conscientiousness is the act of caring about truth and getting proof of that truth. Conscientiousness is an epistemic virtue because through this act, a person can carefully make sure that their thoughts or conclusions are correct. In this paper, I will discuss the vices of conscientiousness, such as a person’s demands for proof being either too high or too low; while also discussing the virtues of conscientiousness, such as a person being able to draw the theoretical line in-between what is too much
which, given human psychology, entails global skepticism. His responses to the charge of skepticism, restricting premise three to basic beliefs and noting that the Rule does not require ‘explicit’ belief, fail. Moreover, the Rule does not express an epistemic duty. Finally, his argument against this fails since it is false that if an experiential state has representational content, then it is in need of justification. I venture the diagnosis that BonJour mistook the representational content of a cognitive
count as a priori. Then, I show that under various possible construals of a priori, the incompatibilist argument would be invalid: either a fallacy of equivocation or an argument without a plausible closure principle guaranteeing transmission of epistemic status from premises to conclusion. Finally, I maintain that the only possible construal of the property of being knowable a priori that avoids invalidity is one that fails to generate the intended reductio. I Compatibilism, or the attempt
Epistemology, the question of what is meant by an epistemic virtue and how does open-mindedness qualify as virtue. In Epistemology, there is a binding relationship between self-trust and self-knowledge. Zagzebski raises the question of what the relationship is and clearly explains that we cannot have one without the other. Riggs, another philosopher of Epistemology, wrote an article speaking about open-mindedness. Riggs explains how he understands the virtue of open-mindedness and the qualifications and
proof of an external world. In opposition to Moore’s opinions will be found three main arguments: firstly that all of Moore’s evidence is based upon sensory input, secondly that the truth of one fact based on the truth of another fact forms an Epistemic Circle in this case, and finally that the evidence out forth by Moore, even if proved, does not necessarily prove the fact that he is attempting to prove. Moore’s “Proof of an External World” is based on the fact that he has two hands. Moore’s
according to which it is a sufficient condition for visual perception that subjects receive visual information in a way which enables them to give reliably correct answers about the objects presented to them. According to this view, blindsight, non-epistemic seeing, and conscious visual experience count as proper types of visual perception. This leads to two consequences concerning the role of the phenomenal qualities of visual experiences. First, phenomenal qualities are not necessary in order to see
restricting, but it’s a necessary skill to have for the future, particularly when it comes to writing essays. Once students have mastered form, they will discover that they actually do have a lot of freedom in expressing their views within it. The epistemic model can be difficult because one always has to keep audience in mind, but it is also very useful, and shows students that their writing can make a difference. Certainly teaching students how to write convincing editorials, petitions, or letters
(Greco 1). Now, this is categorically a 'virtue reliabilist' or more specifically, an 'agent reliabilist' claim. The purpose of this paper to analyze Greco's virtue reliablism. Moreover, to articulate one strong objection to Greco's view and to argue that Greco's defense of virtue reliablism fails. Specifically, the argument will be made that the newly instantiated 'Sea Race Objection' example effectively refutes Greco's version of virtue reliablism. Greco's Virtue Reliabilism- Greco contends that, “
What is Virtue Epistemology? This paper functions as a brief introduction to virtue epistemology, a topic that has enjoyed a recent gain in popularity among analytic philosophers. Here I maintain that the defining feature of virtue epistemology is its focus on the intellectual virtues and vices rather than the evaluation of belief. What constitutes such a focus? And, what are the intellectual virtues? In the first section, I enumerate five different ways in which virtue epistemologists might focus
Self-Worth and Moral Knowledge I argue that persons are unlikely to have moral knowledge insofar as they lack certain moral virtues; that persons are commonly deficient in these virtues, and hence that they are regularly unlikely to have adequate moral knowledge. I propose a version of this argument that employs a broad conception of self-worth, a virtue found in a wide range of moral traditions that suppose a person would have an appropriate sense of self-worth in the face of tendencies both
The philosopher, Linda Zagzebski, offers a virtue based definition of knowledge. She arrives at this definition by presenting numerous accounts of knowledge definitions that fail, explore why they fail, then shows how her theory satisfies knowledge criteria. Zagzebski defines knowledge by expressing the relationship between the subject and the truth proposition. A truth claim becomes knowledge when your state of belief makes cognitive contact with reality. What it is to know that you understand
Virtue and Patience In order to survive these days, there need to be at least some standards and goals of morality in a person's life. Moral excellence is definitely hard to achieve, but is something worth while to attempt. Personally, there are many distractions and obstructions the present day provides, creating a difficulty of direction in my own life. I need to overcome obstacles such as peer pressure in order to become a confident, successful person. The present day provides impediments
Aristotle's Views on Citizenship For Aristotle the human is "by nature" destined to live in a political association. Yet not all who live in the political association are citizens, and not all citizens are given equal share in the power of association. The idea of Polity is that all citizens should take short turns at ruling (VII, 1332 b17-27). It is an inclusive form of government: everyone has a share of political power. Aristotle argues that citizen are those who are able to participate in
Aristotle’s eyes (Russell McNeil). However he does distinguish between different types of friendship. Friendships for Aristotle can be divided into three main categories. 1. Friendships of Utility 2. Friendships of Pleasure 3. Friendships of Virtue. 1. Friendships of Utility Friendships of utility are based on people who are useful to each other. This is the sole reason behind them being friends. A good example of a friendship of utility might be the relationship between a car salesman
Courage ?Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak, Courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen? Courage is the thing which can be found in a child to an old man. It needs a lot of courage to take out courage from the heart. It is like a brain. It depends on the person, how and when he uses it. This tiny word has the power to convey the whole gesture of a person. According to Harper Lee?s genius ?To Kill a Mockingbird?, Courage is when you know you are licked before you begin
Action and reaction are the very threads that make up the fabric of our universe, conflicting forces that wage war against each other in hopes of gaining the upper hand and overcoming the other. Virtue versus desire, faith versus logic, tradition versus change, light versus darkness, (Republicans versus Democrats,) and good versus evil-all opposing facets of their respective fields that switch off control in a never-ending dance of push and pull. We witness one of these never-ending dances first
Some may agree with Aristotle's view of friendship. He classifies friendship into three categories: friendship for utility, pleasure, or virtue. Aristotle says a virtuous friendship is when you wish good things for the other person. Is this all that constitutes a true friendship or is there more to it? What exactly is a virtuous person? For Aristotle virtue is expressed in action. Virtuous actions are about giving what one deserves. “a virtuous friend seems to be naturally desirable for a
Death Be Not Proud by John Gunther is a classic work of literary merit. The genre of the memoir is one that will never die. The life of young Johnny Gunther takes place in the 1940’s, but the courage and wisdom he portrays can be understood forever. The message Johnny sends will endure the test of time. Johnny Gunther goes through countless surgeries, hospital visits, and painful illness. Yet, despite his troubles, Johnny is surprisingly upbeat and optimistic. It is not that he is naive, it is simply
during this time. One of the many is Benjamin Franklin, he wrote what he felt or what he was thinking or doing with his life. In his autobiography he spoke of the “thirteen names of virtues.” (131) This was the type of discipline that he tried to follow, and it required restraint on his part to try to follow these virtues. “1. TEMPERANCE Eat not to dullness; drink not to elevation.” “2. SLIENCE Speak not but what may benefit other or yourself; avoid trifling conversation.” “3. ORDER Let all your
First it explains the thought with particular emotional effectiveness. Second it conveys Hamlet’s character, both virtue and tragic fear. Lastly, it marks the beginning of the tragic discovery and Hamlet’s downfall, answering the question “why does Hamlet delay?” Observing the beginning of Hamlet’s downfall and tragic discovery in this passage, which happens despite his many virtues, maximizes the pity and fear at the same time. The first contribution is that this passage conveys Hamlet’s thoughts