Aristotle has a monist approach to the soul, unlike Plato he says that the soul cannot exist without the body. The soul is not a body but something that belongs in a body, comparable to the brain; it is necessary and is within all humans and it gives us reason, intellect and an innate sense of justice. This therefore can make his theory more convincing than Plato’s as the soul isn’t ‘immortal’ and dies along with the body, thereby eliminating the theory of reincarnation which is hard for anyone who isn’t Hindu to believe as it is contradictory to their religious views. Aristotle states that all reason is associated with the pure thought of the Prime Mover and the soul is what gives the body its shape and form; he argued that the soul is not a substance but the reason and shape behind the matter. Best described by using the example of a marble statue, as the marble stature is essentially a block of marble but it has a shape and form and like the body the soul, the shape and form cannot be removed from what the statue is, in the same way the body cannot be separated from the soul.
A quote by Albert Einstein “Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.” one of the most influential people discussing limitations on the rational mind. The argument between empiricism and rationalism seems to be a back and forth battle between a bunch of old guys arguing about which came first the chicken or the egg. Although when they were brought together is when it seems to make the most sense. For rationalism we have the belief that reason is the primary source of all knowledge, only reason itself can give meaning to experience and separate reality from illusion. To understand truth we must be completely sure of it, this requires a rational method of inquiry based on doubt.
That is, a false premise can possibly lead to a false result, and inconclusive premises will also yield an inconclusive conclusion. Both types of reasoning are routinely employed. One difference between them is that in deductive reasoning, the evidence provided must be a set about which everything is known before the conclusion can be drawn. Since it is difficult to know everything before drawing a conclusion, deductive reasoning has little use in the real world. This is where inductive reasoning steps in.
Meta-Ethics is a branch of ethics which is concerned with the language that is used in ethical arguments. Many would say that if we do not know what we are talking about, then there is not point to ethical debate. This differs from normative which deicides whether or not something is bad or good and gives us a guide for moral behaviour. Meta-ethics is about normative ethics and tried to make sense of the terms and concepts used. The terms good and bad are used a lot in day to day sentences - but what do they really mean?
“Religious Language is meaningless” Analyse and evaluate this claim with reference to the verification and falsification debates. (35 marks) Religious Language is language used to talk about God and other religious beliefs. Religious language is known to be cognitive as it can make a positive statement be proved true or false. However on the other hand, Religious language could be seen as non-cognitive as some statements could be misinterpreted, for example, majority rather than a minority in some cases could act out religious and cultural beliefs within society. The verification principle had originated from philosophers in a group called ‘The Vienna Circle” where they believed that dome statements were meaningful and some simply were not, they distinguished these statements by coming up with a theory called, The verification principle.
As such it useless by itself because it reasoning only can make decisions based on what the mind considers as practical and sound, (Stewart 433). However if there is no past experiences to draw from, or present perceptions to take in, reasoning what is good or bad cannot be determined. It is the purpose of this essay to highlight the positive and negative aspects of using reasoning as a way of knowing. Reasoning is a good way to make a logical decision as it can be conclusive. Deductive reasoning can be a great example of this conclusiveness.
Dissoi Logoi contains opposing arguments that can be argued either way. Its relevance to Rhetoric is that it allows us as readers to see that no argument can be made both bad and good, just and unjust, seemly and shameless. In our own minds we know right versus wrong, but not everyone has the same vision of what is right and what is wrong. What is wrong to one can be right to another and vice versa which appeals to the logos aspect of rhetoric. These notion of contradiction within this writing are rhetoric.
This leaves them unable to detect their own bias, and unable to be objective. In “Learning to Read” by Malcolm X and “Idiot Nation” by Michael Moore, the authors’ writings demonstrate that they are indeed knowledgeable, but are also subjective on the topics that they discuss. When reading the essays of Malcolm X and Michael Moore, a perceptive reader can easily identify their biases which are illustrated throughout their work in the forms of inflammatory remarks, contradictory statements, and or, one-sided evidence. Inflammatory remarks are inimical and signal an author’s bias. By utilizing demeaning language, such as racial epithets, in an effort to draw support and substantiate beliefs, a writer alienates his audience and draws attention to whom or what his biases are against.
Of the many objections to his Mediations on Philosophy, Descartes believed only two to be valid. One of these objections was based on Descartes’ claim that he proved the existence of an infinite being. Descartes believed that he proved the existence of a perfect being through the processes he laid down in his Discourse on Method. His theories provided many interesting new ideas. Like any new ideas, his ideas faced objection.
Logic and Perception The way in which logic relates to critical thinking is that once you use the critical thinking process to identify the problem, you have to use logic to ensure you choose the right solution when it comes to reaching your final decision. Critical thinking involves knowledge of the science of logic, or the nature of correct thinking, which includes correct reasoning. A person who uses critical thinking must understand the source of knowledge, and the nature of truth. Without using logic the answer that is chosen could be an ill logical choice. Logic allows you to examine the situation and reach a clearer solution to a problem, question or situation.