Descartes first meditation included a few arguments that Descartes studied and analyze. The one I choose to analyze was his argument of sense deception. The actually argument is the following: (1) My senses sometimes deceive me. (2) If my senses sometimes deceive me, then they might always deceive me. (3) If my senses might always deceive me, then I cannot be certain about any beliefs acquired through my senses. (4) If I cannot be certain about any beliefs acquired through my senses, then I must
In his speech, Brutus appeals to the loyalism of his audience by making intertwining arguments of ethos, pathos, and logos. He begins by establishing his ethos by asserting his status as an honorable fellow Roman worthy of their respect. He expands on this ethos by dividing it into three parts: his love of Caesar, his loyalty to Rome, and his relationship to his audience. Brutus tells his audience that he was a “dear friend” to the man he murdered, invoking a pathetic sense of sympathy from his
Melos. The debate did not really occur-the arguments given by each side were of Thucydides own creation. Thus it is reasonable to assume that we can tease out Thucydides' own beliefs. In this paper, I will first extract Thucydides views from the Melian Dialogue and then analyze whether or not these views are well founded. Thucydides believed that the Athenians had the stronger argument. Proof of this lies in the way Thucydides picked the arguments for each side. For the moment, we will disregard
The Pros and Cons of Welfare Reform There have been numerous debates within the last decade over what needs to be done about welfare and what is the best welfare reform plan. In the mid-1990s the TANF, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Act was proposed under the Clinton administration. This plan was not received well since it had put a five year lifetime limit on receiving welfare and did not supply the necessary accommodations to help people in poverty follow this guideline. Under
Recently, we’ve been introduced to Jason Kawall’s argument for the theory of Biocentric Individualism (BI). In this paper, I intend to state Kawall’s argument for the theory, explain the premises and conclusions of the argument, and evaluate the argument using an objection raised and responded to by Kawall himself. My thesis in this paper is that Kawall presents a strong cogent argument for biocentric individualism. The argument begins by asserting (in premise one) that it is morally preferable to
and justice that is recognized as universally recognized standard. Parties or individuals who are seeking to attain high grounds always refuse to act in ways which are treated either as morally defensible or legitimate. In order to win a certain argument or produce a critique of something, an individual may use the perspective of “Gai...
it is contained in the argument between Tom Regan and R.G. Frey. Regan maintains that “all who have inherent value have it equally” (Regan 66). Frey, conversely, maintains that not all lives can be of equal inherent value since the potential for enrichment is not equal for all lives. Taking both arguments into consideration, the remainder of this paper will attempt to reconcile these arguments, suggesting that a sensible compromise is possible. Regan supports his argument with the following premises
In fact, these three arguments are related to each other and cannot stand on their own to draw Plato 's final conclusion that the human soul is immortal. The recollection argument is the most interesting one because of Plato 's way to draw the final conclusion of the argument. Plato 's premises for the recollection argument follow an irrefutable logic. Therefore, the argument is logically valid. However, the soundness of the argument can be put into question since there are gaps
ideal choice, if instead we the people treat it as a form of therapy and not punishment and treat these offenders as victims not monsters, then maybe one day this will allow castration to be a viable sex offender treatment. He also went on to say that we should help these offenders instead of seeking revenge on them.On the other hand, another Attorney Kari A. Vanderzyl believes that castration of sex offenders should not be allowed. Her main argument is that the castration of sex offenders is not unacceptable
1. Money is both a necessary and useful instrument for justice in society because it establishes a proportional form of exchange, it acts as a medium to mediate exchange and enable supply and demand between people of different avocations thus promoting justice in society as well prompting injustice in society. 2. Money being necessary and a useful instrument for justice in society is relevant to the individual person because money allows and “guarantees” the individual to purchase and sell amongst
release books that are intended for the large teenage audiences. However these books have unintentionally become popular with adult readers who have been drawn into these book franchises, such as The Hunger Games, Harry Potter, and Twilight. The argument within the article, Adults Should Read Adult Books, focuses on the growing number of adults reading young adult fiction and the consequences of this trend. While many people would argue that the genre of a book should not dictate readership, the
For this essay, I will evaluate the Employee Loyalty Argument derived from ‘Whistleblowing and Employee Loyalty’ by Ronald Duska. I will argue that this Employee Loyalty Argument is deductively valid but is not deductively sound because premise 2 is false. I will justify my claims that premise 2 is false by arguing about how it is rational for employees to expect their companies to recognize and fulfill a duty of loyalty to their employees if the employees also have a duty of loyalty to the companies
him from a car accident. (2) This argument is not valid. The argument is not valid because there could be another possible explanation for the strong tap on his shoulder, or the unknown force that pushed the car into the other lane.. I believe that this argument is invalid because of the lack of potential possibilities that could be a factor when regarding this situation. However, it is a strong argument depending on whom you are arguing against.
Arguments are weakened when the conclusion does not go along with the premises. An informal fallacy is a mistake in reasoning that occurs in ordinary language and is different from an error in the form or structure of arguments. There are three categories of informal fallacy; fallacies of relevance, fallacies of unwarranted assumption, and fallacy of ambiguity. For the purpose of this research, I will only focus on fallacies of unwarranted assumption and fallacy of ambiguity. An assumption is a
Topic 3 For this paper I will break down the following argument in terms of validity and soundness: If an argument has a true conclusion, then it is both valid and sound. If an argument is sound, then it is valid. An argument will have a true conclusion if it is sound. An argument has a false conclusion only if it is valid. If an argument has a false conclusion, then it is invalid. An argument is both valid and invalid. Therefore, an argument is sound if and only if it is sound. I have prepared
present arguments for the existence of absolute justice. Many people disagree that absolute justice exists. Thus they argue that justice cannot be derived from nature since contradictory and different forms of justice exist in nature; and one cannot derive the greater and perfect from the lesser and imperfect, also they argue that the idea of absolute justice is the ideas of different cultures and times. That is why the idea of justice varies greatly from one culture to the next. The argument used to
materialism lacking semantics and real-world interaction, offers an explanatory basis for human comprehension. The main purpose of this paper is to discuss and compare different views regarding computationalism, and the arguments associated with these views. The two main arguments I feel are the strongest are proposed by Andy Clark, in “Mindware: Meat Machines”, and John Searle in “Minds, Brains, and Programs.” Andy Clark strongly argues for the theory that computers have the potential for being intelligent
"false cause" is completely irrelevant. Trump assumes that because the others candidates didn 't notice that the AC wasn 't working, as a result they will not know how to run a country or even defeat United States from the ISIS. I don 't think this argument is effective because a physical equipment has nothing to do with beginning a leader for a
of developing this appeal, he also includes appeals to both logos and pathos, making his argument something more than a simple tug on the heartstrings. Though not without its problems, this essay presents a strong argument in favor of the benefits of violent media such as comic books. Recent events have driven the debate over violence into the center of the national attention once again. There are many arguments
Neglected Argument for the Reality of God ABSTRACT: Charles S. Peirce sketches "a nest of three arguments for the Reality of God" in his article "A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God." I provide careful analysis and explication of Peirce's argument, along with consideration of some objections. I argue that (1) there are significant differences between Peirce's neglected argument and the traditional arguments for God's existence; (2) Peirce's analysis of the neglected argument into three