Many people suggest that it is pointless or a waste of time to reason
Question Many people suggest that it is pointless or a waste of time to reason about the existence of God. Three of the most common reasons given to support this are:a. “You can’t prove it (because God is not visible or tangible)”b. “It’s a matter of opinion/it’s subjective.”c. “Nobody ever changes their mind about religion.”Are any of these good reasons to conclude that discussing the existence of God is pointless? Discuss. Try to show how these reasons could be used to construct arguments, and show whether those arguments are any good.
Materialists contend that in the final analysis, mental states are
Question Materialists contend that in the final analysis, mental states are identical with, reducible to, or explainable in terms of physical brain states. What are the practical implications of such a view? If you were convinced that materialists are correct, how would this influence the way you see yourself and the choices you make? Is the self the same as the brain?
Modern science is now able to use advanced equipment and sophisticated
Question Modern science is now able to use advanced equipment and sophisticated techniques to unravel and articulate the complex web of connections that binds consciousness and body together into an integrated self. The impressive success of such scientific mind-brain research has encouraged many to conclude that it is only a matter of time before the mental life of consciousness is fully explainable in terms of the neurophysiology of the brain. The ultimate goal of such explorations is to link the self—including all of our thoughts, passions, personality traits—to the physical wiring and physiological functioning of the brain. What are your thoughts?
Both Plato and Aristotle (whom we’ll be reading soon)
Both Plato and Aristotle (whom we’ll be reading soon) seem to have a rough agreement that the human soul/mind/psuché is some sort of “form” associated with a living body. That might be about where their agreement ends, though. Plato’s Theory of Forms suggests an immortal “soul” that is at least like the abstract, universal, unchanging and eternal Forms (if not a genuine Form in its own right), while Aristotle’s hylomorphism is fairly reminiscent of the “body is to soul as harp is to harmony” analogy we see from Simmias in Plato’s Phaedo, and suggests a “soul” that cannot exist without a material body.Which of these two approaches gives the more compelling account of the “soul?” Does the soul outlive the death of the body, or does it perish with the body? Is there such a thing as your soul, or my soul? Explain more?
Determine whether each of the following is valid or invalid. If it
Question Determine whether each of the following is valid or invalid. If it is invalid, either think of circumstances in which the premises could be true and the conclusion false, or think of another argument of the same form, the premises of which are true and the conclusion false. 1. If a man’s destiny is caused by the star under which he is born, then all men born under that star should have the same fortune. But masters and slaves and kings and beggars (whose fortunes differ greatly) are born under the same star at the same time. Thus, astrology – which claims that a man’s destiny is caused by the star under which he is born – is surely false. — (Pliny the Elder, Natural History, quoted in Merrilee H. Salmon, Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking, 3rd ed., p. 96) 2. If you have read and understood the philosophy of Hegel, you will be able to gain a clear understanding of Marx. Since you haven’t studied Hegel, you won’t be able to gain a clear understanding of Marx. 3. Either Extraterrestrial visitors have landed in Canada or the honest people who have reported seeing them are liars. But these people are not liars, so extraterrestrial visitors must have landed in Canada.
Essay Writing at Allessays.Online
Review This Service