Category: Philosophy 1203

It is generally accepted that man is binary in his structure; he consists of a soul and a body. According to this notion, the soul is the invisible, inner spiritual part, while the body is its outer, apparent one. The dependence of these two elements has long been proved and challenged by numerous philosophers. Rene Descartes was the first to make a significant distinction between these concepts by making them completely independent. He departed considerably from the former tradition in interpreting their connection, recognizing that not only does the soul influence the body, but the shape can also affect the state of the soul tangibly.

This argument is rational and has many premises and explanations regarding the laws of chemistry and physics. In considering the nature of the body, Descartes appealed directly to the mechanical-hydraulic model. In his view, nerves transmit excitement like fluid through pipes, and muscles and tendons are similar to engines and springs. On the other hand, the soul is filled with the will and affects, the passions, which dispose it of those things for which the body is prepared. The soul is immaterial (that is, it does not consist of any matter), but it is capable of consciousness and thought, thus providing information about the outside world (Hatfield 444). However, the thinking, feeling, and free-will mind must somehow influence the body and perceive the responses. If an intention is born in the soul, for example, to move from one place to another, this desire is carried out by the bodys muscles, tendons, and nerves. Similarly, suppose the body is exposed to a stimulus (light or heat, for example). In that case, the mind perceives and processes the sensory data and decides on the appropriate response.

To formulate his concept of the interaction between soul and body, Descartes needed to find some physical organ in which they could combine. Following a long philosophical tradition, he considered the soul simple in structure, with no constituent parts inside; it could only interact with a separate bodily organ. According to his conviction, such a place must be located in the brain because experimental data showed that impressions move from the periphery to the mind and, vice versa, all movement impulses emanate from it. Such a structure became the pineal body or spite, which was considered the meeting place of the soul and form (Hatfield 450). This interaction can also be described in a typically mechanistic manner: the creatures juices moving through the neural tubes are imprinted in a certain way in the pineal body, and on this basis, the mind creates sensual images and perceptions.

According to Descartes, all possible things constitute two separately functioning and independent of each other (but not of God who created them) substances  spiritual and corporeal. However, at the same time, the criterion the philosopher chose to differentiate between functions is, in part, subjective. He clearly distinguished between the concepts of substance and attributes. He characterized the theory of matter as one that needs only the ordinary assistance of God. In contrast, attributes cannot exist without material, as they are their qualities. These things are cognized in their basic attributes; for bodies, such attributes are the extension; for souls, they are considering (Hatfield 454). This position cannot be regarded as true, for it is impossible to determine with certainty how rational such judgments are.

Moreover, the philosopher himself had doubts and contradictory thoughts concerning the two substances incompatibility and their direct dependence. On the one hand, he tried to prove that the body has a great influence on the soul and vice versa. However, on the other hand, he also believed that the soul could exist on its own (Hatfield 456). These elements seem independent, but the extent of their mutual influence can be questioned. Such contradictions led one to challenge the validity of the concept, after which it was often disputed and counter-arguments.

Princess Elisabeth appealed to Descartes arguments and corresponded with him. She asked the philosopher to explain how the human soul, which she considered only a substance, could influence the physical body to perform deliberate actions. At the same time, the royalty firmly insisted that the phenomenon of movement was through an impulse causing a state of motion. Thus, Elizabeth wrote, that Descartes completely excludes spatial dimensions from the idea of the soul. She also demonstrates that physical contact as one of the modes of bodily movement cannot be non-material (Urban 230). In this way, Elizabeth criticized the reason for the interaction between the material body and the immaterial soul (mind).

Descartes admitted that she produced a fair question and provided her with such answers. Descartes argues that any human conceptions of body and soul are primitive. Thus, the average person cannot comprehend the principles of activity of the two interrelated substances and may ascribe incorrect properties to them. Thus, he explains that Elizabeth tries to imagine how the soul affects the body, on the example of how one physical object influences another. Moreover, this is already a mistake because the nature of the soul is not a physical object (Hatfield 443). At the same time, Descartes describes that the princess has made the error based on Aristotles philosophy concerning the fact that physical objects are attracted to the center of the Earth because of their weight. That is, according to the philosopher, the interaction of soul and body must be viewed on an immaterial level.

In her response, Elizabeth writes that the analogy with the Earths gravitational force cannot explain the interaction of soul and body. Probably the similarity should have looked like this: according to Aristotles model, the center of the Earth is the point toward which a physical object moves by nature (Urban 230). According to Descartes principle, the soul is the purpose by which the body moves by nature. Although Descartes rejects a teleological interpretation of the action of material things relative to the Earth, teleology does present a way of showing the movement of the body related to the soul. In any case, although Descartes himself does not explicitly say so, it seems to me to be a way of understanding it that describes why he finds the analogy of weight useful at all.

Thus, I support Descartes answer; it seems to me that his answer further comments on the differences between human conceptions of soul, body, and the union between the couple. He addresses the traditional distinction between intellect or understanding, imagination, and the senses. He says that the soul is known only by reason, the body by reason along with imagination, and the union between the two by idea along with imagination and the senses (Hatfield 445). The concept here is that the relationship of the union between soul and body is evident in the attributes that, according to Descartes, neither soul nor body can have separately. For example, appetites, emotions, and sensations exist only when the spiritual and the bodily enter into a relationship. Thus, I fully support Descartes in arguing that people need to rely on the experience of bodily sensations, and affective states, not just intellect and imagination, to properly understand the causal relationship between soul and body.

It seems to me that the counter-argument to Descartes main postulate is that the connection seems mysterious to me. I do not understand whether to consider it simply to the intellect or to the intellect and imagination (Urban 231). It is also unclear to me what role a persons situational feelings play here. My suggestions are certainly interesting, but that does not mean that convincing. If Descartes had meant only that, from the point of view of phenomenology, the close connection between soul and body seems perfectly obvious and natural, he would certainly have been right. My question is not about the soul and body interacting, but rather how they could do so, considering that Descartes claims about the nature of each. As I have already expressed in support of the philosopher, the real problem with Descartes position is not that he has difficulty explaining how the soul and body interact. He argues that they are two separate substances that work together to support human functioning.

Works Cited

Hatfield, Gary. Descartes: New Thoughts on the Senses. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, vol. 25, no. 3, 2017, pp. 443-464.

Urban, Elizabeth. On Matters of Mind and Body: Regarding Descartes. Journal of Analytical Psychology, vol. 63, no. 2, 2018, pp. 228-240.

Philosophy has always been one of the most important and fascinating aspects of human life. Its significance is due to the fact that it develops meanings and values. Moreover, philosophy thus makes the life of individuals complete. The study and evaluation of various philosophical concepts are necessary for a better understanding of everything that surrounds people. That is why this work will be considered the object of John Lockes essay on human understanding as a source of useful and precious knowledge.

An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, authored by the philosopher John Locke is one of the most significant works of the seventeenth century. This essay is divided into four parts, which cover various topics. The first part provides proof that there are no innate concepts in the human mind, and the next part provides information about where they actually come from (Mills, 2021). Next, the author examines the meaning of language in cognition. In the last part, the types of knowledge are given, taking into account the faith and opinions of people. Fuller et al. (2019) emphasized that apart from the discussion of the extent and limits of human knowledge, then it deals with the philosophy of perception, the origins of concepts, the foundations of science, the nature of language, a variety of metaphysical topics, and with morality and religion (p. 5). The theory of knowledge is a key point in the work of a philosopher.

John Locke is considered to be the receiver of Bacons materialistic thought. Focusing on the development of empiricism, the philosopher brought it towards materialistic sensualism. Thus, the author gave his own explanation of the principle of the origin of concepts in the human mind through the sensory world. Lockes Essay on Human Cognition is a refutation of the philosophical thought of his contemporaries and their predecessors. Those thinkers of those times tended to the theoretical basis of the anti-sensualist and adhered to the side of the theory of knowledge that recognized extrasensory knowledge.

The first argument that Lockes work is of particular importance is his reflections on the birth of human ideas. So, according to the author, certain concepts cannot be immediately embedded in a persons mind. All of them are based on the experience experienced through the prism of feelings. The bases for the formation of concepts are simple ideas that a person receives through a practical component. Thus, the mind alone has no way to create and develop an understanding of anything and always depends on experience. This thinking contributed to the development of the concept of tabula rasa, or a clean slate (Ali Zaiter, 2018). This aspect of philosophy is inherent only in newborns whose mind does not yet contain any information (MacBlain, 2018). Moral characteristics and views of people are also considered acquired by the author. In support of the argument, Locke says that people in different states have different beliefs from each other.

As already mentioned, Locke accepted simple knowledge as the basis for the formation of ideas. The author claims that they are fundamental parts of the human experience. An example is a chair that is perceived by a person through one sense, through multiple feelings, a reflection, or a combination of these two concepts (Locke, 2019). Thus, the stool is conducted by the individual as brown, through color, or hard, through its function. Such consideration helps to form a complete image of a larger concept. Thus, people acquire certain knowledge through the processes of experience and feelings.

The philosopher also emphasizes in the work that not all components of concepts are sensations. Thus, not all components of the surrounding world, perceived through the senses, are similar to how various things are actually arranged and framed. They are endowed with characteristics such as size, density, or shape, while not having color, smell, or taste. However, they are endowed with the smallest particles, which, when moving and acting on the senses, create a certain sensation. Therefore, such aspects as, for example, the color of an object are a kind of motion of matter. Various kinds of experiences, especially sensory ones, also determine the level of peoples cognition abilities of the world around them. Thus, individuals can realize and form certain concepts in the context of their own sensory perceptions and experiences. They are defined by Locke as closed areas of knowledge that are inaccessible to people.

Since morality is not a natural trait inherent in people, Locke argues that it, like most concepts, is formed with the help of experienced experience and the openness of the human spirit. Moreover, the argument for the validity of this thought is that the philosopher does not accept the universality of moral postulates. The main source of morality, according to Locke, was God. Then, there was a direct human experience that helped people decide what exactly brings both happiness and calm. The last aspect was considered to be the very essence of a person, in which his desire and desires for satisfaction and happiness are embedded. These criteria are an important positive ethical meaning of Lockes philosophy.

Another important aspect of John Lockes work is the sensory side of personality experience, which forms concepts. Sensory experience is a source of consciousness containing certain human ideas. Furthermore, many concepts and the very essence of their formation can be explained. To explain them, it is necessary to determine the way in which people form knowledge. Moreover, it is necessary to find an explanation of how certain information appears in consciousness. It can be just through perception, feeling, experience, and observation, which is proof that all knowledge is not innate. Moreover, Lockes concept of the non-innateness of concepts can also be supported by psychology. Thus, people may simply not realize the ways of forming thoughts and ideas that they believe they already have in their minds. This is due to the lack of awareness of the role played by upbringing, experience, and customs in this process.

Therefore, this work explored the philosophical thought of John Locke as an important aspect of the worldview. In his essay, the author focuses on the main problems of epistemology. He focuses on how people acquire certain knowledge. Moreover, the most important aspect of Lockes teaching is that he took the position of denying the innateness of concepts, which were promoted by such famous philosophers of those times as Plato and Descartes. Moreover, Locke does not deny the existence of external objects, God, and human existence. In the modern world, the philosopher, the predecessor of Kant, is considered the founder of the newest critical theory of knowledge.

References

Ali Zaiter, W. (2018). The impact of John Lockes tabula rasa and Kants faculty of intuition on the poetry of Wordsworth, Coleridge and Keats: Implications and applications. AWEJ for Translation & Literary Studies, 2(3).

Fuller, G., Stecker, R., & Wright, J. P. (Eds.). (2019). John Locke: En essay concerning human understanding in focus. Routledge.

Locke, J. (2019). An essay concerning human understanding. Creative Media Partners.

MacBlain, S. (2018). Learning theories for early years practice. SAGE.

Mills, R. J. W. (2021). Locke against innatism. The Religious Innatism Debate in Early Modern Britain, 71-76.

Michel Foucault was born on October 15, 1926, in the small provincial town of Poitiers, France. From a young age, he was expected to follow the medical path as both his father and grandfather were surgeons. They did everything they could to ensure that he receives the best education possible. Apart from that, there was another tradition on the paternal side of his family  to give all first-borns the name Paul. However, it was the mother who decided to name her son Paul Michel. Being hostile to the father because of his despotic nature, the young boy preferred to be called by his second name (Eribon, 1991). Therefore, in the official documents, the philosopher is filed as Paul, but the large audience knows him as Michel Foucault.

As a child, Foucault studied at the Lyceum of Henry VI, and in 1940 he transferred to the College of St. Stanislaus. After receiving a bachelors degree in 1943, the young man began preparing for the entrance exams at the ENS. In his youth, he became interested in philosophy, discovering the works of Georg Hegel, Friedrich Nietzsche, Carl Jung, and other thinkers. He received his secondary education during the years of the fascist occupation, and this had a significant impact on him as a person. The perception of reality was completely different from that of the modern world. The most radical ideas flourished, infiltrating the ethical and cultural foundations of society.

Upon entering university in 1946, Michel Foucault started a whole new life. Despite the post-war optimism and relief, all students were under enormous pressure. ENS was one of the most prestigious educational institutions in France, among whose graduates were many famous people, such as Canguilhem or Sartre. Therefore, it was necessary for the students to be strikingly different from others. From that point of view, Michel Foucault was remarkably successful as he was able to work incredibly hard and had a diverse variety of skills. His profound knowledge, unique sense of humor, and natural talent came unnoticed neither by his fellow students nor by the teachers.

These years of education were rather difficult for Foucault since, unfortunately, classmates began to avoid him as he was often misunderstood. At the same time, the young man started to comprehend his homosexual nature. As a result, this tension and alienation led to him trying to take his own life two years later in 1948 (Eribon, 1991). This was the event that first brought him to St. Annes psychiatric hospital. Nonetheless, there were those who tried to help this confused and insecure young man. One of them was Jacques Lacan Guesdorff, who conducted lectures on psychiatry for his students at the St. Annes hospital for practical training. Eventually, he and Michel Foucault became close friends for many years.

In 1948, Foucault received a degree in philosophy at the Sorbonne. Four years later, he graduated from the Paris Institute of Psychology and had degrees in philosophy, psychiatry, and psychopathology. During the early years of his career, the philosopher had spent much time working at the hospital of St. Anne. The work was monotonous and the hospital itself was rather indistinguishable from others operating during that time in France. The scientist also often times visited a local prison for medical examinations, as well as homes of his patients, studying their lifestyle and condition (Miller, 1993). Apart from that, there is not much information about this period of his life as he himself did not enjoy dwelling on it.

For five years, from 1951 to 1955, Michel Foucault taught at the ENS and he, as did his mentors before, also took students to St. Annes Hospital for excursions and lectures. As Foucault began to work on his book The History of Madness, he started learning German to read the works of Heidegger, Husserl, and Nietzsche (Gutting, 2005). He was drawing inspiration from all popular philosophical and political movements of the time, including Marxism and existentialism. While working in the shadow of Sartre who was a graduate of the same educational institution, Michel Foucault strived for perfection.

Years later, his attitude towards Marxism and existentialism has changed, yet the respect for Nietzsches work remained for life. His direct influence can be explicitly seen in the later works of Foucault. In them, the author introduces the concept of genealogy, which was based on the ideas of the German philosopher. However, Michel Foucault owes his brilliant creativity to Hegel, or rather, to his teacher Hippolytus, who was an ardent adherent of Hegelianism. It was he who inspired the future scientist to devote his thesis to the analysis of Hegels works.

In his early works, the scientist made a considerable contribution to the development of the philosophical school of structuralism. Analyzing the phenomenon of space, Foucault introduced his definition of heterotopia, the borderline between utopia and dystopia. However, for some reason, he later abandoned this line of thought and concentrated on developing the idea of genealogy. Namely of significant interest to the scientist were questions of the relationship between power and crime. In the book Discipline and Punish: The Birth of Prison, Foucault described the evolution of prison institutions, showing how the realities of each era changed the perception of the execution within the society. The philosopher also considered the problems of gender relations from different points of view, analyzing the way power influences individual needs. Overall, he was interested in all sorts of power relations that are present within modern society: parent-child, teacher-student, doctor-patient, convict-supervisor. Nonetheless, the philosophers most intriguing discoveries are associated with verbal communication and linguistics. To summarize his ideas, one may capture three interrelated trends that define modern culture according to Michel Foucault.

The first tendency discovered by Foucault is the formation of a new language caused by a radical rejection of the unambiguous conjugation of linguistic reality with a certain and stable thesaurus of the cultural tradition. This provides linguistic phenomena with an extra-linguistic dimension, and an opportunity to claim the status of a natural condition of discourse (Foucalt, 2006). Modern culture can be expressed, according to Foucault, only by language that is not connected with any tradition and, most importantly, not bound by it.

This leads directly to the second trend in contemporary culture noted by Foucault: the trend he refers to as attachment to the death of God. According to Foucault, language expresses by no means the anthropological truth, it only confirms that mankind is left without God. The author introduced the idea of Transgression that opens the experience of the impossible, which is not bound and not limited by external and possible existence. From this point of view, language as a system sets certain limits of perception that eventually erase any possibility of limitless existence (Foucault, 1984). Thus, the world without God is the world that dissolves itself in the experience of the limit, creates itself again, and annihilates itself in an act of excess  in an act of transgression.

The third and, as Foucault believed, the most important trend of modern culture is the fact that the phenomenon of transgression expresses itself in the oppression of sexuality. In Foucaults assessment, sexuality in modern culture can by no means be regarded as a natural truth, moreover, due to the power of discourses, it is being denaturalized. According to the scientist, for almost two centuries now, language has not been eroticized: on the contrary, sexuality has been absorbed by it (Foucalt, 1988). Today, the status of sexuality can be defined not via the concept of freedom, but precisely via the concept of limit  the limit of consciousness, the limit of the law, and the limit of language. Therefore, the existing power relations within society become an obstacle in terms of complete comprehension of human sexuality.

Over time, life in France became unbearable to Michel Foucault, so he decided to travel around the world. He lectured in Canada, the USA, Brazil, Japan, Tunisia, Sweden, Poland, and Austria-Hungary. During this period, he continued to actively work on the History of Madness. as Michel Foucault himself once noted, this time of his life is characterized by depression and confusion (Eribon, 1991). As he was struggling to accept his own aging, he decided to cut his hair regularly.

At the end of his life, the philosopher often visited the USA, California. Due to many reasons, such as his radical ideas and erratic behavior, he was rejected by European society. Moreover, he had to keep his homosexuality in secret as it was not welcomed on the continent during that time. However, in California, he felt happy as it was the only place where he could finally be himself. The society was much more tolerant to the emerging subculture of gay people, who actively struggled for their rights while publishing articles and organizing meetings. Perhaps it has played a part in Michel Foucaults quick and unfortunate demise: in the summer of 1984, he died of the terminal stage of HIV infection.

There is no consensus about Michel Foucaults belonging to one particular school of thought. In his research and work, the scientist was never limited by any framework of concepts and strict methodology. The study of insanity as a way of a persons alienation from society convinced him that this problem hasnt received enough attention from the academic community. It was his personal goal to make society finally recognize psychiatry and accept it as an independent discipline. To achieve this, he had thoroughly examined the aspect of the influence of madness on contemporary culture. He is universally recognized not only for his unique uncommon approaches and exceptional vision but also for his invaluable contribution to the development of psychiatry, psychology, and history. And despite the ambiguity of Michel Foucaults ideas and concepts, he was and still remains one of the main philosophers of the 20th century, who introduced an entirely new direction of the philosophical discourse.

References

Eribon, D. (1991). Michel Foucault. (Wing, B. Trans.). Harvard University Press.

Foucault, M. (1984). Nietzsche, genealogy, history. The Foucault Reader: An Introduction to Foucaults Thought. Edited by Paul Rabinow, 76100. Pantheon.

Foucault, M. (1988). The history of sexuality. Vol. 1, The Will to Knowledge (Hurley. R. Trans.). Penguin.

Foucault, M. (2006). History of madness. Edited by Jean Khalfa. (Murphy, J. Trans.). Routledge.

Gutting, G. (2005). Foucault: A very short introduction. Very Short Introductions. Oxford University Press.

Miller, J. (1993). The passion of Michel Foucault. Simon & Schuster.

The essence of Arendts idea was in the fact that the power of many would not become something substantial over the course of time, as the core of Jeffersons ward system was the power of everyone and the personal competencies of every civilian (254). This turned out to be a catalyst for Jeffersons approach because a large society would not be able, nevertheless, to divide into powerful assemblies and function properly after that.

The ideas of revolution were an instance of an afterthought on Jeffersons side, as Arendt had previously claimed that the ward system was holding the title of a spirit of equal liberty where the counsel tradition could be exemplified (250). The previous notions pushed by Jefferson were rather bold and focused on the importance of recurring revolutions, but deeper insights seemed to have demonstrated the significance of accessible alternatives for both the government and civilians in general.

Work Cited

Arendt, Hannah. On Revolution. Viking Press, 1963.

As the ancient Roman philosopher, Cicero said: To make a mistake is only human; to persist in a mistake is idiotic. Indeed, it is impossible to live without faults. They can ruin a persons life, even break his soul, but they can also give a rich life experience. We can say that the life of each person is made up of many missteps. By analyzing his failures, a person learns from them and thus develops. Therefore, it is essential to make mistakes and not be afraid to do so.

There are many reasons people should not be so afraid to make mistakes, because they are helpful. American psychologist Hans Schroder in his research, proved that when a person accepts his failures, his brain begins to work more actively, and he absorbs information more efficiently. It has been proven that people, sometimes without even noticing it, analyze the causes of mistakes and thus increase their knowledge. Therefore, by trial and error, an algorithm for solving the problem is found, and new skills are acquired. Moreover, faults are a chance to see things in a new way. It is an opportunity to move away from the usual course of events and look at the world from a different angle.

Many literary works are examples of the transformation of mistakes into an invaluable experience. In Dickenss novel The Life and Adventures of Nicholas Nickelby, the protagonist makes missteps all the time, but they help him realize his shortcomings and become better, eventually finding happiness. Another striking proof of the benefits of mistakes is the fantastic story of the famous inventor Thomas Edison, who did hundreds of experiments, and they all failed. And only with the next attempt did he succeed, and he invented an incandescent lamp. Thus, making mistakes is not a reason to get discouraged and fold your hands.

Human life is a long road on which not only victories but also failures await everyone. The absence of faults will entail a reluctance to develop and improve. Having made a mistake, a person does not feel very pleasant, but it should be understood that the experience gained will make him stronger. The only man who never makes a mistake is the man who never does anything - Theodore Roosevelt. Therefore, lets try to give free rein to our actions and act without fear of failure, because only in this way you can reach incredible heights.

At the turn of the 20th century, America began to see a surge in religions of healthy-mindedness that would eventually change the landscape of modern medicine. Taken from William James pivotal lecture The Religion of Healthy-Mindedness, this distinction of American religions would provide the groundwork for an entire genre of beliefs centered on a particular conception of human nature. James gives the name healthy-mindedness to the tendency which looks on all things and sees that they are good (James, 79).

James creates a distinction between religions in his turn of the century lectures that separates religions based on their definition of human nature. Religions either view humans as inherently evil and destructive or kind-hearted and good. It is from that latter group that James forms his category of religions of healthy-mindedness. These religions extend the philosophical belief that man is inherently good to the idea that this goodness can overcome physical ailments. That is, physical health is derived from spiritual health and conversely physical maladies are outward signs of mental imbalance.

In an America with limited medical solutions to common illnesses and a strong religious culture, these explanations were attractive to people seeking answers for their sicknesses. More than just answering unanswered questions, though, the move toward healthy-mindedness was fueled by human nature: people inherently divert our attention from disease and death as much as we can (James, 84).

One of the most prevalent examples is the First Church of Christ, Scientist. Founded by Mary Baker Eddy in 1866, members believe in the healing power of Christ and Christ alone. Because all things are possible through God, knowledge, understanding and prayer can heal all illnesses. Thus, rather than subscribing to conventional medicinal solutions to physical ailments, Christian Scientists believe that their experiences of material conditions can be improved by greater knowledge of their spiritual reality through prayer. The fundamental philosophical premise underlying this belief is one of the inherent goodness of a creation made in the image of a perfect beingGod.

The belief is somewhat reminiscent of eastern medicinal practice of cleansing the spirit or soul. However, as James noted these ideas are no longer relegated to a strict regimen of exclusive mind-cleansing beliefs. Instead, there has been a transition in American religion to a framework of healthy-mindedness, even if subconsciously. Rather than focusing on the traditional fire and brimstone sermons, there are whole congregations whose preachers, far from magnifying our consciousness of sin, seem devoted rather to making little of it (James, 86).

But religions of healthy-mindedness are not specific to Christian doctrine. Many other religions have sought to prove the effectiveness of their piety in the realm of medicine. Muslims, for instance, have claimed the benefits of fasting in slowing disease, specifically cancer. Moreover, these beliefs have made their way into modern medicine. In 1992 the Office of Alternative Medicine was established by the National Institute of Health. Healthy-mindedness has made its way into medical journals as alternatives to traditional medicine that demand attention.

Works Cited

James, William. The Variety of Religious Experience. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1997. Print.

Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism are among the most influential Asian philosophies, and they all happened to influence China in particular. From China, they spread to Korea and Japan together with the writing system, which had a noticeable impact on their cultures. Although the degree of spirituality of the philosophies varies, they laid the foundation for the way Asian people think and act. This essay will compare the philosophies to one another, highlight their similarities and unique features.

The first pair of philosophies that will be analyzed is Taoism and Confucianism, as they are both originally from China. They appeared around the same time, before the Warring Period, and tried to provide the answer as to how a person should live. Both philosophies valued humility, with Confucianism focusing on the child humility, and had a spiritual element, which allowed to them to become religions (Confucius and Confucianism 00:03:10-00:03:35; Taoism. The Philosophy of Flow 00:03:10-00:03:23). However, Confucianism has a practical element in it, as one of its central questions is how to be a good ruler, and the remaining energy should be spent on that (Confucius and Confucianism). Meanwhile, Taoism values non-action, the process over the result, and has a mostly spiritual approach to existing (Taoism. The Philosophy of Flow). Overall, despite sharing some similarities, the two philosophies are quite different, but both focus on reaching the golden balance.

The next pair of philosophies that will be compared are Taoism and Buddhism, which are both highly spiritual. They are similar in their emphasis on focus, which allows a Buddhist to reach Nirvana and a Taoist to perform a task at hand (Taoism. The Philosophy of Flow 00:03:33; What is Buddhism? What Do Buddhists Believe? 00:04:50-00:04:55). The ways to achieve the focus are different for the two, as Buddhism offers deliberate steps to it (Eightfold Path), while Taoism finds virtue in non-action, which is a simpler and more approachable way. However, Buddhism promotes non-violence as one of the steps, and it might be similar to non-action from Taoism (What is Buddhism? What Do Buddhists Believe? 00:01:23-00:01:30). In general, the two philosophies are spiritual, but they offer different ways to come in touch with ones inner concentration.

It may appear that Confucianism and Buddhism do not have anything in common, but there are some points that connect them. Those points are hidden within the Eightfold Part, which partially mirrors Confucianism. They both focus on the right speech, especially the absence of rudeness, and the right livelihood, although both have different definitions of what it means (Confucius and Confucianism 00:03:42-00:04:12; What is Buddhism? What Do Buddhists Believe?). For a Buddhist, the right livelihood would probably mean possessing only essential things, leading an ascetic lifestyle, while a follower of Confucianism would still be attached to material things. After all, Buddhism is entirely spiritual, and Confucianism strives to have practical use.

In conclusion, the three philosophies discussed in this paper have some similarities and differences that have shaped the Asian way of behaving. They are all similar in a way that they offer a virtuous way of living that can lead one to achieve something, but their ways are unique. Still, Asian countries allowed them to co-exist and influence one another, and what one might consider a bad feature of an Asian persons behavior might be a virtue according to one of the philosophies.

Works Cited

Confucius and Confucianism. YouTube, uploaded by Khan Academy. 2017, Web.

Taoism. The Philosophy of Flow. YouTube, uploaded by Einzelgänger. 2019, Web.

What is Buddhism? What Do Buddhists Believe? YouTube, uploaded by I Am Your Target Demographic. 2019, Web.

Can Truth be Known Based on the Writings of Aquinas and Plato?

Philosophers have varying interpretations of the truth as human beings understand the meaning of the word. According to Aquinas, truth resides not in the human intellect but in things (Knight, 2017). This belief applies when the truth cannot be real until it is proven with facts. For instance, the stones beneath the earths surface can be perceived as unreal because they cannot be seen until the earth is exposed. Once revealed, these stones become truth because they can be seen and touched (Knight, 2017). However, the human intellect would not have perceived these stones as real because they were in a position that the human intellect could not interpret as true at the time.

Similarly, the idea that space and other planets exist cannot ultimately seem true in the human intellect until one sees the natural settings from space. Seeing these planets proves their existence, and it becomes inarguable that they truly exist. Aquinas postulates that God is truth based on the nature of his existence and actions (Knight, 2017). God judges all things and understands all intricacies of existence; hence his divine intellect is the truth.

On the other hand, Plato elaborates that the concept of truth is based on ones perception of things and the illusion that is presented to emulate what may be termed as truth or not (Jowett, 2017). The analogy used in Allegory of the cave illustrates how the human intellect can be tricked into believing that something is true based on what they can see. Plato explained that the people who were imprisoned in the cave thought that the shadows in the cave were actual people because they were already used to seeing shadows, and they believed that it was the truth based on what their eyes showed them and their perception of the particular experience.

However, Plato continues and explains that things would certainly change if someone found out that they were prisoners in the cave and the true nature of the shadows. Such a person would pity the rest in the cave and no longer focus on the shadows because they understand the truth. It would be needless for such a person to convince the rest who have their truth that they have perceived things erroneously all along. Similarly, humans perceive their material existence as the truth, but as the analogy by Plato suggests, the human intellect is limited in terms of what is truly the truth. It is a phenomenon caused by the lack of sufficient knowledge and understanding of the universe.

Does either writer (or do both) sound like they are describing what we have termed cosmic or nomic truth?

Both Aquinas and Plato sound like they explain that cosmic and nomic truth may be true, but there is no certain way to determine it unless there is some supernatural intervention. The two philosophers argue that the perception of truth is highly determined by the intellectual interpretation of ones surroundings based on what is exposed. Therefore, human beings interpret the world around them according to what they can see and touch (Jowett, 2017). However, there may be much that remains hidden, just like the cave dwellers thought they understood the world around them and interpreted it as the truth based on the limited information at their disposal.

References

Jowett, B. (2017). The Allegory of the cave. Enhanced Media.

Knight, K. (2017). Summa Theologiae: Home. Newadvent.org. Web.

As a way of life, philosophy demands that children should have a space for active engagement in philosophical thought to promote their critical thinking. Philosophical thought allows children to ask existential questions about their surroundings and the world (Kizel 142). The curiosity in children exposes them to many dangers, some of which can be tragic. Therefore, it is important to establish a philosophical solution for a soldier who finds a child with a gun under certain circumstances, considering the moral, ethical implications, and consequences of having the weapon.

Though the philosophy of children requires adults to temporally abandon their normative and conventional knowledge and authority towards children, the latters autonomy should be limited because their minds are not fully developed. It would be upon the soldier to distract the kid so that he could drop the gun and allow him to take it. Children are easily distracted, and any opportunity to make the kid release the gun would be critical. The soldier should ask broad-ranging questions after taking the gun from the child to understand where he got it from and for what reasons. The soldier should evaluate the moral responsibility of the kid and the possible consequences of deciding what to do.

The capacity of a person is critical in determining whether they are morally responsible for a certain behavior or not. Young children lack the powers and capacities to be held responsible (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). The kid cannot make independent decisions, and therefore, the responsibilities for his action lie with the parents or adults taking care of him (Kizel, 147). For that reason, the soldier should not hesitate to take the gun.

Children are curious, and because they do not understand the dangers of a gun, they can cause injuries if allowed to have it. It is the moral responsibility of every adult in possession of a gun to have it stored responsibly, unloaded, or locked up to prevent access by children. It is only competent and law-abiding adults in the US who have the moral right to own a gun for self-defense reasons (DeGrazia 4). However, the situation involving a kid shows that it is unethical and morally wrong for the child to possess a gun. Therefore, the soldier has the moral authority to take the gun under any circumstances. Most importantly, the soldier should educate the kid about the dangers of a gun and should emphasize why children should keep off firearms.

Accessibility to guns to children is a disturbing reality to many Americans. According to Muñoz, more than half of the families with firearms in the US store them in a way that is accessible to children (3). Most gun-related injuries among children aged 5-14 years in the US occur when a child gains access to a gun that was stored, loaded, or unlocked (DeGrazia 4). By having a gun, the kid would cause an injury or a death which would be a big blow to the victims family and the people close to them. Unintentional shooting by kids results in deaths and injuries, which can be avoided if people understand their responsibility and prevent such incidences.

Understanding that children have no moral responsibility because of their underdeveloped minds helps adults decide what to do when the former are exposed to committing crimes. Educating children about guns and the risks the weapon has would make them cautious about many issues. Young children should not have access to guns, and any adult should be quick to take any weapon possessed by kids. As a result, this would prevent the harm that would have been caused by the gun action.

Works Cited

DeGrazia, David. Handguns, moral rights, and physical security. Journal of Moral Philosophy, 13.1 (2016): 56-76. Web.

Kizel, Arie. Philosophy with children, the poverty line, and socio-philosophic sensitivity. Childhood and Philosophy 11.21 (2015). Web.

Muñoz, Sofía Nussbaum. The Effect of Child Access Prevention Laws on Unintentional Shootings Perpetrated by Children. Diss. The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, 2021. Web.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Moral Responsibility, 2018. Web.

The Trolley Problem

The trolley problem refers to a thought experiment frequently cited within philosophy and psychology. While it contains many variations, its central idea is based on decision-making. It describes a situation where the reader witnesses a trolley with dysfunctional brakes toward a switch in the tracks. At the same time, the current track has five people on it, while a different track has just one. If the trolley continues on the unchanged path, it will kill five people. If the switch is used, it will only kill one. The thought experiment offers the reader the option to switch the trolleys path, with the decisions resulting in either one or five dead people. While there is no correct answer, killing one person is most often regarded as the better choice as you can sacrifice less. As such, the real theme of the problem resides in understanding that a trade-off is likely to exist in all scenarios and the debate of whether sacrifices are ever acceptable. On a more philosophical level, the problem asks whether active and passive killing differs in any real manner. This paper will present the view which supports the lack of the readers intervention.

Sacrifice

The debate regarding the sacrifice of one of few for the many has no decisive conclusion, both in real crisis scenarios and within thought experiments. However, their evidence has suggested that cultural and societal upbringing can influence such decisions. A study found that individuals within Europe, Australia, and the Americas were more likely to sacrifice one individual to save five. On the other hand, East Asian countries were much less likely to pull the switch, and it was often quoted as a morally questionable view (University of Exeter). Interestingly, this was not due to the unwillingness to save more than less but because many responders were unwilling to sacrifice the lives of others for any purpose. The trolley problem in this study revealed the approaches to sacrifice and, by extent, even the importance of belonging to groups and communities.

Passive versus Active Harm

The thought experiment also provides perspectives of active and passive harm. The creator of the original problem, Phillipa Foot, believed that the switch was a form of passive harm that resulted in death while pushing the fat man; an alternative to the switch was active killing (Andrade). However, within many modern practices such as healthcare, psychology, and even warfare, these decisions have the potential to become blurred. While the acts may have differing methods, the result and intent remain the same. In the case of the problem, both the switch and the fat man are implemented by the reader in order to cause the death of one consciously.

While Protagoras beliefs cannot be applied directly to the trolley problem in order to hypothesize his own reply, out of his three statements, the second can assist in understanding the discourse. The statement declares that man can make a weaker argument appear or stronger (Bonazzi). As such, it can be said that it is the reader that attributes the value to sacrifice and the nature of the passive or active killing. On the other hand, Aquinas believed that sacrifice was integral due to religion, though it can be substituted for any other belief, such as the greater good or the welfare of society (BBC). Ge Hongs works are deeply connected with Confucianism and Taoism, which uphold social harmony and nature as the agent of change (Michael 173). As such, even Ge Hongs approach suggests a duality, as the trolley should be left on its path as intended in order to abide by nature, while the preservation of social peace and well-being is also prioritized.

Works Cited

Andrade, Gabriel. Medical ethics and the trolley problem. Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, vol.12, no.3, 2019. Web.

BBC. Aquinas and the nature of humans. BBC, 2022. Web.

Bonazzi, Mauro. Protagoras. Stanford, 2020. Web.

Michael, Thomas. Philosophical Enactment and Bodily Cultivation in Early Daoism. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2021.

University of Exeter. Trolley dilemma: When its acceptable to sacrifice one person to save others is informed by culture. Phys, Web.