'Only Hard Determinism is justifiable' Discuss. Determinism is the idea that all actions are governed by laws outside of one’s control. Some philosophers believer that one’s ability to make free choices is an illusion whereas, others state that there is something else beyond understanding that may cause one’s actions to be determined. There are a variety of theories which are response to dealing with debate about free will and determinism. Hard determinism is the theory that human behaviour and actions are wholly determined by external factors, and therefore humans do not have genuine free will or ethical accountability.
a) Explain the Platonic Concept of ‘Forms’ Plato believed that behind every concept or object in the visible world there is an unseen reality which he calls its ‘Form’. These Forms exist in the world of the Forms separate from the visible world. Within the world of the Forms the pattern or the objects and concepts for the material world exist in a state of unchanging perfection. Plato was more interested in the Forms of concepts such as good, truth and justice, than he was in the Forms of material objects. The meaning of the word beauty would correspond to some external reality (Plato called it the Ideal Form).
Plato and Aristotle both have great philosophical views on the theories of matter and forms and dualism. Plato’s Theory of Forms state that forms are universal factors or ideas in which the world becomes intelligent as a result. However, the intelligence must gain the knowledge about certain aspects in a non-physical way (If knowledge is pursued then it will be found within ones self). Plato believes that there is a distinction between the mind and body. Plato recognizes matter and form as being separate entities.
Anaxagoras’ ideas are in many ways similar to that of Heraclitus; however, there are some deviations that I will highlight in contrasting each philosopher’s theory on the nature of what is. Heraclitus’s main motivation in his philosophical endeavors revolved around his desire to know what is and the organization or order of all things that exist. Heraclitus's central claim in his attempt to answer his curiosities was that the world (and universe for that matter), is ordered, guided, and unified by a rational structure, which he called the LOGOS. This rational structure of the cosmos orders and controls the universe. Thus the LOGOS, in Heraclitus's view, is the unifier in nature.
Berkeley was troubled by the opening of the door to atheism and skepticism as a consequence arising from Locke’s argument. Locke’s view proposed that all knowledge rested on the existence of material objects independent of minds or ideas. Locke held that objects produce ideas in our minds, and that our ideas resemble objects in the material world, but some qualities that objects appear to have are not in the objects but depend on our minds. Meaning, material objects may in reality possess measurable qualities, such as size and weight, but their sense qualities such as color, odor, and taste, depend on human perception. Berkeley felt the distinguishing between material objects and the ideas through which we perceive them does not provide
‘Our ethical decisions are merely the result of our social conditioning’. Discuss. The base of our ethical decisions can only be described as a mystery to a non-philosopher, but debates have taken place between many philosophers determining whether our decisions are due to having free will, or if everything we do is pre-determined anyway. Libertarianism is the view that human agents can, when faced with a moral choice, freely act and retain moral responsibility for that act. However determinism take an opposite view to this; hard determinism is the theory that everything in the universe, including all human actions and choices has a cause which proceeds it.
Existentialism is a philosophical theory that states that each individual has absolute freedom of choice and each has the responsibility to regulate one’s own actions. Existentialists believe that life has no universal meaning thus the pursuit of any greater truth is unnecessary and trivial (Existentialism). In slight contrast, absurdists believe that in the trivialality of a universal meaning, but that the pursuit itself may contain greater truths (Belanger). However, both believe that the world as a whole is purely nonsensical and illogical (Existentialism). Camus’ philosophical beliefs are evident throughout his first work, The Stranger.
For Descartes body and mind were substances, but with utterly different basic natures. According to him, body is extended and unthinking while the mind is thinking and un-extended. He rejected the Aristotelian concept of the body, which is, with its form-matter and actuality-potentiality dimensions, an essentially biological concept of matter. Problem of conceptualizing the mind The mind can be conceptualized from two broad perspectives, viz: a. With reference to internal connections between mental events, and b.
He also believes the philosopher is able, through using his intellect, to achieve true knowledge of the abstract Forms without using his senses. Plato’s theory of Forms can be seen as unconvincing to some who believe that abstract ideas e.g table, horse, beauty are actually names that have been invented to help people describe their experiences of the physical world. This is a materialistic view as it suggests that objects in this world are the real reality and our ideas can develop based on experience of things. Aristotle agrees with this and believes knowledge is gained through experience and that there is not an eternal World of Forms that is a priori to us. However, in Plato’s defence some believe that each variety of a Form shares a likeness for example each horse is slightly different yet they all share something that makes it resemble a horse.
Asserting Thrasymachus’ thesis, what follows is that justice is not a ‘form’ as argued by Socrates but rather a inter-subjective concept. It would also follow that justice does not have a fixed, objective definition. Since the interest of two different sovereigns may conflict, so may different conceptions of justice. Thrasymachus argues this point in various ways; stating that ‘injustice, if it is on a large enough scale, is stronger, freer, and more masterly than justice’ (344c) In this context, Thrasymachus’ thesis is descriptive but on this note, it also project a prescriptive meaning. Thrasymachus’ arguments largely rest on observational