It would also be interesting to fit Quine and other philosopher's into the discussion by substituting their language, as Palmquist substituted Kripke, into this Kantian framework. By agnostically 'accepting both' frameworks as possibilities and instead establishing some form of feedback loop between the two to reconcile then, we could then use the resulting framework in a variety of disciplines to guide both our research and in every day life, our actions. I do believe such a framework would be consistent, but its use would have to not be taken too far, as it is not a complete one. It is merely a way of making sense of things in some meta-framework, a way that has been a great tool to me since December 2014 thanks to your class. As Gödel showed though any argument for it, would pre-suppose it .
The student shows her teacher and her class the value of her writing by not letting Mr. Sedaris devalue it with his criticism. The only person who knows and who can determine the true value of writing is the author. Even though the teacher thought his students’
Assumptions should play no part in critical thinking but unfortunately they do, and often. I know as humans we all make snap judgments, but the idea is to push aside our assumptions and judgments when we think critically. Thinking critically is a skill that you either have or you don’t, the ones who have it will ultimately be the ones to thrive in their respective fields. Though it may be difficult to avoid making assumptions, as professionals we have no choice. We can keep our assumptions to ourselves but unless we consider all aspects of the situation we are not thinking critically.
The writer has to avoid appealing to “authorities” who are interesting but who are not experts. Another method for persuasion is using examples. The example should clearly relate to the argument and should be typical enough to support it. Avoiding examples that are not typical enough to support the general statement, it is a good way. To persuade the reader, the writer can use the method predicting the consequence.
Your essay may support, refute, or qualify the view expressed in the statement. What you write, however, must be relevant to the topic under discussion. Additionally, you must support your viewpoint, indicating your reasoning and providing examples based on your/or experience. To be underrated may sometimes be better and more favorable than being overrated. When one is overrated, people have high expectations.
What Arendt is inherently saying about Eichmann when she states that he acted out of sheer thoughtlessness is that he is not thinking or what can also be said is that he suffers from lack of thought. Eichmann was thoughtful as an administrator to which it’s true that he could deal with lots of complicated details, but overall to her, Eichmann is not thinking. For Arendt, thinking involves on the spot judgment and the ability to take another’s viewpoint into consideration. This is something that she thinks Eichmann lacks. For instance, in her book she states that this is a flaw where he, Eichmann, cannot take another fellow’s point of view and her example is in relation to when he was working in Vienna.
It is obvious that he has betrayed his principles but he has not become as engagé in the war as Pyle. During the novel we learn that Fowler’s main principle is his detachment. This is incredibly important for Fowler along with his ability to deal with external things and not his own thoughts and feelings and the fact that he has “no real opinion about anything”. He tries to hide his expressions of emotions and opinions from those around him particularly Phuong and Pyle. He is very quick to correct himself if he believes he is beginning to take a side or become involved.
John or also known as The Savage really like how all the factors of positives and negatives in life which life is worth living for. This makes me think that we shouldn’t try to find the perfect life with no problems at all because this books shows us that that is not the way to take to be able to change our life for the better and be able to enjoy our lives. Instead, as how I interpreted this amazing book, we should be searching for the perfectly imperfect lives with the perfect problems that make life enjoyable or in better terms life more lifelike. I honestly feel that there is no perfect life and if it was it shouldn’t considered being alive at all. The book also shows some abnormal actions that would be considered different in our time but it is normal in that world.
We might think that it’s impossible to change the entire world—and it is—so we passively sit and continue to complain. While complaining may seem easier, it comes with a sinister cost. It casts a shadow of helplessness and victimhood and it compounds the issue. Nothing ever changes because of criticism alone. If everyone complained and no one picked up the trash, the situation would stay the same (at best).
These seemingly good fellows at ordinary times are nothing in dangerous moment. On the contrary, the abandonment by Beauty, Strength, Discretion, Five-wits and Knowledge is not forsaking in a real sense but a no-choice move as no one can own his beauty, strength, discretion, five-wits and knowledge forever. This is natural law. When we at 60 some, we may lose our beauty ; at 70, strength; 80, discretion; 90, five-wits...when we die, we surely cannot take our knowledge with us as we are not able to think any more. In fact, the order of these abandonments are also arranged by the author carefully though it seems very casual.