Uncategorized Essay plato normative function Hero function essay.
The nature of epistemology Epistemology as a discipline Why should there be a discipline such as epistemology?
Aristotle — bce provided the answer when he said that philosophy begins in a kind of wonder or puzzlement. Nearly all human beings wish to comprehend the world they live in, and many of them construct theories of various kinds to help them make sense of it.
Because many aspects of the world defy easy explanationhowever, most people are likely to cease their efforts at some point and to content themselves with whatever degree of understanding they have managed to achieve. Unlike most people, philosophers are captivated—some would say obsessed—by the idea of understanding the world in the most general terms possible.
Accordingly, they attempt to construct theories that are synoptic, descriptively accurate, explanatorily powerful, and in all other respects rationally defensible.
In doing so, they carry the process of inquiry further than other people tend to do, and this is what is meant by saying that they develop a philosophy about such matters. Like most people, epistemologists often begin their speculations with the assumption that they have a great deal of knowledge.
As they reflect upon what they presumably know, however, they discover that it is much less secure than they realized, and indeed they come to think that many of what had been their firmest beliefs are dubious or even false.
Two of those anomalies will be described in detail here in order to illustrate how they call into question common claims to knowledge about the world.
Two epistemological problems Knowledge of the external world Most people have noticed that vision can play tricks. A straight stick submerged in water looks bent, though it is not; railroad tracks seem to converge in the distance, but they do not; and a page of English-language print reflected in a mirror cannot be read from left to right, though in all other circumstances it can.
Each of those phenomena is misleading in some way. Anyone who believes that the stick is bent, that the railroad tracks converge, and so on is mistaken about how the world really is.
Although such anomalies may seem simple and unproblematic at first, deeper consideration of them shows that just the opposite is true. How does one know that the stick is not really bent and that the tracks do not really converge? Suppose one says that one knows that the stick is not really bent because when it is removed from the water, one can see that it is straight.
But does seeing a straight stick out of water provide a good reason for thinking that when it is in water, it is not bent? Suppose one says that the tracks do not really converge because the train passes over them at the point where they seem to converge.
But how does one know that the wheels on the train do not converge at that point also? What justifies preferring some of those beliefs to others, especially when all of them are based upon what is seen?
What one sees is that the stick in water is bent and that the stick out of water is straight. Why, then, is the stick declared really to be straight?
Why, in effect, is priority given to one perception over another? One possible answer is to say that vision is not sufficient to give knowledge of how things are. But what justifies the belief that the sense of touch is more reliable than vision? After all, touch gives rise to misperceptions just as vision does.
For example, if a person chills one hand and warms the other and then puts both in a tub of lukewarm water, the water will feel warm to the cold hand and cold to the warm hand.
Thus, the difficulty cannot be resolved by appealing to input from the other senses. Another possible response would begin by granting that none of the senses is guaranteed to present things as they really are. The belief that the stick is really straight, therefore, must be justified on the basis of some other form of awareness, perhaps reason.
But why should reason be accepted as infallible? It is often used imperfectly, as when one forgets, miscalculates, or jumps to conclusions.
Moreover, why should one trust reason if its conclusions run counter to those derived from sensation, considering that sense experience is obviously the basis of much of what is known about the world?
Clearly, there is a network of difficulties here, and one will have to think hard in order to arrive at a compelling defense of the apparently simple claim that the stick is truly straight. A person who accepts this challenge will, in effect, be addressing the larger philosophical problem of knowledge of the external world.
That problem consists of two issues: The other-minds problem Suppose a surgeon tells a patient who is about to undergo a knee operation that when he wakes up he will feel a sharp pain.
When the patient wakes up, the surgeon hears him groaning and contorting his face in certain ways.
Although one is naturally inclined to say that the surgeon knows what the patient is feeling, there is a sense in which she does not know, because she is not feeling that kind of pain herself.Thucydides vs Plato Essay Thucydides versus Plato Thucydides versus Plato on the nature of the Good Life Plato and Thucydides both had strikingly different views on their approach on the good life.
Some have claimed that Plato is making normative claims, whereas Thucydides is . Epistemology, the philosophical study of the nature, origin, and limits of human benjaminpohle.com term is derived from the Greek epistēmē (“knowledge”) and logos (“reason”), and accordingly the field is sometimes referred to as the theory of knowledge.
Epistemology has a long history within Western philosophy, beginning with the ancient Greeks and continuing to the present. Hero function essay. · Plato ( B.C.) and Aristotle ( B.) were the two early Greek political philosophers who made far-reaching and lasting essay plato normative function contribution in the.
Few philosophers in ancient and modern history continue to have as much influence as Plato. More than years after Plato’s death.
Immanuel Kant (–) is the central figure in modern philosophy. He synthesized early modern rationalism and empiricism, set the terms for much of nineteenth and twentieth century philosophy, and continues to exercise a significant influence today in metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, political philosophy, aesthetics, and other fields.
Philosophy and Disability, Normative Embodiment, Plato, Reason, Euthanasia, Infanticide Abstract This essay argues that the tendency to exclude individuals with disabilities from philosophical discourse is rooted in the attempt to apply rationally-derived principles to human embodiment.