Essay on “Criticisms of Conventional Morality”

Essay on â€Å"Criticisms of Conventional Morality† 1. What is your conscience? It is not only being aware but being aware that you are aware. It also includes a sense of the relationship between the mind and the world. Could it be no more than the collection of prejudices that you were taught growing up? It is also an awareness of the self as self-existing. Why do you trust your conscience? Descartes said it best, â€Å"I think therefore I am† everything else is a product of thought maybe even existence itself. That is where trust lays who better to trust than yourself? Is it only because doing so â€Å"has brought you sustenance and honors† as Nietzsche suggests? No, it is because it is born of reason and it is from a purely philosophical perspective a construct of the mind and self. 2. Kant claims that the moral law his categorical imperative is to act only according to those maxims or principles of action that one could will to be a universal law of nature. That is, only act in ways that you would want everyone to act. What are Nietzsche’s criticisms of this idea? Nietzsche refused to believe that values and morals carry a priori value. 3. Nietzsche maintains that every action is unique. What does he mean by this? All actions cannot be waited on a single value scale without considering all the variables in order to make a moral judgment. E.g. Killing is wrong but what about in self-defense? How does this claim contribute to his critique of Kant? It means that two moralities then are born the noble Good/Bad and the ignoble Good/Evil. 4. Nietzsche recommends that we create our own values and our own moral laws. How can we accomplish these things? By adopting the age old saying doing unto others as you would unto yourself. 5. According to Nietzsche, different moral codes are designed to achieve difference purposes, that is, different practical aims. Is there any reason, then, to think that there is a moral code that is uniquely true? Yes there are universal values that transcend all social and cognitive constructs if not then we would have no morality and society would break down. 6. Nietzsche claims to have â€Å"discovered two basic types† of morality. What are they? The noble Good/Bad and the ignoble Good/Evil. How do they differ from each other? Ignoble values are reversal born out of resentment of the former created by the strong .e.g. the wealthy say wealth is good while the poor say it is a vice. 7. According to which type or morality does one have duties only to one’s peers? Respect is the morality for one’s peers. Do you think this kind of moral code underwrites nationalism and patriotism? No it is a created human cognitive construct that is a mechanism for collective protection and progress. 8. What does Nietzsche see as the difference between good versus bad and good versus evil? He never gave an alternative to Kant. 9. Nietzsche claims that there are no moral facts whatsoever, that morality is merely symptomatology. What can he mean by this? Morality doesn’t exist and that proving, providing or promoting a value means it is a value just a construct. He denies some values have an intrinsic value Morality is a symptom of what? Civilization which is loss of freedom for we stop being like a bird of prey and have to be civil to each other thus civilization is the ultimate product. Appearance and Reality 1. Russell says that in daily life we sometimes make certain assumptions that we later recognize as mistaken. Can you think of an example of a belief you were quite sure of, that you later found out was false? My parents were infallible and all knowing. 2. What do you think Russell means when he says to view the world as a painter? The painter creates his world through his five senses and his perception. A philosopher? A wise one who uses reason. 3. Russell says that the table in front of him isn’t brown all over. Why not? It is a question of perception and epytimology he may name it by a color not accepted as being called brown what point is Russell making by pointing out this simple fact? What I see and you see are two different things due to perception. 4. Isn’t the shape of the table always the same? No where would you have to be to view the table as a rectangle? From one end at a specific angle 5. How do Russell’s examples suggest a difference between appearance and reality? One is perception born of the mind one is born of the physical world of fixed laws of physics. The Will to believe 1. James argues that we do not have volitional control over our beliefs, that we cannot, just by willing it, believe that Abraham Lincoln’s existence is a myth, for example. Is he right? No he is wrong we can have reason to use to destroy false information as well as science e.g. everybody knows Columbus didn’t discover America simply because he was lost thought he was India and found the ameri-indians there before him If he is right, then are we really responsible in any sense for our beliefs? We are responsible and a distinction must be made between belief and conviction. There is such a thing as wrong conviction and right belief 2 Why does Hames write that â€Å"our faith is someone else’s faith, and in the greatest matters this is most the case†? Do you agree with him? Yes. It is interesting that the god of the conquered e.g. looks exactly like the conquer. It is a wonder that black Africa was conquered by Europeans and their god now looks like a European Jesus. Spanish conquistadors or British colonialist, 3. James maintains that as rational thinkers our goal is to gain truth and avoid error. Yet it is challenging to pursue this goal when the evidence is mixed and inconclusive. James thinks that when the evidence for and against some proposition X is inconclusive, we have three choices: (1) we can withhold belief and continue to amass evidence for and against until we can make a more informed decision, (2) we can go ahead and believe X anyway, or (3) we can go ahead and disbelieve X anyway. What would Clifford recommend we do in such a case? I have my own solution first proposed by the Muslim scholar and theologian Ibn Sina known as Avores. Double truth. Where both can be true. 4. James thinks that the strategy of withholding belief when faced with conflicting evidence amounts to accepting this risk averse strategy: better to miss our on some truths rather than add more errors. He argues that a more risk positive strategy is equally rational, thought: better to add more errors rather than miss our on some truths. Which approach sounds more reasonable to you? Better to add errors so that they maybe eliminated and there in lies the wisdom because error brings truth and truth easily falls to error. 5. James is concerned with whether we should have very high standards for belief or lower our standards and be willing to believe on shakier evidence. What do you think about this issue in a legal setting? Never in a legal setting because innocent people will be robbed of their lives and time. 6. High standards means that we would convict on very compelling evidence (thus seldom convicting the innocent, but at the same time setting guilty people free against whom we had little evidence). Lower standards means that we would be willing to convict on weaker evidence (thus mistakenly convicting more innocent people, but also convicting more guilty people). Is it better to (1) let some guilty go free rather than convict more innocents, or (2) convict more innocents rather than let more guilty go free? Better let guilty go free why what goes around comes around. The society has to change to chastise the guilty. E.g. everybody shuns them.

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder ( Ptsd ) - 1565 Words

Introduction Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a mental illness that has resulted from a severe traumatic event. Given the hidden nature of this mental illness, PTSD has become more common among teenagers. Research states that â€Å"Depending upon the nature and degree of the traumatic event, the prevalence rates of PTSD in victims have been reported to approach 100%† (Kar, 2011, p.167). Cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) has been used as an effective intervention to assist in regulating post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Evidence-based practice, displays that cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) strategy is an excellent way in decreasing the symptoms and risks that occur with post-traumatic stress disorder (Feather Ronan, 2009). The†¦show more content†¦Goals of the Program Evaluation The first goal of this consumer-oriented evaluation is to reduce PTSD symptoms in teenagers with the use of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT). Evaluating the efficacy of this goal, the first data point would be to collect quantitative data on the severity levels of PTSD with the use of self-report surveys. Second, collect quantitative data with a questionnaire on the use of parental involvement within the teenager’s life. Third, collect qualitative data from focus groups on how teachers can be supportive. The second goal of this consumer-oriented evaluation is to diminish the risk of violence in teenagers with PTSD. Evaluating the efficacy of this goal, the first data point is to use quantitative data to measure adjustments in violent behavior in pretreatment and posttreatment. Second, use quantitative data to display a correlational relationship between the annoyance and forceful behavior in PTSD. Third, use qualitative data to assess the changes that occurred with posttreatment on reducing the risk of violence with PTSD. Data Collection and Instrumentation The first goal data points will utilize quantitative collection with the use of self-surveys and questionnaires. The PTSD Self-Rating Scale, will be used to provide a measurement of post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms (Fan et al., 2011). This self-report survey was given before treatment, to provide a rating on the severity of the PTSD

Dutch Revolt Free Essays

1 Assignment 2 How significant was the Reformed faith for the success of the Dutch Revolt Essay plan My essay will begin with a chapter on when and why the revolt Started, and will then continue to explain and talk about the main participants in its continuance and then go on to talk about their individual beliefs and reasons for the revolts emergence and success. The Dutch revolt or the revolt of the Netherlands as it is also known as, started in 1566 and carried on until the early 17th century. The seventeen provinces of the Low Countries were acquired by the Hasburgs through marriage in 1477 but were still infested with independent lordships right up until the 17th century and were divided between German speaking Dutch in the north 2 East and French speaking Walloons (people from the area of modern day Belgium) in the south west. We will write a custom essay sample on Dutch Revolt or any similar topic only for you Order Now The reformation in the Netherlands was an international religious and political event with the seventeen provinces of the Low Countries against the ardent Catholics supported by Charles V and then his son Philip II of the Spanish Empire. The seventeen provinces soon jelled under the leadership of William prince of orange. William was born in 1533 and was raised as a Lutheran, when he was 11, and when his cousin died he inherited the title Prince of Orange, on the condition that he had a Roman Catholic education. He grew up and became a wealthy nobleman who originally served the Hasburgs as a member of the court of Margaret of Parma, the governor of the Spanish Netherlands who was the king’s representative due to the fact of being Charles V illegitimate daughter from a relationship with Johanna Maria Van der Gheynst. William held the position of the Stadholder (steward/ lieutenant). Having been raised as a Lutheran and later being educated in the 3 Catholic ways he grew dissatisfied at the persecution of the Protestants in the Netherlands. It was 1559 when he was given the position of Stadholder of the provinces of Holland and Utrecht, and his decision to oppose the king originated later in the same year when in the company of a couple of French noblemen he overheard about the plan to exterminate the protestants in both France and the Netherlands, and he decided he wanted, nothing to do with their slaughter. In August 1566 the uprising was bought about with a wave of beeldenstorm (iconoclasm) spread with the destruction of statues and religious images in hundreds of churches and monasteries across the Netherlands. The destruction of these statues and Catholic images were denounced as superstitious and unbiblical and the stained glass images were also seen as false teachings of the church (pp68 Block 2 The European Reformation). Margaret allowed influential noblemen including William to become more involved with the rebels in return for their help in quelling anymore destruction; she also granted some of the rebel’s wishes, which included suspending the heresy laws to enable a group of 4 petitioners to negotiate with Philip II, but in early 1567 it became clear she would not be allowed to fulfil her promises when the Duke of Alba was dispatched to the area to restore order. After his arrival the duke set up the council of troubles or known locally as the council of blood because of he 10,000 rebels called before the council for judgment and subsequently killed. William was one of these called up but he failed to show up, he was named as a rebel and had his lands and properties confiscated. Charles V was born in the Flemish city of Ghent in 1500. In 1506 he inherited his father’s Burgundian territories but because of his tender age his aunt Margaret acted as regent until 1515. From early on in 1 515 Charles had to deal with a rebellion from peasants, and after defeating them in 1523 he went on to extend the Burgundian territories. The European Inquisition executed their first Lutheran martyrs at Brussels in 1523, but private support for the new beliefs was more widespread than publically thought. In 1521 Charles called an assembly at worms in Germany to discuss Protestant Reformation. He called Martin Luther to appear before the assembly and to either renounce or reaffirm his views. 5 Luther Said â€Å"Unless I am convinced by the testimony of the scriptures or by clear reason (for I do not trust either in the pope or in councils alone, since it is well known that they have often erred and ontradicted themselves), I am bound by the scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the word of God. I cannot and will not recant anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience. May God help me. Amen. After the assembly Charles V made a decree (edict of worms) which stated â€Å" We forbid anyone from this time forward to dare, either by words or by deeds, to receive, defend, sustain, or favour the said Martin Luther. On the contrary we want him to be apprehended and punished as a notorious heretic, as he deserves, to be brought personally before us, or to be securely guarded until those who have captured him inform us, where upon we will order the appropriate manner of proceeding against the said Luther. Those who will help in his capture will be rewarded generously for 6 their good work†. It was the culmination of an ongoing struggle between Martin Luther and the Catholic Church. On his way back to Wittenburg after his meeting with Charles, William was picked up by soldiers of Frederick the Wise and escorted to Wartburg Castle for his own protection. Philip II became king of Spain and Lord of the low countries in 1556 when he took over from his father Charles V. Philips rule in the seventeen separate provinces known collectively as the Netherlands faced many difficulties including heavy taxation and the suppression of Protestantism; this led to warfare in 1568. In 1566, protestant preachers sparked anti-clerical riots known as the Iconoclast Fury; in response to growing heresy, the duke of Alba`s army went on the offensive which further alienated the local aristocracy. In 1584, William of Orange was assassinated by Balthasar Gerard, after Philip had offered a reward of 25,000 crowns to anyone who killed him, calling him a â€Å"pest on the whole of Christianity and the enemy of the human race†. 7 All of the key people involved with the revolt in the Netherlands had their own religious beliefs, and it was these beliefs which were instrumental in the uprising, from the catholic support of the Spanish royal family and the other established European rulers at the time, and the new believers such as Luther and Calvin who influenced William of Orange and other key rebels. The key figures in the new religious movement had such influence over the wronged peasants that they were able to be guaranteed of their support in whatever was asked of them including the revolt itself. (Word Count 1149) Bibliography Wallace, P. (The Long European Reformation). Grell, Ole Peter. O`Day, R. Laurence, A. Loftus, D. (The European Reformation), Block 2. The Open University, Milton Keynes. How to cite Dutch Revolt, Papers

Discipline free essay sample

Machiavelli has a theory that ends justify the means which means a person may do whatever they need to do as long as their outcome has some meaning. In sports some believe that taking steroids is the right thing to do. Then there is also the group that believes that taking steroids is morally wrong. From an ethical/moral standpoint, players who use steroids are cheating and living a lie, garnering success and prospering from illegal substances. Users who buy into Machiavellis theory go against societys standards of rewarding hard work and discipline. When you take steroids you do not use hard work and discipline to reach your physical status. Taking steroids is a harm that reaches far beyond ones body, but into ones soul. It is morally wrong to cheat for a living. Those who oppose the illegality and immorality of performance-enhancing drugs maintain that professional athletes should have the right to use steroids because steroids are no different from any other technology or substance that enables athletes to compete at high levels. Although advances in technology in sports have been made that only allows the sports to become more competitive. Ones body is not a piece of equipment that can be used, abused, and replaced. Using enhancers such as, anabolic steroids, allows beings to become almost super human an act of immorality. In Steve Yuhas’ essay, â€Å"The Steroid Scandal in Baseball has been Overblown,† he explains a profound understanding that steroids cannot increase the abilities of an athlete. Overall steroids do not help the abilities taught to professional athletes or athletes in general. Yuhas states that â€Å"Yes, they can become stronger and their biceps may grow to the size of a normal person’s thigh, but that doesn’t make them able to hit a small ball with a thin bat and it certainly doesn’t make a football player throw more accurately or kick the ball through the uprights with more precision† (Yuhas 2). Abilities are taught and learned. Steroids do not help the ability of the athlete. He is a believer of Machiavellis theory; he believes that an athlete does not have to work hard to achieve a mentally and physically stronger body when they can just pop a pill to do the work for them. Yuhas’ argues, â€Å"There seems to be a [†¦] scale of morality involved in steroids that is absent from any other substance. Popping a pill to render a child more productive in school or to make a fat person thin is great; sucking the fat out of a womans behind or injecting a forehead with botox is simply cosmetic upkeep, but put something in your body that makes you more competitive in your livelihood and it is somehow morally corrupt† (Yuhas 2). Although Yuhas makes a substantial argument there is a thin line between what is morally wrong and what is right. Athletes use steroids to become stronger to earn more money and fame for themselves. Society looks upon steroid use as an immoral judgment. Steroid use for athletes is a selfish and greedy act. People may use botox to prevent â€Å"Father Time†, but that is not a reason for professional athletes, who are role models to so many, to use steroids. A human beings competitive livelihood is apparent to all. When someone wants to become the best they are willing to work hard for it and not cheat. When you use steroids you do not become the greatest athlete, but you do become the worst. Despite the recent problems with steroid use in professional sports, especially baseball, steroid restrictions have not been enforced hard enough on the athletes. Steroids used by one-person gives them an advantage over those who do not use performance enhancers. Due to steroid use, sports records held by elite athletes are being broken by false feats that are only achieved by using an enhancer, and enforcing steroid use in professional sports gives young athletes a better understanding of how dangerous enhancers actually are. Aside from personal harm to the user, steroid use is detrimental to fellow players as well as fans. Many things can be included as an immoral act but in today’s society steroid use is a main point on what is morally wrong. Baseball is an American pastime and ruining the game is a bad example to all Americans. Americans have a livelihood for competition, from clinching the World Series to who can belch the loudest. Our conscience urges competition to an extreme that makes the littlest of things very big. While performance-enhancing drugs enhance an athletes skill sets, they devalue and alter competition. When you go to a baseball game you only want to see a few things, which include that huge homerun by your favorite player and the win to your favorite team. Some would argue that using steroids will allow more homeruns to players and would make baseball games more entertaining. Well those few people may be right but then the game would not be competitive. If you go to a game and each team hits five to eight homeruns apiece the urge to see homeruns and watch the game would be ruined. Records are always broken, each decade a more outstanding athlete emerges and they begin at a record pace and break great athletic records. Records are something to glorify, Babe Ruth had the record homeruns in a season, then a few years later that was broken by another player, Roger Marris. As the game began to become more competitive in both aspects of pitching and hitting records were difficult to break. Hitters began to hit the long ball harder and further, the change in the athletes muscle mass was exponential but players and the MLB did not care. Baseball had many fans, as Mark McGwire had been his record-breaking homerun pace. His record was set by a lie as he attested to using steroids during that record breaking year and his lie caused much hurt to fans as it had embarrassed the franchise. Later Barry Bonds broke the record and broke the all time homeruns in a career passing Hank Aaron. Not long after that he was accused of using steroids and then again a franchise was embarrassed. The pressure on baseball players is indirect; it comes twice a month, on paydays. The big money goes to guys who hit thirty homers, not the ones who hit thirty doubles. It pays to be strong; it is almost like an animalistic behavior. Only the strongest survive. Are athletes the role models needed for American youth? Many young athletes have their favorite player in whichever sport they partake in. Seeing their idol admitting to using steroids could possibly corrupt their mind in believing that steroid use is the right thing to do to become a stronger and better athlete. Beyond any possible benefits of steroid use lies the dangerous issue of health. In many cases, athletes (especially young athletes) are so focused on success in a professional sport that they are ignoring the glaring consequences of steroid use. In actuality, the price of steroid use and abuse is high; much higher a price than any lucrative contract or marketing deal. â€Å"The National Institute on Drug Abuse reports that heart attacks, strokes, and live cancer are the more serious life-threatening effects of steroid abuse. Side effects for male users include acne, hair-loss, development of breasts, shrinking testicles, and impotence. † (qtd. In Fletcher D4). Yet another way in which steroids harm the user is through increased susceptibility to injuries. One theory is that players are overwhelming their bodies with rapid muscle growth. Players who use steroids to gain a competitive advantage over peers and opponents pressure others, including youth, to use performance-enhancing substances. If they too want to win and remain competitive, they must use steroids as well. In baseball, as with all professional sports, income, fame, and marketability depend on success and impressive feats of athleticism. The pressure and increased incentive to bulk up is evident. â€Å"The average size of a major-league player was a pretty standard 6-foot-1, 185 pounds for at least 30 years, until the early 1990s. Today, the average player is 6-foot-1, 200 pounds, and most teams have players who weigh in at 240 pounds or more. † (West 22). Bigger players hit more home runs and sign lucrative contracts and endorsement deals. Because of this, more players want to be bigger. As more and more players are tainted by steroids it begins to affect more and more of the youth that watches sports. Steroids have directly affected the biggest fans in baseball, America’s youth. Besides cheapening statistics and athletic accomplishments, the use of performance-enhancing drugs has tarnished the general image of baseball. Instead of a game that encourages healthy competition, it is one that resembles a pharmacological trade show, where the effects of steroids are put on display. Baseball is known as Americas pastime. It holds a special place in American society. The values of society are reflected in the values of its most popular and revered cultural pastimes. When the message is sent that it is acceptable to have a drug problem in sport, it is akin to saying that this staple of American culture is reflective of a drug problem in society. Some would argue that baseball is a reflection of a culture mired in drugs and a society that is lacking quality role models for its youth. One of the biggest blows to baseballs image came in August 2005 when slugger Rafael Palmeiro, who has collected over 3,000 hits and has hit nearly 600 home runs during his career, tested positive for steroids. † (Fletcher D1). The former first baseman for the Baltimore Orioles was booed relentlessly and was told by the team after the season he would no longer be part of the team. Palmeiro is since retired; his hall-of-fame numbers are still in question. As we have seen, the use of performance-enhancing drugs in sport, specifically baseball, is an immoral practice. As seen steroid use does in fact directly affects fans and the teammates that the player plays with. Drug testing baseball players cannot be foolproof. In fact, all the testing does is keep players from using optimal dosages and encourage them to find ways to mask the drugs. The only infallible test for steroid use is a players moral compass. As soon as players identify not using steroids as a moral obligation, for both personal reasons and beyond, the game of baseball and its once-great warriors will return to the apex of the sporting world.