Thus, the only time a person can be sure he is right is if he is constantly open to differing opinions; there must be a standing invitation to try to disprove his beliefs. Second, there is the criticism that governments have a duty to uphold certain beliefs that are important to the well being of society. Only "bad" men would try to undermine these beliefs. Mill replies that this argument still relies on an assumption of i... ... middle of paper ... ...s beliefs are not reflected in their conduct. As a result, people do not truly understand the doctrines they hold dear, and their misunderstanding leads to serious mistakes.
Because the culture’s believing don’t have a methodological discipline, we had to learn to not trust believing and believing can seem a scary word. The believing game is not much honored.”Summerized from The Believing Game Peter Elbow “people learned systematic doubting with its logic reasoning and critical thinking, we might forget what believing
Since our feelings fail to eliminate the doubt set in our minds because they are limited and undependable, we turn to reason through ideas to comprehend our thoughts. We become so unsure due to the factors that come into play when making a decision. Doubt can cause strong minds to flutter therefore making us question the credibility of our feelings. Allowing doubt to seep through, leads to a never ending battle of thoughts. Can I really trust my feelings?
In certain circumstances and situations, I truly believe it is ok to lie. Initially, it is extremely beneficial to lie, rather than hurt the feelings of a loved one. Equally important, if you are trying to protect someone from getting impaired, it is okay to lie in order to keep them safe. Last but not least, exaggerations can help boost people’s self-esteem by making them exceptional. William Blake once said “A truth that's told with bad intent beats all the lies you can invent.” I urge you to question if honesty is really the best route, or is it okay to lie sometimes.
Perhaps, when the poet Charles Bukowski said "the more crap you believe, the better off you are," he realized that such an extensive doubt can be harmful to the majority of people, because they are in fact "better off" believing in their senses, their God, and their ability to determine whether they are sleeping or awake. It is possible that it may be beneficial to live and die being deceived, and be ignorant to that deception, than to live and die searching for truth where truth may not be found, for the true determinant to whether such an extensive skepticism is beneficial or necessary depends on the individual. Neither Descartes nor Bukowski can speak for anyone other than themselves.
In trying to make their writing seem like a work of art, some novice writers fall into the trap of vague writing because they are concealing their true opinion on the subject from their readers or they simply know nothing about the subject. This can be remedied by researching more about the topic and by stating clearly what one's true opinion on the subject is. As a result, readers would be able to understand where the novice writer got his opinions and therefore make their own judgments as to whether they agree or disagree with his sentiments.
Though this event had a lot of support, the arguments by the skeptics could not be ignored. Some people questioned the video footage a... ... middle of paper ... ... But at the same time, too less skepticism would also cause problems, too less skepticism would mean that a person is optimistic and therefore, will be positive to accept any source of knowledge that comes to him. However, if optimism exceeds the limits, the person may have the tendency to become gullible rather than open-minded. In that case, one has to have some elements of skepticism to certain extent.
People do not know me or my intentions and their split judgment of my intentions is based off of either past experiences or trusted established generalities (regardless of how false they may be), therefore why should they trust me. In extreme terms and in their minds, if they are wrong and they avoid or accuse me they cannot be the victim…if they fight their instinct on principle alone there is still a possibility they will become a victim. No one wants to be a victim. If it is essential that someone trusts me, then I do just as the author did and demonstrate some type of tension relief. While not fair, If I desire to be perceived differently, then it is my responsibility to change my posture, gestures, stance etc.
Problems begin when the people in the relationship forget to realize when to draw the line and focus on what is truly important, which unfortunately to them might not always be the other person relationship or the relationship itself. When a problem aris... ... middle of paper ... ...serve it? He still couldn't understand. That thing in the Dumpster--and he refused to call it human, let alone a baby. (622-623)" Jeremy had formed the opinion in his psyche that he had done the right thing by getting rid of his child, he began to make justifications for his action in saying that it was just another unwanted child in an overpopulated world.
In cases involving benevolent lies many argue these lies are “good lies” because they aren’t causing immediate harm or danger to anyone. Hill contends benevolent lies are wrong not only because they’re a lie, but they violate autonomy. Hill points out autonomy is morally important because it helps explain the right and wrong of different actions. When a benevolent lie is told it interferes with a person’s autonomy by depriving them of knowledge. The knowledge deprives them from the options open to them in the given situation.