Skip to main content

Home/ Philosophy for teens/ Group items tagged is

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Daryl Bambic

The Internet Classics Archive | Symposium by Plato - 14 views

classics.mit.edu/...symposium.html

shared by Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15 - Cached
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      Context: The group is deciding how they will drink given the excessive partying from the previous night.
    • Nick Adoranti
      Nick Adoranti on 05 Feb 15
       
      Hiya
    • Eric Bensoussan
      Eric Bensoussan on 05 Feb 15
       
      Im surprised that philosophers drank so much
    • hebaali1998
      hebaali1998 on 05 Feb 15
       
      How can you have a philosophical conversation while being intoxicated? 
  • entirely has this great deity been neglected." Now in this Phaedrus seems to me to be quite right, and therefore I want to offer him a contribution; also I think that at the present moment we who are here assembled cannot do better than honour the. god Love
  • Let Phaedrus begin the praise of Love,
  • ...100 more annotations...
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      The dinner party decides they are going to take turn giving speeches in praise of Love.
  • Love is the eldest and noblest and mightiest of the gods; and the chiefest author and giver of virtue in life, and of happiness after death.
  • Phaedrus
  • encouragement which all the world gives to the lover;
  • Such is the entire liberty which gods and men have allowed the lover, according to the custom which prevails in our part of the world.
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      We have a custom of forgiving unreasonable behaviour when people are in love.
  • Evil is the vulgar lover who loves the body rather than the soul, inasmuch as he is not even stable, because he loves a thing which is in itself unstable, and therefore when the bloom of youth which he was desiring is over, he takes wing and flies away, in spite of all his words and promises; whereas the love of the noble disposition is life-long, for it becomes one with the everlasting
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      Basically, he said that people who love for physical attraction and evil and vulgar because their love is cheap and disappear when youth's beauty fades.
  • Pausanias
  • Eryximachus
  • rightly distinguished two kinds of love
  • harmony is composed of differing notes
  • harmonious love of one another and blend in temperance and harmony,
  • Aristophanes
  • Mankind; he said, judging by their neglect of him, have never, as I think, at all understood the power of Love
  • original human nature was not like the present, but different. The sexes were not two as they are now, but originally three in number; there was man, woman, and the union of the two, having a name corresponding to this double nature, which had once a real existence, but is now lost, and the word "Androgynous
  • sexes were three, and such as I have described them; because the sun, moon, and earth are three;
  • will restore us to our original state, and heal us and make us happy and blessed.
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      Love is about finding our true nature in another and in so doing, becoming whole.
  • Agathon
  • ut I would rather praise the god first, and then speak of his gifts; this is always the right way of praising everything.
  • flexibility and symmetry of form
  • beauty of the god
  • virtue I have now to speak: his greatest glory is that he can neither do nor suffer wrong to or from any god or any man
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      Love cannot be forced as it is an act of freedom.
  • ll men in all things serve him of their own free will, and where there is voluntary agreement
  • courage and justice and temperance I have spoken, but I have yet to speak of his wisdom-
  • for I do not praise in that way; no, indeed, I cannot. But if you like to here the truth about love, I am ready to speak in my own manner, though I will not make myself ridiculous by entering into any rivalry with you. Say then, Phaedrus, whether you would like, to have the truth about love, spoken in any words and in any order which may happen to come into my mind at the time. Will that be agreeable to you?
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      Socrates here says that he cannot praise Love the way Phaedrus does (because he said it all and laid all manner of claims of Love). 
  • Socrates then proceeded as follows:-
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      An example of the famous Socratic method is about to unfold...
  • Is Love of something or of nothing?
  • The inference that he who desires something is in want of something, and that he who desires nothing is in want of nothing, is in my judgment,
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      Socrates gets Agathon to agree with his claim that we desire that which we don't possess OR that which we are not.
  • nd yet, added Socrates, if a man being strong desired to be strong, or being swift desired to be swift, or being healthy desired to be healthy, in that case he might be thought to desire something which he already has or is. I give the example in order that we may avoid misconception. For the possessors of these qualities, Agathon, must be supposed to have their respective advantages at the time, whether they choose or not; and who can desire that which he has? Therefore when a person says, I am well and wish to be well, or I am rich and wish to be rich, and I desire simply to have what I have-to him we shall reply: "You, my friend, having wealth and health and strength, want to have the continuance of them; for at this moment, whether you choose or no, you have them. And when you say, I desire that which I have and nothing else, is not your meaning that you want to have what you now have in the future?
  • Then he and every one who desires, desires that which he has not already, and which is future and not present, and which he has not, and is not, and of which he is in want;
  • First, is not love of something, and of something too which is wanting to a man
  • Love is the love of beauty and not of deformity
  • Then Love wants and has not beauty?
  • Is not the good also the beautiful?
  • Then in wanting the beautiful, love wants also the good?
  • Diotima of Mantineia
  • Love was neither fair nor good.
  • is love then evil and foul?
  • must that be foul which is not fair?
  • And is that which is not wise, ignoran
  • a mean between wisdom and ignorance?
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      Diotima shows Socrates that there is a mid point between extremes; she avoids the 'either-or' trap.
  • ou also deny the divinity of Love.
  • What then is Love?" I asked; "Is he mortal?
  • he is neither mortal nor immortal, but in a mean between the two." "What is he, Diotima?" "He is a great spirit (daimon),
  • e interprets," she replied, "between gods and men
  • For God mingles not with man; but through Love
  • god Poros or Plenty
  • son of Metis or Discretion
  • Poverty,
  • always poor
  • nything but tender and fai
  • rough and squalid
  • no shoes, nor a house to dwell in;
  • is always in distress.
  • But that which is always flowing in is always flowing out, and so he is never in want and never in wealth;
  • he is in a mean between ignorance and knowledge. The truth of the matter is this
  • god is a philosopher. or seeker after wisdom, for he is wise already;
  • neither good nor wise is nevertheless satisfied with himself: he has no desire for that of which he feels no want."
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      He who is neither 'good nor wise' is satisfied with himself because he does not desire that which he is not aware that he lacks.
  • ho then, Diotima," I said, "are the lovers of wisdom, if they are neither the wise nor the foolish?" "A child may answer that question," she replied; "they are those who are in a mean between the two; Love is one of them.
  • what is the use of him to men?
  • of the beautiful. But some one will say: Of the beautiful in what, Socrates and Diotima?-or rather let me put the question more dearly, and ask: When a man loves the beautiful, what does he desire?
  • hat the beautiful may be h
  • rther questio
  • Let me put the word 'good' in the place of the beautiful, and repeat the question once more: If he who loves good, what is it then that he loves?
  • And what does he gain who possesses the good
  • generally as the love of the everlasting possession of the good?" "That is most true."
  • "Then if this be the nature of love, can you tell me further," she said, "what is the manner of the pursuit? what are they doing who show all this eagerness and heat which is called love? and what is the object which they have in view?
  • hat all men are bringing to the birth in their bodies and in their souls.
  • onception and generation are an immortal principle in the mortal creature, and in the inharmonious they can never be.
  • The love of generation and of birth in beauty."
  • mortal creature, generation is a sort of eternity and immortality
  • love is of the everlasting possession of the good, all men will necessarily desire immortality together with good: Wherefore love is of immortality."
  • hy should animals have these passionate feeling
  • Marvel not," she said, "if you believe that love is of the immortal, as we have several times acknowledged; for here again, and on the same principle too, the mortal nature is seeking as far as is possible to be everlasting and immortal: and this is only to be attained by generation, because generation always leaves behind a new existence in the place of the old.
  • Marvel not then at the love which all men have of their offspring; for that universal love and interest is for the sake of immortality."
  • even to die, for the sake of leaving behind them a name which shall be eternal.
  • will preserve their memory and giving them the blessedness and immortality
  • But souls which are pregnant-for there certainly are men who are more creative in their souls than in their bodies conceive that which is proper for the soul to conceive or contain. And what are these conceptions?-wisdom and virtue in general.
  • oets and all artists
  • temperance and justice
  • he who would proceed aright in this matter should begin in youth to visit beautiful forms; and first, if he be guided by his instructor aright, to love one such form only-out of that he should create fair thoughts; and soon he will of himself perceive that the beauty of one form is akin to the beauty of another; and then if beauty of form in general is his pursuit, how foolish would he be not to recognize that the beauty in every form is and the same!
  • become a lover of all beautiful form
  • beauty of the mind is more honourable than the beauty of the outward form.
  • birth thoughts
  • mprove the youn
  • beauty of institutions and laws,
  • and that the beauty of them all is of one famil
  • ersonal beauty is a trifle;
  • sciences, tha
  • who has learned to see the beautiful in due order and succession,
  • oward the end will suddenly perceive a nature of wondrous beauty
  • everlasting,
  • rowing and decaying, or waxing and waning; s
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      At the end of life, the one who has pursued beauty will perceive its true eternal nature.
  • not fair in one point of view and foul in another
  • ut beauty absolute, separate, simple, and everlasting, which without diminution and without increase, or any change,
  • begins to perceive that beauty, is not far from the end.
  • And the true order of going, or being led by another, to the things of love, is to begin from the beauties of earth and mount upwards for the sake of that other beauty, using these as steps only, and from one going on to two, and from two to all fair forms, and from fair forms to fair practices, and from fair practices to fair notions, until from fair notions he arrives at the notion of absolute beauty, and at last knows what the essence of beauty is.
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      The true order of discovering love and beauty; first of the body and the individual and then ascending upwards to the idea of absolute beauty itself.
  • beholding beauty with the eye of the mind, he will be enabled to bring forth, not images of beauty, but realities (for he has hold not of an image but of a reality), and bringing forth and nourishing true virtue to become the friend of God and be immortal, if mortal man may. Would that be an ignoble life?"
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 05 Feb 15
       
      Beholding beauty with the eye of the mind.
  • nature of Love first
  • Whether love is the love of something or of nothing?
  • whether Love desires that of which love is.
Mason Brenhouse

Taxation is Theft Because it's Involuntary and Permanently Denies People their Property... - 1 views

georgedonnelly.com/...taxation-is-theft

taxation theft is philosophy

shared by Mason Brenhouse on 26 Nov 10 - No Cached
  • Taxation is theft because it is the use of aggression to deny another person their property. It doesn’t matter what their property is to be used for or what complicated arguments are made to justify it. Taxation is involuntary and it results in a person’s property being permanently taken. This is all that is necessary for our thesis to be proven.
  • Yet others will claim that taxes are payment for those services government provides. What if one doesn’t want those services? What if they are substandard? There are no answers to these questions because these alleged services are provided involuntarily. You can hardly call that a voluntary arrangement.
  • Taxation is theft because it involves a first use of violence in order to permanently acquire someone else’s property. State apologists may make excuses or wild conjecture in a vain attempt to justify this theft. But the fact remains that is theft. The only valid way to acquire someone else’s property is through voluntary interaction. Taxation is involuntary.
  • Mason Brenhouse on 26 Nov 10
     
    This is an article that has several points as to why taxation is theft. Firstly, taxation is theft because it is the use of aggression to deny another person their property.This is because it involves the use of violence in order to permanently acquire someone else's property. As we know, taxes are used in order to give certain services to citizens. However, what if these citizens do not want these services? This is why taxation is considered theft. 
  • Ali Goldman on 08 Dec 10
     
    I think that this is a very good website because it shows that taxation is theft because it is taking away someones property. I also like the point that shows how it uses violence and how some people do not want the services that are provided from paying taxes.
mariakanarakis

An Introduction to the Orthodox Christian Understanding of Free Will - 0 views

orthodoxyinfo.org/AzkoulFreeWill.htm

orthodox greek christianity christian understanding will fate philosophy religion

shared by mariakanarakis on 10 May 12 - No Cached
  • Some have said that man is a machine, who must follow the laws ofhis nature; therefore, he is  neither free to choose between good and evil (whatever they are) nor even between things. Even if he could overcome the laws of nature, he would, as some ancient Greeks said, be subject to "fate" (moira, eir mene) whose decisions must be fulfilled. Thus, choice is a delusion.
  • "predestination," that is, before the creation of the world, God decided who would live with Him forever, and those who would dwell in penal fire for eternity
    • mariakanarakis
      mariakanarakis on 10 May 12
       
      Predestination= fate, destiny When they say God decided who would live, they mean go to heaven, and those who would dwell in penal Fire are the ones who go to hell
  • predestination
  • ...21 more annotations...
  • Materialists have postulated that man is a soulless machine and subject to the laws of nature.  Freedom is an illusion. We eat what we eat, think what we think, live as we live, according to the iron laws of the universe.
    • mariakanarakis
      mariakanarakis on 10 May 12
       
      By laws of nature they mean: not choosing between good and evil
  • The 18th century philosopher, Immanuel Kant, said that not only must we believe that man is free, but also he has an immortal soul, and that God exists. The idea of freedom cannot exist without the idea of God and immortality. Without such beliefs, the happy life and civilization are impossible.
    • mariakanarakis
      mariakanarakis on 10 May 12
       
      This is the opposite side of the materialist's one.
  • In the words of Nicholas Berdayaev, "Man is an enigmatic  being because he is not the product of natural processes, but is the child of freedom which  springs from the abyss of non-being. "
  • Man possesses a divine element within him and, therefore, he is free, with the power to create beauty, to do good, to love justice. Certainly, man's body is controlled by the strictures of time and space, but his spirit is free to transcend all the laws of his finite nature. His spirit takes him where his body cannot go.
  • What does the Orthodox Church teach about free will? None of the above. She has never been concerned about the so-called discoveries of human reason. Rather she trusts the sacred Scriptures and her holy Fathers.
  • We are limited -- - not  paralyzed --- by our nature, the force of circumstance, the laws of Nature.
  • free will does not mean the ability to do whatever we want.
  • we are restricted by the passions. The passions limit the scope of our choices.
  • Freedom involves deliberation. Ignorance is an excuse only for them who have no ability or opportunity to learn
  • Augustine of Hippo taught that
  • there are matters entirely beyond our control, such as those things which God has  reserved for Himself only God has autarkeia or is self-sufficient, absolutely independent; only God is autexousios or complete "self-authority", "self-power", without any authority over Him.
  • How does the Church define "free will"?
  • two meanings
  • It is the  ability to choose between good and evil and between one thing and another. In every choice  there is the risk of sin, unless we call upon the Grace of God to aid« us.
  • our choices always involve  the power to choose between good and evil.
  • our liberty is restricted by ignorance.
  • impossible for us to choose between good and evil and, therefore, to take any part in our salvation
  • "original sin"
  • The liberty of Christians differs from the liberty of the unbeliever, he who is outside the influence of God's saving Grace.
  • choice depends upon knowledge; and upon the knowledge of God's Revelation, which presents the greatest number of choices.
  • with the knowledge of God comes the knowledge of the good and, by implication, the knowledge of evil; and, consequently, the possibility to choose between them. Without that knowledge and the choices that result from them, we are left with no explanation for human existence except fate or predestination, some unknown destiny. Understanding  ourselves this way, is to deprive human choice and action of all meaning Worse, if there were a  God, we would need to blame him for all evil. Not even the devil, if one existed! , could be held  responsible for his conduct.
    • mariakanarakis
      mariakanarakis on 10 May 12
       
      FINAL conclusion
  • mariakanarakis on 10 May 12
     
    An Introduction to the Orthodox Christian understanding of free will
Megan Levine

America and the 'Fun' Generation - NYTimes.com - 1 views

www.nytimes.com/...30iht-currents.html

fun hedonism philosophy pft

shared by Megan Levine on 30 Mar 14 - No Cached
  • And now a count can declare the victors: “achievement” and “fun.”
  • term “excellence”
  • dropped out of favor, also elevenfold. As “fun” gained influence, mentions of “pleasure” fell by a factor of four.
  • ...15 more annotations...
  • In the history of language, words rise and fall. We make and remake them; they make and remake us.
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 02 Apr 14
       
      Language is the philosopher's primary tool.  What do you think that the rising influence of 'fun' means for how we think about pleasure?
    • Natasha Campbell
      Natasha Campbell on 03 Apr 14
       
      I think that overtime, we become influenced by certain attributes, or things throughout the day which makes us perceive certain things as entertaining... With new technology, and the way our world changes, we could view different things as pleasure in contrast of what people thought of as appealing way back when.
  • turning in American culture, and one that has influenced the world. It is a turning away from an arguably aristocratic idea of the intrinsic worth of things: from pleasure, with its sense of an internal condition of mind, to fun, so closely affiliated with outward activities; from excellence, an inner trait whose attainment is its own reward, to achievement, which comes through slogging and recognition.
  • Merriam-Webster defines “pleasure” as “a state of gratification
  • fun is “what provides amusement or enjoyment;
  • excellence” as “the quality of being excellent,” which in turn means “very good of its kind: eminently good.” “Achievement,” meanwhile, is “a result gained by effort.”
  • “Pleasure” carries a hint of the sublime; it speaks of a state of mind that comes organically, that need not be artificially induced.
  • un,” though almost synonymous with “pleasure” for contemporary speakers, often involves artificial inducement
  • If “pleasure” comes from being and from talking through ideas, “fun” comes from doing and, often, switching off the brain.
  • Ours is an entertainment-seeking nation, but not necessarily a pleasure-seeking one.”
  • “Excellence” evokes Aristotle with its overtones of virtue. Anyone can achieve
  • but how many can truly be excellent?
  • “Achievement” is a word more likely to come from American leaders today, and, like “fun,” it is outward in nature. It comes in doing specific things. It is more about checking boxes than fulfilling inner potentialities.
  • The achievement culture permeates life today
  • n American culture of instantaneous celebrity teaches young people that fame is an end in itself rather than an incidental symptom of excellence in craft.
  • But with that change has come another: what would seem to be a growing intolerance for merely being, and an anguished insistence on doing, doing, doing.
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 30 Mar 14
       
      What are the differences between pleasure and achievement according to the author?   Do you agree with him?
    • Natasha Campbell
      Natasha Campbell on 03 Apr 14
       
      Achievement is simply something we check off on our to-do list. It's not something we take great value in. As in pleasure, it's something that we treasure because it's something we don't get too often, because we're too busy being blinded by the 'fun' aspects of life. I agree with the author because I believe that many people today believe that they find pleasure in doing absolutely nothing, and to shut off their brains completely. I believe that discovering new things and letting your mind wander just enough is pleasurable. 
    • Megan Levine
      Megan Levine on 03 Apr 14
       
      Today, pleasure is something that is very rare to find, since it is overshadowed by "fun". However, achievement is simply something that can be checked off a list, and is very easy to accomplish. Anyone can achieve something; they just may have a harder time being excellent at something. We take great value in pleasure, but not in achievements. I agree with the author because I believe that our generation is so caught up in technology, and entertainment, that we sometimes forget to seek for pleasure in our lives. I also agree that shutting off our brains does not give us pleasure; it just shuts away all the problems that will resurface. It's okay to have fun, but finding pleasure is something that is much more valuable, in my opinion. 
Mason Brenhouse

What is Wrong with Inheritance Taxation? | Newsflavor - 0 views

newsflavor.com/...rong-with-inheritance-taxation

cons taxation wrong philosophy

shared by Mason Brenhouse on 01 Dec 10 - No Cached
  • Some people think that inheritance taxes are the right way to redistribute wealth. But does it really do that? In effect, they just provide governments with more money to squander. If they really should redistribute wealth, they should be excluded from the normal government income and allocated in a special fund earmarked for the purpose. Some people think that inheritance taxes are downright wrong; taking away already taxed and hard earned money from people who earned it.
  • What happens when you tax an inheritance? Applying British standards, 50 percent of the inheritance gets lost to the government coffers. If this money is sitting in a savings account or in a safe, the fact might be annoying to the heir, but hardly life threatening to anyone. If the money on the other hand is sitting in a company providing work to people, losing half the money could mean the end of the company. This second case in fact doesn’t redistribute wealth, it kills it
  • Mason Brenhouse on 01 Dec 10
     
    According to this article the taxation of inheritance is actually an ineffective and actually steals hard earned money from the people who actually went out and earned it. It goes on to say that relatively 50% of inheritance is actually lost to the government. It speaks about working capitol which is money that is actively contributing to the economy and dead capital which is money that is lying dormant somewhere being saved. 
  • Daryl Bambic on 03 Dec 10
     
    This is a very interesting article but make sure to use it as a secondary point and not your main argument.
Daryl Bambic

Russell, Bertrand: Ethics [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy] - 0 views

www.iep.utm.edu/russ-eth

russell ethics

shared by Daryl Bambic on 02 Apr 14 - No Cached
  • Russell’s view is that the good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge
  • neither love without knowledge
  • knowledge without love
  • ...24 more annotations...
  • but love is in a sense more fundamental, since it will lead intelligent people to seek knowledge in order to find out how to benefit those whom they love.
  • “scientific knowledge and knowledge of particular facts.”
  • All moral rules must be tested by examining whether they tend to realize ends that we desire.”(374)
  • In his youth, Russell took the utilitarian view that the “happiness of mankind should be the aim of all actions”
  • dignity of which human existence is capable is not attainable by “devotion to the mechanism of life”, and that unless the contemplation of “eternal things” is preserved, humankind will become “no better than well-fed pigs.”
  • He believed that (1) “good” is the most fundamental ethical concept and (2) that “good” is indefinable
  • a priori certain propositions about the kind of things that are good on their own account.
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 02 Apr 14
       
      A priori meaning without empirical evidence, from reason and logic.
  • Russell, on the other hand, gives no such list of things which are good in themselves,
  • regard consequences or results as of vital importance for judging an action as right or wrong. In other words both are teleologists or consequentialists, like the utilitarians.
  • mpact of the First World War, which Russell passionately opposed
  • of human passions similar to that of psychoanalysts. Russell started believing that fundamental facts “in all ethical questions are feelings”, (Russell 1917, 19) and that impulse has more effect in moulding human lives than conscious purpose.
  • d we ought to act so as to maximize the balance of happiness over unhappiness in the world, and says: “I should not myself regard happiness as an adequate definition of the good, but I should agree that conduct ought to be judged by its consequences.”
  • According to him, once “good” is defined, the rest of ethics follows:
  • According to Russell, when we assert that this or that has value, we are giving expression to our emotions, not to a fact which would still be true if our personal feelings were different.
  • he first of these sentences, which may be true or false, does not, says Russell, belong to ethics but to psychology or biography
  • he second sentence which does belong to ethics, expresses a desire for something, but asserts nothing; and since it asserts nothing it is logically impossible that there should be evidence for or against it, or for it to possess either truth or falsehood.
  • Russell adopts as his guiding principle David Hume’s maxim that “Reason is, and ought, only to be the slave of the passions.
  • esires, emotions or passions
  • nly possible causes of action. Reason is not a cause of action but only a regulator.
  • The world that I should wish to see,” says Russell, ‘is one where emotions are strong but not destructive, and where, because they are acknowledged, they lead to no deception either of oneself or of others. Such a world would include love and friendship and the pursuit of art and knowledge.” (11)
  • esires are not “irrational” just because we cannot give any reason for them.
  • wondering once again whether there is such a thing as ethical knowledge.
  • since it must involve appeal to the majority,
Matthew Schaffer

The ideas of Karma and Fate. A "free will inviolability" as a fundamental law of Creation - 0 views

www.eniology.org/...ndamental-law-of-creation.html

shared by Matthew Schaffer on 09 May 12 - No Cached
  • mistakes a man has committed in his life may allegedly throw him back, and he may reincarnate as an animal.
    • Matthew Schaffer
      Matthew Schaffer on 09 May 12
       
      Believing that if we do bad things in our life may make us re-birth as an animal is very interesting? I don't see here why to them being an animal is so bad. What does the animal symbolize to them?
  • If something is going on in this world, it means that some system stands necessarily behind this,
    • Matthew Schaffer
      Matthew Schaffer on 09 May 12
       
      Here they are saying, in simpler terms, that everything has a force. Everything that happens in the world is made by some "system" which is behind it. So, this is saying that things can and will happen no matter what, confirming their belief in fate. 
  • a man has to know his mistakes for himself
    • Matthew Schaffer
      Matthew Schaffer on 09 May 12
       
      It begins to talk about Karma here, however this was not the assignment it is still interesting. What they say about Karma is that man needs to be aware of the mistakes that they have made and try to fix it, and then move on. 
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • The fate is a possibility to choose freely your own Past and your own Future.
    • Matthew Schaffer
      Matthew Schaffer on 09 May 12
       
      The Easterners definition of Fate is the possibility to choose your own past, and your own future. This meaning that in a way, man can choose and create their own fate. I agree with this, because after what they said about Karma, it is clear to me that they believe that everything is because of man. 
  • a possibility of this free choice of his own fate is not always available because of karma of all the civilization.
    • Matthew Schaffer
      Matthew Schaffer on 09 May 12
       
      Here they say that Fate may not always be possible. I think because someone may want a certain fate, but because of their strong belief in Karma, Karma will get in the way of their Fate
Daryl Bambic

Ion, by Plato - 0 views

www.gutenberg.org/...1635-h.htm

ion plato

shared by Daryl Bambic on 29 Jan 12 - No Cached
  • In the course of conversation the admission is elicited from Ion that his skill is restricted to Homer, and that he knows nothing of inferior poets, such as Hesiod and Archilochus;—he brightens up and is wide awake when Homer is being recited, but is apt to go to sleep at the recitations of any other poet.
  • he who knows the superior ought to know the inferior also;—he who can judge of the good speaker is able to judge of the bad.
  • and he who judges of poetry by rules of art ought to be able to judge of all poetry.'
  • ...23 more annotations...
  • The rhapsode is not guided by rules of art,
  • s inspired by the God
  • The poet is the inspired interpreter of the God
  • some poets, like Homer, are restricted to a single theme
  • Tynnichus, are famous for a single poem;
  • rhapsode is the inspired interpreter of the poet, and for a similar reason some rhapsodes, like Ion, are the interpreters of single poets.
  • Socrates asks whether he can speak well about everything in Homer
  • 'What about things of which he has no knowledge?
  • n answers that he can interpret anything in Homer.
  • Socrates
  • omer speaks of the arts, as for example, of chariot-driving
  • will he, or will the charioteer or physician or prophet or pilot be the better judge?
  • on is compelled to admit that every man will judge of his own particular art better than the rhapsode
  • , who has no suspicion of the irony of Socrates,
  • jest and earnest,
  • elements of a true theory of poetry are contained in the notion that the poet is inspired
  • Genius i
  • unconscious, or spontaneous, or a gift of nature:
  • They are sacred persons, 'winged and holy things' who have a touch of madness in their composition (Phaedr.),
  • reated with every sort of respect
  • The rhapsode belongs to the realm of imitation and of opinion: he professes to have all knowledge, which is derived by him from Homer, just as the sophist professes to have all wisdom, which is contained in his art of rhetoric.
  • he cannot explain the nature of his own art; his great memory contrasts with his inability to follow the steps of the argument
  • old quarrel between philosophy and poetry
Mason Brenhouse

What's Wrong with Taxation? - Tibor R. Machan - Mises Daily - 2 views

mises.org/1103

taxation wrong philosophy cons

shared by Mason Brenhouse on 23 Nov 10 - No Cached
  • Liberty is incompatible with taxation. This despite that famous saying by Oliver Wendell Holmes that "Taxation is the price we pay for civilization." In fact, taxation is a most uncivilized way of obtaining funds, given that it boils down to nothing less than extortion.
  • Not a lot of taxation, mind you, because it seemed pretty clear to the Founders that taxation is in fact extortion. But they didn't see some other, legitimate, morally acceptable way of collecting the funds needed to pay government for its service of securing our rights. Yet, they might have.
  • The first step is to acknowledge, unapologetically, that the institution of taxation is not a civilized but a barbaric method to fund anything, because it amounts to nothing less than outright extortion, a gross violation of human liberty.
  • Mason Brenhouse on 23 Nov 10
     
    Interesting, this article suggests that both taxation and liberty are incompatible. Therefore by association, not only does being taxed go against everyone's own liberty but it simply cannot function in a society that is based upon liberty. In fact taxation is essentially compared to extortion. It goes on to explain how people go to work in order to earn some money in order to live their lives. However, when the pay checks come in they have only received a fraction of what they were promised. Eventually it concludes by saying that taxation is in no way civilized but simply just barbaric. 
  • Daryl Bambic on 24 Nov 10
     
    Look at who these people are. Go to their home tab. This is the Austrian school of economics. Interesting.
Daryl Bambic

The Internet Classics Archive | Gorgias by Plato - 0 views

classics.mit.edu/...gorgias.html

gorgias

shared by Daryl Bambic on 09 Feb 14 - Cached
  • prolixity of speech
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 09 Feb 14
       
      Prolixity: taking too many words to say something, too much blah blah blah
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 09 Feb 14
       
      Definition:  using too many words to say something when it could have been said simpler and clearer.
  • Then, when the rhetorician is more persuasive than the physician, the ignorant is more persuasive with the ignorant than he who has knowledge?-is not that the inference?
  • gain the ears of the multitude on any subject, and this not by instruction but by persuasion?
  • ...17 more annotations...
  • does he really know anything of what is good and evil, base or honourable, just or unjust
  • he rhetorician need not know the truth about things
  • You say that you can make any man, who will learn of you, a rhetorician
  • rhetorician must either know the nature of the just and unjust already, or he must be taught by you.
  • that is not to be laid to the charge of his teacher, who is not to be banished, but the wrong-doer himself who made a bad use of his rhetoric-he is to be banished-was not that said?
  • that the rhetorician might make a bad use of rhetoric I noted with surprise the inconsistency into which you had fallen;
  • this habit I sum up under the word "flattery"
  • Soc. Will you understand my answer? Rhetoric, according to my view, is the ghost or counterfeit of a part of politics
  • assume the existence of bodies and of souls?
  • good condition o
  • only in appearance?
  • The soul and body being two,
  • art of politics attending on the soul; and another art attending on the body,
  • hat there are these four arts, two attending on the body and two on the soul for their highest good;
  • flattery knowing, or rather guessing their natures, has distributed herself into four shams or simulations of them; she puts on the likeness of some one or other of them, and pretends to be that which she simulates, and having no regard for men's highest interests, is ever making pleasure the bait of the unwary, and deceiving them into the belief that she is of the highest value to them.
  • the physician would be starved to death.
  • s the natural difference between the rhetorician and the sophist, but by reason of their near connection, they are apt to be jumbled up together; neither do they know what to make of themselves, nor do other men know what to make of them
Mason Brenhouse

UN Investigator Urges Probe of Alleged US Torture | CommonDreams.org - 1 views

www.commondreams.org/...27-2

torture philosophy UN

shared by Mason Brenhouse on 02 Nov 10 - No Cached
  • Nowak, an Austrian human rights lawyer who has been U.N. special rapporteur on torture for six years, called for an investigation of all allegations of U.S. torture and collusion with states that use torture since the fight against militants began in earnest after the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001.
  • Nowak also reiterated calls by him and other U.N. officials for the Obama administration to investigate reports from reams of leaked military documents showing U.S. troops killed Iraqi civilians or ignored prisoner abuse by Iraqis.
  • "What we need is a full investigation into torture practices by U.S. officials -- whether it's military officials, CIA officials or private security companies," he said, adding it should include those "who willingly and knowingly handed over detainees to other states" that torture. An ideal probe, Nowak said, would be conducted by a special prosecutor or panel of international experts.
  • Mason Brenhouse on 02 Nov 10
     
    Changes in the US torture policies. An Austrian human rights lawyer named Manfred Nowak works for the U.N. as a special rapporteur and has been doing so for six years. Nowak wants to have a full scale investigation done on what exactly is happening regarding their policies on torture. He questions exactly what the Obama administration is doing and hopes for an investigation. 
  • Kelsey Adams on 03 Nov 10
     
    I am so happy you found this information because after reading how U.S troops killed iraqi civilians and ignored prisoner abuse, I was in total shock. Nowak is doing a great thing fighting for the rights of humans because no one deserves torture, it only makes matters worse.
  • Ali Goldman on 03 Nov 10
     
    Manfred Nowak is trying to accomplish an amazing task and I greatly agree with what he is doing. I hope that this investigation happens regarding the policies of torture. Hopefully was can also see what Obama's administration is doing. Torture is never the answer.
Kelsey Adams

The Case for Animal Rights by Tom Regan - 2 views

www.animal-rights-library.com/...regan03.htm

shared by Kelsey Adams on 23 Nov 10 - No Cached
  • Kelsey Adams on 23 Nov 10
     
    This is an actual case which demonstrated the various points as to why the use of animals as a resource is wrong. Tom Reagan explains that the people who are against the right of animals believe that their only purpose in our world is to be eaten, surgically manipulated and to be exploited for sport or money. It even sounds awful to say such a thing.
  • ...2 more comments...
  • Daryl Bambic on 24 Nov 10
     
    Where is this from? This is a file on the web but who publishes it and who is Tom Regan?
  • Kelsey Adams on 30 Nov 10
     
    Tom Regan is an American philosopher who specializes in animal rights theory. He teaches at North Carolina State University. He is the author of numerous books on the philosophy of animal rights, including The Case for Animal Rights. His studies, books and cases have significantly influenced the modern animal liberation movement.
  • Kelsey Adams on 01 Dec 10
     
    I was not able to sticky note the page but here are some parts i would have highlighted: Singer and Frey both offer arguments that are motivated by utilitarian concerns Regan offers his own Rights View as an adequate moral theory: to respect the rights of an individual is to treat that individual as if she was inherently valuable rather than merely useful (improvement on utilitarianism) Nothing less than the abolition of using animals as food, in science, and in industry is morally acceptable according to Regan
  • Kelsey Adams on 01 Dec 10
Mason Brenhouse

Libertarian Party of Canada - 0 views

www.libertarian.ca/...libertarian-party-faq.html

libertarian taxation philosophy wrong

shared by Mason Brenhouse on 04 Dec 10 - No Cached
  • Government is force. Libertarians believe in a win-win voluntary society where people cooperate through trade and charity. The moral issue here is that Libertarians believe that it is not right to take forcefully from one person in order to provide for another's needs. Libertarians believe in minimizing taxation and funding government by other means if possible. Welfare for those in need should be provided through voluntary means. Forcing others to "give" is not just or generous. Government should not be deciding who needs welfare, because welfare is damaging to some people because it encourages dependency, lack of initiative, and poor planning. A free economy will produce more wealth for everyone. Taxation is robbing people of their wealth and the ability to invest that wealth in new business, which would benefit the poor.
  • Think of the possibilities for giving in a society with extremely low taxation. People are concerned about providing for their own families and living responsibly and they need to be free to make their own decisions with their money. Most people in our daily lives are good most of the time - otherwise society wouldn't function - we trust people enough as equals. However, the more power we give to others, the more skewed things become. As Lord Acton said, Power corrupts.
  • Mason Brenhouse on 04 Dec 10
     
    This is a site run by the Libertarians of Canada. They believe in minimizing the total amount of taxation. They also believe in the pricipal that someone's property is solely their's and no one else has the right to take it, even the government. 
steven bloom

Using Animals for Testing: Pro's Versus Con's - About Animal Testing (UK) - 1 views

www.aboutanimaltesting.co.uk/-testing-pros-versus-cons.html

shared by steven bloom on 22 Nov 10 - Cached
  • ssible by
  • It is for this reason that animal testing is considered vital for improving human health and it is also why the scientific community a
  • nd many members of the public support its use. In fact, there are also individuals who are against animal testing
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • for cosmetics but still support animal testing for medicine and the development of new drugs for disease.
  • Another important aspect to note is that animal testing helps to ensure the safety of drugs and many other substances humans use or are exposed to regularly. Drugs in particular can carry significant dangers with their use but animal testing allows researchers to initially gauge the safety of drugs prior to commencing trials on humans. This means that human harm is reduced and human lives are saved - not simply from avoidance of the dangers of drugs but because the drugs themselves save lives as well as improve the quality of human life.
  • osest match and
  • best one with regards to applying this data to humans.
  • Daryl Bambic on 24 Nov 10
     
    Please add your sticky note summary.
  • steven bloom on 03 Dec 10
     
    Thia website states the cons of animal testing. It says that when animals are finished being tested on they are usually killed. It also states that the cost of animal testing is through the roof and we can spend it on anything else. Lastly soem scientist still believe that it is unreliable to test animals and to think that the drug will work on humans.
Daryl Bambic

The Shrinking World of Ideas - The Chronicle Review - The Chronicle of Higher Education - 0 views

chronicle.com/...150141

ideas neuroscience

shared by Daryl Bambic on 25 Nov 14 - No Cached
  • To put it in the most basic terms: Our preferences, behaviors, tropes, and thoughts—the very stuff of consciousness—are byproducts of the brain’s activity. And once we map the electrochemical impulses that shoot between our neurons, we should be able to understand—well, everything. So every discipline becomes implicitly a neurodiscipline, including ethics, aesthetics, musicology, theology, literature, whatever.
  • If all behavior has an electrochemical component, then in what sense—psychological, legal, moral—is a person responsible for his actions?
  • neuroscience has put a new spin on free will and culpability:
  • ...8 more annotations...
  • all behavior is mechanical,
  • back to forces beyond the agent’s control."
  • British philosopher Roger Scruton
  • xception to the notion that neuroscience can explain us to ourselve
  • Sally Satel and Scott O. Lilienfeld’s Brainwashed: The Seductive Appeal of Mindless Neuroscience
  • The same questions that always intrigued us—What is justice? What is the good life? What is morally valid? What is free will?
  • neurohumanities
  • Now that psychoanalytic, Marxist, and literary theory have fallen from grace, neuroscience and evolutionary biology can step up
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 25 Nov 14
       
      This is the heart of it.
Daryl Bambic

Purdue OWL - 0 views

owl.english.purdue.edu/...724

papers paper argumentative

shared by Daryl Bambic on 20 May 15 - No Cached
  • A thesis is not an announcement of the subject:
  • A thesis is not a title
  • thesis is not a statement of absolute fact:
  • ...12 more annotations...
  • our main idea/claim/refutation/problem-solution expressed in a single sentence or a combination of sentences.
  • Try to be as specific as possible (without providing too much detail)
  • Induction is the type of reasoning that moves from specific facts to a general conclusion. When you use induction in your paper, you will state your thesis (which is actually the conclusion you have come to after looking at all the facts) and then support your thesis with the facts.
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 20 May 15
       
      Replace 'facts' with reasoning and logic for a philosophy paper.  
  • general premises and move to a specific conclusion
  • syllogistic reasoning (the syllogism)
  • Major premise Minor premise Conclusion
  • relationship of the two premises lead, logically, to the conclusion.
  • If you disagree with either of these premises, the conclusion is invalid.
  • So the unstated premise is “Only rich people have plasma TVs.
  • may also call for action
  • The preacher's maxim is one of the most effective formulas to follow for argument papers: Tell what you're going to tell them (introduction). Tell them (body). Tell them what you told them (conclusion).
Kayla Korman

Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide in Canada (91-9E) - 2 views

www2.parl.gc.ca/...919-e.htm

shared by Kayla Korman on 23 Nov 10 - No Cached
  • AIDS and Alzheimer’s disease;
  • n early times euthanasia was generally equated with suicide.
  • Euthanasia is the deliberate act undertaken by one person with the intention of ending the life of another person in order to relieve that person’s suffering.
  • ...11 more annotations...
  • he Criminal Code and Euthanasia
  • No person is entitled to consent to have death inflicted on him, and such consent does not affect the criminal responsibility of any person by whom death may be inflicted on the person by whom consent is given.
  • n the medical context, a doctor who, at a patient’s request, gives the patient a lethal injection would be criminally liable. A number of other provisions of the Criminal Code may also come into play, depending upon the circumstances; these provisions include:
  • B.  Legal Issues
  • Theoretically, one would expect euthanasia to be prosecuted as first-degree murder, because there is an intent to cause death, which is the definition of murder, and the act is most often planned and deliberate, which is the definition of first-degree murder
  • elieve suffering
  • Charges in Canada have ranged from administering a noxious substance, to manslaughter, to murder.
  •   Other Cases in Canada
  • eating disorders
  • weighed only 22 pounds,
  • was severely disabled and could not speak, being virtually non-communicative to all except her closest caregivers. 
  • Kayla Korman on 23 Nov 10
     
    This website talks about very important topics that we can bring up in our debate, such as the historical background of euthanasia, the Criminal Code concerning this topic and some cases and examples we've had in canada.
  • Daryl Bambic on 24 Nov 10
     
    You MUST highlight specific parts to bring your team's attention to an issue. Just bookmarking is not enough.
Daryl Bambic

The Science of Older and Wiser - Defining Wisdom | A Project of the University of Chica... - 0 views

wisdomresearch.org/...cience-of-older-and-wiser.aspx

wisdom insight older

shared by Daryl Bambic on 27 Mar 14 - No Cached
  • hat if you define wisdom as maintaining positive well-being and kindness in the face of challenges, it is one of the most important qualities one can possess to age successfully — and to face physical decline and death.
  • Vivian Clayton, a geriatric neuropsychologist in Orinda, Calif
  • she found that most people described as wise were decision makers.
  • ...41 more annotations...
  • name the characteristics of a wise person
  • hree key components: cognition, reflection and compassion.
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 27 Mar 14
       
      Cognition is the process of acquiring knowledge through thought and the senses.  Speed of cognition is only one aspect of this. 
  • Unfortunately, research shows that cognitive functioning slows as people age. But speed isn’t everything
  • quality of the information in the older brain is more nuanced
  • ore information people have in their brains, the more they can detect familiar patterns.
  • cognitive templates
  • pattern recognition,
  • the reflective dimension)
  • he compassionate dimension
  • Wisdom, she has found, is the ace in the hole that can help even severely impaired people find meaning, contentment and acceptance in later life.
  • more active than passive about dealing with hardship.
  • better coping skills
  • An impediment to wisdom is thinking, “I can’t stand who I am now because I’m not who I used to be,”
  • t’s an embracing acceptance,
  • accept reality as it is, with equanimity
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 27 Mar 14
       
      Equanimity: means being calm and emotionally stable, especially under stress. You might say, "going with the flow".
  • f things are really bad, it’s good to be wise,” she said.
  • an expert knowledge system concerning the fundamental pragmatics of life.
  • general wisdom
  • personal wisdom
  • five elements
  • elf-insight
  • personal growth
  • elf-awareness in terms of your historical era
  • priorities and values, including your own, are not absolute
  • awareness of life’s ambiguities.
  • oping strategy
  • better to be positive about life when you are older, she said,
  • a wise person would fully acknowledge mistakes and losses, and still try to improve.
  • involves recognizing the negative both within and outside
  • stress kindness
  • eduction in self-centeredness,
  • multiple perspectives,
  • people who rank high in neuroticism are unlikely to be wise,
  • amorphous trait
    • Daryl Bambic
      Daryl Bambic on 27 Mar 14
       
      Amorphous: hard to define, without a clear shape
  • If you are wise, she said, “You’re not only regulating your emotional state, you’re also attending to another person’s emotional state.
  • hat you can contribute
  • generativity,
  • Generativity means giving back without needing anything in return,
  • simplifying one’s life is also a sign of wisdom
  • Continuing education can be an important way to cultivate wisdom in the later years
Catherine Delisle

Non-religious arguments against Euthanasia - 3 views

www.starcourse.org/euthanasia.htm

shared by Catherine Delisle on 24 Nov 10 - No Cached
    • Catherine Delisle
      Catherine Delisle on 24 Nov 10
       
      This very credible web page is rich in arguments and has many clear and simple points that are very direct. There are a few points that I thought were more important than others. The first point was that assisting suicide was goes against law and public morality, which means that it is against social values. Also, they mentioned that if someone really wants to die, it may be "due to depression or misapprehension of their prognosis". Euthanasia is also irreversible. Some people can act on things while going through a tough time in their lives. Not only that, but euthenasia would create social pressures on vulnerable people. Euthenasia would also ruin relationships between elders and their children. Often, elders are seen as a burden, and with the option of euthanasia, they will feel pressured not to be a burden anymore. Lastly, the relationship between the doctor and the patient would be ruined. Patients would be afraid that they would be euthanised against their will, which is a real situation in Holland.
  • sara tsapekis on 24 Nov 10
     
    This website is straight to the point, and I like that it gives the reasons in point form, making the reading easy to understand. Many reasons given in the website are justifiable. The first reason, for example, which was that legalizing killing undermines public morality, is a very strong point.
  • sydney goldman on 30 Nov 10
     
    I think that this site is extremely easy to understand and makes some really good strong points against euthanasia that are not easily argued. it shows points from different aspects like health reasons, moral reasons, governmental reasons etc... all of these form a nice barrier that covers all of the possible argument that the other team will make.
Kelsey Adams

The Animal Rights View - 2 views

www.furcommission.com/...rights.htm

shared by Kelsey Adams on 23 Nov 10 - No Cached
  • The capacity for suffering is a prerequisite for having interests at all, a condition that must be met before we can speak of rights.
  • In both the historic and modern views of animal rights, the key point is "sentience," or the capacity to experience pain or pleasur
  • In the animal rights view, if a being is capable of suffering, there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • They don't have to speak a word. Screaming, writhing about, crying and other behavior tells us they are in pain. We see the same sort of behavior in animals.
  • Kelsey Adams on 23 Nov 10
     
    This website gives us the utilitarian point of view on how animal cruelty and their use as resource is continuously horrid. Jeremy Bentham said that as long as a being is capable of suffering, then there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration. He said that the question is not can animals reason but do animals suffer?
  • Daryl Bambic on 24 Nov 10
     
    Highlight an important part(s) of the website for your team to read.
  • vince chatigny-barbosa on 05 Dec 10
     
    What affects us the most in our society: Suffering of a infant or the suffering of an animal? Obviously, we would rather an animal suffer opposed to an infant. If someone has to suffer, it should be animals because it the extreme is outrageous.
1 - 20 of 115 Next › Last »
Showing 20▼ items per page