindedness. A weak-sense critical thinker is although it is working well for the thinker in some respects, it is missing certain important, higher-level skills and values of critical thinking.
Perhaps more so than Emotivists, Prescriptivists see ethical language as fairly meaningful. They believe that the terms used are able to create absolute rules that everyone ought to follow. It would seem that ethical language is seen by many as very meaningful, although for varying reasons. However agent centred theories such as Virtue Ethics would argue that our main focus of morality should be on becoming as virtuous as possible, rather than deciding what is meant by ethical language. Therefore it would seem that perhaps morality should be more focussed on individuals’ actions rather then defining what is meant by ‘good’ and
Russell says that philosophy does not find right answers, but rather encourages thinking. He says the value of it is found in “uncertainty” and when we ponder new thoughts we free our minds of our previous views and other preconceived notions. Russell strongly encourages us to “view the world impartially”, so that we are not imprisoned solely by our previous thoughts and views. Ultimately, Russell says that questioning and thinking is good because it broadens our views and enriches our imagination. The main theme that Bertrand Russell and David Foster Wallace both continually push is for us to make up our minds about what and how to think about certain
It is the rational part of the mind and is always seeking to do what is most helpful for the individual. Different behaviours can be understood by trying to infer which part of the mind is dominant at any time. A person who is very submissive, guilty and always wanting to please may have a very strong superego. A person who is impulsive, careless of other people’s feelings, does not think about the consequences of their actions and can be quite aggressive either verbally or physically, probably has a dominant id. A person who can be submissive and assertive when necessary, who is able to think about other people’s feelings but also take into consideration their own needs, has probably got a strong