| Papers [145-156] of 4449 :: [Page 13 of 371] | | Go to page : <— 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 —> | |
|
|
N. Fearn's "Zeno and the Tortoise", 2008.
This paper is a philosophical study that analyzes Zeno's paradox of the tortoise and Achilles as presented in N. Fearn's "Zeno and the Tortoise: How to Think like a Philosopher".
1,120 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 1 source, APA, $ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This philosophical study argues for the relativity of argumentative perspective in Zeno's tortoise and Achilles paradox through reductio ad absurdum as presented in N. Fearn's 2001 book "Zeno and the Tortoise: How to Think like a Philosopher". In essence, Zeno's paradox of the tortoise and Achilles are examined in order to critically analyze the theory of non-existent motion through reductio ad absurdum.
From the Paper
"In Fearn's analysis of Zeno reductio ad absurdum, there is basis for the necessity for the modern mathematician to deny the need of Zeno's denial of motion, since math can now reduce the segments of points between motion. This provides a reassessment of the validity of motion due to the nature of points ins pace, which act as markers that defy the nature of movement because of eradication of starting and finishing points. If everything can be divisible unto infinity, then the premise of motion is non-existent because time ceases to measure any longer and is reduced to an illogical movement."
| |
|
Kant and Capital Punishment, 2008.
This paper explores Kant's theory of deontology and his views on the death penalty.
1,202 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper provides an overview of Kant's deontology theory and its implications. The paper then argues that Kant's theory presents indisputable support for the death penalty in our society today.
Outline:
Kant's Deontology
Kant and the Death Penalty
Conclusion
From the Paper
"To start with: what is deontology? The word's most basic definition is etymological: the study of duty. Unlike utilitarian philosophy, which can be summed up in the rather trite and shopworn "the end justifies the means," deontology does not assign much importance to an action's consequences, focusing instead on its motives. Or, more concisely: deontology detects moral worth in motives, rather than in outcomes (McCormick 8d). The implications of this are monumental, as Kant is basically arguing that an action may lack moral worth even if its outcome is desirable and, conversely, that an action whose outcome is questionable may be considered "good." To understand these conclusions, it is important to elaborate further on Kant's ideas of categorical duty as opposed to contingent, or hypothetical, duty."
| |
|
Plato, Aristotle and Democracy, 2008.
This paper compares Plato and Aristotle's ideology of democracy.
751 words (approx. 3.0 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses the abstract ideology of democracy that both Plato and Aristotle deem to be a good form of government, but not one that can exist in reality. The paper shows how both philosophers have similar definitions of democracy that provide an ideological, yet impractical form of governing within modern American democratic principles.
From the Paper
"One governmental aspect of Plato's Republic revolves around ruling for the greater good or "democratic" society in the well-ordered soul. The basis for the well ordered soul for Plato and Socrates is related the central concept of the common or greater good of an ideal society in The Republic. However, the natural order of the soul demands a conception of the 'general welfare' of society, which depicts the idea of the common good, as present in Plato's city. This law of 'suffering' for the just and civil greater good of society is the precept of modern law, but Plato argues that human nature rejects suffering in the 'reality' of governmental procedure (Plato 43)."
| |
|
Representativeness and Availability Heuristics, 2008.
This paper examines the concept of representativeness and availability heuristics.
1,325 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at representativeness heuristics and at availability heuristics, provide examples of both, and outline how the use of such heuristics often leads to inaccurate conclusions. At the same time, the paper also looks at why it cannot be said that the application of heuristics by human beings immediately makes people "irrational" in some fundamental sense.
From the Paper
"When taking into account the concept of heuristics and the various limitations the authors delineate, it is actually rather hard to countenance the idea that heuristics generally leads to true conclusions. For one thing, turning momentarily to availability heuristics, even when someone is aware of their basis and makes a conscious effort to correct it, they often over-compensate - and that even rudimentary efforts at over-compensation appears to be relatively rare. For instance, the Nisbett and Ross report that "simple, tempting, availability criteria are used in contexts in which availability and frequency are poorly correlated.""
| |
|
The Theory of Atomism, 2008.
This paper examines Bertrand Russell's theory of atomism.
2,782 words (approx. 11.1 pages), 8 sources, APA, $ 83.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper explains Bertrand Russel's theory of atomism, which emphasizes logical analysis and its consequences for metaphysics. The paper describes how Russel explains the structure of the external world and discusses how pluralism, rather than monism, is the logical force behind the philosophy. The paper also looks at the many arguments against Russell's theory of logical atomism.
Outline:
Introduction
The Structure of the World
Russell's Logical Atomism
Logical Atomism - Realistically Logical?
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Bertrand Russell, author of the theory of atomism, was a philosopher whose emphasis was primarily on logical analysis and its consequences for metaphysics. The traditional philosophical problem of the external world, which is based on the fact that external qualities can only be drawn inferentially, was explained by Russell (1910) as a distinction between "knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description" (Irvine, 2003). Russell's 1918 work on logical atomism was based on the argument that the world is comprised of logical atoms, which he described as "little patches of colour", and their properties (ibid). Together these properties, according to Russell, form the atomic facts which are thus combined to create logically complex objects. Therefore what is normally explained as inferred entities, such as enduring physical objects, are actually logical constructions created from immediate entities of sensation, which Russell identified as "sensibilia" (ibid)."
| |
|
Free Will Vs. Destiny, 2008.
This paper explores the ideas of human free will vs. destiny or predestination in the works of William Shakespeare, Franz Kafka, Martin Buber, Fyodor Dostoevsky and Peter Berger.
2,749 words (approx. 11.0 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 82.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper looks at how Shakespeare, Kafka, Buber, Dostoevsky and Berger all address the problem of free will in a universe that is seemingly deterministic. The paper explains that whether the determinism is termed Fate, God or Science, it has the same implications in terms of limiting human free will. The paper shows how Dostoevsky is the most radical proponent of free will and Berger the most radical proponent of determinism.
From the Paper
"In the "To be or not to be" soliloquy, this speculation takes the form of Hamlet's reflecting upon the question of suicide as a way of removing oneself from the cares of the world. The dilemma as to whether it is better to exist or to not exist (i.e., to commit suicide) is a profound question not only for Hamlet but for humanity in general, as it goes to the basic question of existence: it is worth living. Unlike animals, human are not slaves to instinct but have consciousness and the capacity for choice. However, with this comes the capacity to evaluate one's condition, and the human condition in general."
| |
|
Aristotle and Kant: The Principle of Happiness, 2008.
A review of Immanuel Kant's and Aristotle's views on the principles of happiness and how their arguments differ.
968 words (approx. 3.9 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 34.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper begins by discussing Immanuel Kant's philosophy on the principle of happiness, as described in his work, "Groundwork to the Metaphysics of Morals." It then goes on to discuss how Aristotle would criticize Kant's argument by demonstrating that the premise of Kant's argument is flawed, and that consequently, his entire argument rests upon a misunderstanding or mis-characterization of the role of happiness in morality.
From the Paper
"In contrast to what Kant contends, such an approach does not consist of establishing ethical rules and principles based upon attaining happiness, for morality is grounded in human nature itself. Experience proves that morality is essential for human excellence and happiness, and that it can be manifested through the exercise of human reason, as well as through developing and expanding one's ability to reason, which enables one to identify and apply proper moral conduct.
"Aristotle would argue that the happy human being is one who expresses complete virtue in all of his activities, and who is satisfied with just an adequate supply of external goods and material comforts. Ultimately, according to Aristotle, the good and complete life consists of both moral and intellectual virtue, a certain measure of goods, and friendship. (Aristotle 1015) Living such a life does not involve establishing an ethical system based upon attaining happiness, it simply reflects an acknowledgement that virtue is happiness."
| |
|
Socialism: From Babeuf to Marx, 2008.
A review of socialism from the early eighteenth century up until the middle of the nineteenth century, focusing on the works of Karl Marx and Francois Noel Babeuf.
1,333 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper briefly defines the concept of socialism and outlines its early stirrings in the eighteenth century, right up to the middle of the nineteenth century. In so doing, the paper notes how socialism was not a steady escalation of rhetoric that ultimately culminated in Karl Marx's "Manifesto," but rather, an idea about socio-economic organization that first emerged in its modern form in the fiery writings and outbursts of Francois Noel Babeuf. The paper further shows how socialism went through a period of fairly intellectualized and rational discussion during the first few decades of the nineteenth century.
From the Paper
"By the dawn of the 1850s, thinkers such as Louis Blanc were calling for the advent of social workshops that would be controlled wholly by workers. This approach still sought to involve the capitalists in a cooperative fashion, but Blanc's approach to socialism soon gave way to Marx's highly-charged writings on the nature of social class relations. Specifically, Marx portrayed as inevitable a revolutionary conflict between capital and labor, and he also chastised the socialists as "theoretical utopian dreamers who disregarded the necessity of revolutionary struggle to implement their doctrines" ("Socialism," 44396). In one fell swoop, Marx had sharply rebuked the more measured and thoughtful tone of the early socialists and created a new kind of socialism (or, rather, the revolutionary socialism of Babeuf in a new dress) that avowedly sought the destruction of the existing capitalist order. It was, suffice it to say, the most radical step yet undertaken by the left in its battle against the "oppressive" forces of the classical liberal right."
| |
|
Philosophy of Toleration, 2008.
A case study analysis based on the philosophy of toleration between an orthodox yeshiva and a YWCA gym.
1,727 words (approx. 6.9 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the philosophy of toleration and how it can be applied within society. The paper discusses the case between an orthodox yeshiva and a YWCA gym in terms of its controversy over frosting the glass of the gym. The paper argues against the requests of the yeshiva based on the philosophy of toleration and reasonable expectations.
From the Paper
"In this context, the question is one of a liberal society tolerating an illiberal religion: how far can society be expected to go. While some assert that the issue of toleration, by definition, involves a asymmetrical power differential between the tolerator and the tolerated (Tolerance as Recognition 22), it may be argued that Michael Walzer's observation, with regard to immigrant societies in which "everyone had to tolerate everyone else" (Walzer xi), is more relevant here. In this case, reason would suggest that tolerance is a "two-way street". In other words, the yeshiva cannot reasonably be expected to assume that because they are a minority religious group in Canada, then all other Canadians must modify behaviours and/or endure expenses to satisfy their particular group needs or concerns."
| |
|
Basic Knowledge Structures, 2008.
This paper examines Stewart Cohen's arguments against "easy knowledge".
1,147 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 2 sources, APA, $ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper analyzes the problem of epistemological deduction of knowledge, which leads to a perceptual problem with sensory-based basic knowledge structures (BKS). The paper explains the epistemological argument of Stewart Cohen, which disagrees with P. Markie's views of easy knowledge.
From the Paper
"The premise of Cohen's arguments against "easy knowledge" is accurately derived from the nature of rationalisms and the problem of detailing how knowledge is created from the red table analogy. In normative patterns he accesses the situation with a great of what critics would call skepticism on the basis of easy knowledge, since they often form foundationalist principles to determine the lineage of epistemology. The essential issue that Cohen defines with easy knowledge is founded on the nature of knowledge as a basic structure that often does not provide truths from outside of human cognition. He does not imply that knowledge cannot implicitly be not known through the "common sense" of assumed norms through the person experiencing temporal knowledge, but he does derides Markie's arguments on the basis of 'fact' in knowledge, as it pertains to the choices a father makes in his red table analogy."
| |
|
Artificial Intelligence, 2008.
This paper explains J.R. Lucas' argument against the possibility of artificial intelligence (AI).
1,323 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 5 sources, APA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses Lucas' famous argument in his essay "Minds, Machines and Godel" that human thought cannot be copied by a computer. More specifically, the paper discusses Lucas' finding that true AI can never be achieved because there is always a statement that a machine program cannot recognize and a human mind can. The paper concludes that human beings do not think mechanistically unless they set out to do so, and instead thought and human consciousness are shaped by emotions as well as logic.
From the Paper
"Artificial Intelligence (AI) simply refers to machines that can actually think, but the term also refers to the issue of how to demonstrate AI. In fact, it can only be inferred that other human minds can think as we do because we cannot observe this process or monitor it to see the action of the process in the way we can follow our own mind, and even in the latter case, the mechanisms at work are rarely clear to us. Ideas about this issue have been analyzed by philosophers and scientists in a variety of ways, from considering how to develop a machine that can emulate the complexities of the human mind to how to test such a machine to see if it can think or not. Often, the issue has been addressed as a competition, such as that between human chess champion Gary Kasparov and a chess-playing computer known as Big Blue. The fact that Kasparov won the most points in the six matches does not change the fact that the computer almost won--does this mean the computer can think?"
| |
|
Professional Ethics, 2008.
This paper discusses professional ethics in the nursing workplace and related dilemmas.
1,110 words (approx. 4.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer uses a specific example in a hospital to discuss the ethical dilemmas that may be encountered in the nursing workplace. In particular, the paper discusses the type of dilemma that can arise when caught between being an advocate for the patient and preserving the professional integrity of another professional when he errs.
From the Paper
" The ethics in question was whether to carry out one's duty to the patient and his family, in the interest of being fully honest, open and transparent to the patient in informing them what had happened versus not disclosing this information in the interest of not making a large fuss out of a resident's error that did not result in serious harm. On the one hand, the patient regained not only sinus rhythm, but also regained consciousness several minutes later. He was evidently not pleased to find himself intubated; there did not seem to be any signs of persistent ischemic injury nor reperfusion injury at the time. On the other hand, had the patient been without adequate perfusion for longer than it actually took to revive him, permanent injury would have resulted."
|
|
|