This assignment submission deals with the advantages and drawbacks of intellectual autonomy and intellectual solidarity on the basis of the arguments from David Hume, Thomas Reid and Immanuel Kant as presented on the video lectures of this class. I also make the claim that many of the advantages and drawbacks discussed by Hume, Reid and Kant correspond to advantages and drawbacks experienced by any self-regulating system that is developing towards either a greater degree of specialization (intellectual solidarity) or a greater degree of diversification (intellectual autonomy). In the discussion between Hume and Reid a central question was how much weight to put on testimony. Both agreed that testimony is an extremely important tool in the pursuit of knowledge, but they strongly disagreed on it's correct application. Hume argued that in order to avoid false beliefs you shoudn't trust a testimony unless you have evidence that the testifier is likely to be right. Reid thought that distrusting testimonies was generally putting obstacles on the social pursuit of knowledgeand you should generally trust them. For Kant any use testimony to avoid having to do your own thinking was an inferior path to take to begin with. Avoiding the need to do your own thinking could certainly be seen as an advantage as well. If we assume (like Hume and Reid seem to agree) that pursuit for knowledge is a community effort then taking your peers word for truth in something allows you to focus your own thinking on something else and, assuming limited time and limited capacity, reach higher results than you could have been able to reach without such specialization. Especially Reid argues that not capitalizing on this advantage would "place us ... ... middle of paper ... ...nization of human societies, in the financial investment decisions, in agriculture, etc. so it shouldn't be surprising that it is present in the pursuit of knowledge as well. A religious or scientific authority could easily challenge my claim and say that the truth is not a matter of opinion and that knowingly allowing false beliefs to develop in your community can never serve the purpose of gaining a more reliable understanding. It would be equally easy for an anarchist to demand the full freedom for everybody to make up their own minds. The unfair response would be to appeal to the extreme cases mentioned above, but even in a more moderate tone it is possible to remind the authoritarians of all the right choices made for the wrong reasons but leading to unexpected results and remind the anarchist that intellectual solidarity does not imply intellectual coersion.
The aim of this essay is to prove the reliability of and why Libertarianism is the most coherent of the three views, which refers to the idea of human free will being true, that one is not determined, and therefore, they are morally responsible. In response to the quote in the essay, I disagree with Wolf. This essay will be further strengthened with the help of such authors as C.A. Campbell, R. Taylor and R.M. Chisholm. They present similar arguments, which essentially demonstrate that one could have done otherwise and one is the sole author of the volition. I will present the three most common arguments in support of Libertarianism, present an objection against Libertarianism and attempt to rebut it, as well as reject one main argument from the other.
The reconciliation between social structure and personal autonomy has become a key problem in the world today. Dorothy Lee addresses the difficulty to comply these two broad areas in order for them to work in accordance to one another. It is known that every individual has the capacity to act upon free will however in conformity with society to achieve the greater good. Dorothy Lee explores the importance of human dignity and how every person is entitled to rights and obligations to become essential parts of society. She tends to distinguish the differences from a holistic outlook from that of an individualistic perspective comparing “principles of conformity and individual initiative, group living and private freedom of choice, social regulation and personal autonomy.” (15) The key social problem being discussed limits us from our full potential due to our constant stimulation by how society wishes on socializing us. Society’s intentions of nurturing individuals to behave a certain way does have it’s restraints on personal freedom which is depicted as the dilemma that Dorothy Lee intends on deciphering.
Individualism is considered to have many meanings, such as individual rights and freedoms, economic freedom and equality, self-interest, and can also be expressed as one’s self. The three sources depict the idea of individuals and the roles they hold in society and how it is being manipulated.
Kant is a deontological philosopher; that is, in examining morality he says that the ends must not be looked at, only the means. Kant began by carefully drawing a pair of crucial distinctions among the judgments we do actually make. The first distinction separates a priori from a posteriori judgments by reference to the origin of our knowledge of them. A priori judgments are statements for which there is no appeal to experience in order to dertermine what is true and false. A posteriori judgments, on the other hand, are statements in which experience determines how we discover the truth or falsity of the statement. Thus, this distinction also marks the difference traditionally noted in logic between necessary and contingent truths.
The opponent may say that people’s thinking may be limited because of keep depending on others’ ideas. But actually, it will help to widen people thinking as if a person listens to others, he can review on a subject from different kinds of thoughts and way of thinking. For instance, in the situation when Bruce agreed to join Bejan going to the club. He felt it was okay to wear his formal office attire to go there, but it was not okay for Bejan. Consequently, Bejan chose a silk shirt, cotton vest, linen trousers and synthetic socks for Bruce to wear. As a result, Bruce appeared to be more prominent than usual (Cuban Fury). Just imagine how bored the life it is if everyone has the same way of thinking? Everything will be the same if we turn right, left, up and down. Besides that, more new knowledge will be gained if listen to others. In Cuban Fury, Bruce got to know about how to tackle a woman from his friend, Gary who was already married. He said Bruce need to attract the girl’s attention and try to start a conversation with her. Bruce, who was has no idea about the ways to approach a girl found it out by listening to his friend. Clearly, broaden way of thinking and new understanding gained will be the result of noting others’
A Scottish philosopher, David Hume, came up with an argument that tested if Natural Law is able to actually allow humans to gain moral knowledge. He stated, "There are only two sorts of claims: conceptual truths or empirical truths." A conceptual truth is something that can be known just by understanding it, and an empirical truth is only known by relying on our five senses to have knowledge. Natural Law contests his argument, by acknowledging that humans must know what their human nature is, and knows whether an assortment of actions fulfills it.
Up to this part, I agree with Hume. However, when he goes on talking about his allegations against those who believe and tell the story about miracles, I could agree with him anymore. Hume thinks that the person who tells and listens to the miraculous story works for the other party, “their credulity increase his impotence, and his impudence overpowers their credulity”(88). As discussed earlier, Hume mentioned the relationship between eyewitness and historian. He needs two opposing competitions to get the conclusion. Yet I think the answer may not even exist on either side.
Respect for Autonomy – Respect the patient’s right to make their own decisions. Provide patients with information needed to make an independent and educated medical decision. Autonomy requires that medical professionals provide all the information needed for an informed consent, withholding absolutely no information.
All human actions and responses are influenced by someone or something. For humans, being independent is an unrealistic claim. Claiming to be a completely free and independent individual sounds naive . To be independent means being free from outside control. Humans claim to be a part of a free society, as free individuals, making independent choices, but they’re wrong. In the article, “Group Minds,” Doris Lessing provides a clear argument against the concept of human’s claim to independence. Lessing’s article is an attempt to make the public aware of outside pressures and the reality of our naive claim to individualism and independence.
One’s autonomy is the most important factor about life, meaning that you should not manipulate others to get what you, personally, want. “Always treat an individual as an end-in-itself, never as a means to an end,” this was the mentality for Kant, in which he believes the key factor towards everyone
The topic of free will has been greatly debated by philosophers. It is important to understand freedom especially in terms of responsibility. Whether our actions come from our complete free will or our actions are caused by external factors is vital to our judiciary systems. In this essay, I will firstly discuss Locke’s compatibilist argument as well as his analysis that we are free if we do what we will. Secondly, Hume’s analysis that with better definitions of freedom we will all conclude that the world is necessary. Thirdly, Kant’s argument that freedom cannot exist in the empirical world, but can coexist with necessity if we consider it as in the world of things-in-themselves. Finally, I will compare then analyze their arguments of freedom
Indeed, even self-intrigued independence itself is a type of socially composed reliance in which individuals arrange their cooperation with reference to models of "self-expression" and "self-regard"— which are socially proficient, socially showed, and situated to social qualities. Calculative, focused models of "progress" and "accomplishment" are not any more regular and not any more central than social models of charitable minding; all are socially characterized and accepted. socially defined and validated.
Autonomy is our ability to be self-directed, independent and free from outside control. Independence contributes to the sense of competence and successful working relationships with others. Daniel Pink’s book Drive explores the topic of autonomy and how this concept relates to human motivation through illustrating examples from his own and others experiences and others. Through student’s scholastic endeavors, students receive a blend of autonomous and non-autonomous classes with teachers offering some freedoms or classes with strict guidelines. While in middle school students go from class to class each having their own rules and requirements, in high school they can choose between a few classes usually electives but other than that it still
Education is very important in the development of our future. Scholars spent many years of their life in an educational environment because it provides the tools that scholars need to be successful on their own. However, educational institutions fail to encourage those who are “street” smart of their intellectual potential and undervalue them. Scholars will be more inclined to reach their intellectual potential if they were encouraged to practice with the subjects that interest them. Thus, “street” smart and “book” smart have different intellectual potential and they apply it differently to the subjects that interest them.
Some people say that the definition of independence is a complex word and idea to try to define. In al truth independence is a perplexing word to try to define. This is because everybody has their own speculations of what independence is. Very infrequently are their two people that have the same perception of what the definition of independence is. What I perceive the definition of independence is the absolute freedom to do what you want, and to not be held back by any rules or laws of government or man, but by the rules and laws of nature and your own self concise. My view of independence may greatly differ form your beliefs on the definition but in this paper I will try to show exactly what my perspective on the definition of independence is by my experiences, my beliefs, my thoughts, and research on the subject at hand.