| Papers [169-182] of 4382 :: [Page 13 of 313] | | Go to page : <— 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 —> | |
|
|
Differing Opinions of Liberty, 2008.
This paper looks at the differing views of Thomas Paine, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson regarding liberty.
1,658 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 7 sources, MLA, £ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer discusses that for Thomas Paine, liberty was "common sense," the catchphrase that he used to describe his sermonizing pamphlet of 1776 denouncing monarchy. The writer notes that while this might have seemed nonsense to a colonist of a dozen years earlier, in 1776 it roused a people ready for independence. The writer then points out that Adams regarded the form of government as important and that he firmly believed that the separation of powers in government was essential to control human nature's tendency to become tyrannical. The writer notes that, unlike most of those around him, Hamilton favored monarchy and felt there were sound reasons for strengthening government. Finally, the writer points out that it was Thomas Jefferson, of course, who penned the opening of the Declaration of Independence.
From the Paper
"Hamilton felt there were sound reasons for strengthening government. In 1791, the Congress authorized an excise tax on distilled whiskey. To westerners, this was an insult. With only crude roads through much of the country beyond the bare seaboard, the westerners had no efficient way of moving grain. Grain distilled into whiskey was far more compact and marketable. Further, Hamilton's financial policies had so restricted currency that in the western territories nation that there was essentially no conventional currency. Whiskey became the accepted medium of exchange, offered and accepted in exchange for other goods. As a result, a tax on this amounted to an attack on their prosperity."
| |
|
Holocaust and Jewish Thought, 2007.
This paper discusses the impact of the Holocaust upon post 1945 Jewish religious thought.
1,687 words (approx. 6.7 pages), 7 sources, MLA, £ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer discusses the influence made by the Holocaust upon contemporary Jewish thought. In particular, the paper looks at the works of Richard L. Rubenstein, Eliezer Berkovits and Emil Fackenheim and notes how these major scholars are forced to grapple with an issue that threatens to permanently undermine the faith of the Jewish people in the God of their ancestors. In addition, the paper also notes the general despair which often seems to characterize Jewish works in the post-Holocaust epoch. In the end, the writer maintains that the horrors of the Holocaust have forced many Jewish theologians to consider that they may be worshipping a God who is either not omnipotent - or not omni-benevolent.
From the Paper
"To start with, the holocaust was an event of catastrophic suffering for the Jewish people and this suffering forced - at least among some prominent intellectuals - a re-assessment of religion and, more especially, a re-assessment of God. Simply put, the horrors of the Holocaust challenged the traditional religious text from which the Jewish people had long read in a way that no other event could possibly have done. Specifically, traditional Judaism had frequently been at odds with modernity insofar as the proponents of historicism and positivism (to say nothing of the teachings of Hegel and Kant and even Marx) took issue with an historical narrative that emphasized the existence of a transcendent deity who not only created the world but who also designated the Jewish people as a "special people" with a special communion with God."
| |
|
Marx and Alienation, 2007.
An analysis of the theory of alienation in the philosophy of Karl Marx.
936 words (approx. 3.7 pages), 3 sources, MLA, £ 20.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes the crucial aspects of Karl Marx's description of alienation within his social theory. It looks at how, by analyzing the differing aspects of human nature, Marx defines the separation of "natural" things from each other or that develop an antagonism toward one anther in social harmony. It shows how this provides evidence that Marx's theory of alienation is still valid, which in turn provides evidence for the commonly used materialist definitions of "human nature" within modern society.
From the Paper
"The social and economic perspectives of alienation to be effective within society directly relates to how class division forces the proletariat to become mere commodities. Marx had defined in his "Theses on Feuerbach" that the bourgeois seek to create a religious or mythic definition of human nature, but this form of alienation must translate into productivity and labor. Through the use of capital, the separation of the working classes within that of the bourgeois is part of the materialization of the abstraction of human nature. "
| |
|
Classical Theism, 2007.
An analysis of the arguments for and against classical theism in religion and the broader world.
1,696 words (approx. 6.8 pages), 9 sources, MLA, £ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the prospects for defending the epistemic respectability of religious belief. It looks at where this can be found in institutionalized religion, as well as where it can be understood in a broader sense. The paper analyzes the philosophical arguments for and against classical theism and then discusses the general evidence that falls in favor of decrying classical theism and not supporting it.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
General Philosophical Arguments For Classical Theism
Philosophical Arguments Against Classical Theism
Definitional Problems
Logical Inconsistencies and Contradictions
Immortality and Life After Death
Miracles and Other Paranormal Phenomena
Science and Religion
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Though they are mostly mutually exclusive in nature, occasionally science and religion overlap with the former usually operating to denounce the latter. The two most common fields of contention are that of creation science and evolution, and homosexuality. Creation science holds that, according to God's words in the Bible, He created the world during a six day, 144 hour period between 4004 and 8000 BCE. However, science is in direct opposition to this - it is now nearly consensus opinion that the universe was created about 14 billion years ago and the Earth was formed approximately 4.5 billion years ago (Religious Tolerance)."
| |
|
Armstrong's Physiochemical Basis for Mental States, 2007.
An analysis of David Armstrong's arguments in "The Nature of Mind".
1,581 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 1 source, MLA, £ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses David Armstrong's "The Nature of Mind", which presents an attack on the behaviorist model of the nature of the mind and mental states. The paper first discusses Armstrong's arguments and analyses. It then concludes that Armstrong's intentions and arguments are quite valid, but the evidence supporting his position is sorely lacking.
From the Paper
"Logic can be used to prove any position, even with identical data sets--this is the danger of critical work performed in the humanities and social sciences. Unlike the hard sciences--such as molecular biology or astrophysics--is more difficult in the humanities to create situations and data that cannot be explained away using a variation of the prevailing theory. Its disciples defend the theory despite any evidence to the contrary. And though this does occur in the hard sciences to some degree, experiments are designed to disprove existing hypothesis, not set up conditions by which they can be confirmed. In asserting the dominance of scientific consensus in regard to conceptions of the human mind, Armstrong should have followed that lead and based his argument on the evidence that exists instead of suggesting a theory and then performing logical and linguistic acrobatics to demonstrate its validity."
| |
|
Hume's Causality Theory, 2007.
This paper discusses Hume's theory of causality to explain how and why we make judgments of causality.
1,482 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 9 sources, MLA, £ 29.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines David Hume's philosophy of causality that follows on from the empiricist philosophy. The paper discusses Hume's theory that people do not make judgments of how or why because causality does not exist. The paper explains the belief that only through the senses is information recorded, processed and inscribed upon our empty minds as a reaction to an aggregated association of thought. The paper stresses how empiricist philosophy denies the relevance of the person as a social, choosing being.
From the Paper
"David Hume (1711-1776) was the last and perhaps most controversially influential of "the three most famous British Empiricists of the eighteenth century" [John Locke 1632-1704, and George Berkeley (1685-1753](Flage 1). Although Hume's ideas had great impact on Immanuel Kant, Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, and Charles Darwin, the concept of empiricism can be traced back at least to Protagoras of Abdera, a fifth century Greek Sophist, who propounded the radical relativism that "Of all things the measure is man, of the things that are, that {or'how'] they are, and of things that [or 'how'] they are not" (Poster 4). Protagoras' taught that judgment of qualities, as abstractions like truth, are subjective, relative only to the individual observer. This, of course, is the basis of empiricism, the philosophy that all knowledge is derived from the experiences of the senses."
| |
|
The Meaning of Life, 2007.
This paper compares and contrasts Karl Marx's and Epicurus' ideas about the meaning of existence.
1,220 words (approx. 4.9 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper explores the meaning of life from the perspective of Karl Marx and Epicurus. The paper discusses how Marx's ideas of alienation of labor effectively reduces the significance of human existence to being synonymous with labor activity, while Epicurus argues for a broader conception of life. The paper is of the opinion that Epicurus' view is stronger and more universally applicable.
From the Paper
"Karl Marx, in developing his theory of the alienation of labour, implies that the meaning of life - its "point" in other words - lies in man's labour. It is this capacity to labour with conscious purpose that makes us human. In Marx's words: "The animal is immediately one with its life activity. It does not distinguish itself from it. The animal is its life activity. Man makes his life activity itself into an object of his will and of his consciousness. He has conscious life activity. . . .""
"Throughout his text, Marx's choice of words imply that to be human is to be synonymous with work. For example, in explaining one consequence of the alienation of labour where workers are alienated from their work, Marx states: "The result, therefore, is that man (the worker) feels that he is acting freely only in his animal functions" (Marx 51). Similarly, when describing the work or the labour itself, it is interesting to note how Marx suggests that work is at the core of our humanity. Thus, when the worker is alienated from his work: "so the worker's activity is not his spontaneous activity. It belongs to another; it is the loss of his self" (Marx 51)."
| |
|
Hobbes, Human Nature and the State, 2007.
This paper discusses Thomas Hobbes' beliefs about human nature and the origin, character and functions of the state.
1,251 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 3 sources, MLA, £ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines Thomas Hobbes' claims that man, in his natural state, is driven by competitiveness and the desire for power and resources, to the extent that he will kill to preserve his own life. The paper shows how Hobbes' ideas of the ideal dictatorial state were entirely at odds with notions of feudal life.
From the Paper
"Thomas Hobbes is widely known for the wonderfully pithy line in which he claims that in the state of nature, the life of man would be "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short." (Hobbes and MacPherson, 62) What is less widely known is that he based this claim on a calmly reasoned, materialist notion of the nature of reality. To Hobbes, all of reality consists of the motions of bodies. In the case of men, he believed that their motions are governed by passions, and moderated by reason. According to Hobbes, each man is an island, unable to truly understand other men, and motivated by a desire to be better than them, in terms of both reputation and resources."
| |
|
Classical Liberalism, 2007.
An analysis of the history, development and threats to classical liberalism.
2,140 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses classical liberalism and the threats and challenges that it faces from other ideologies. It looks at the reasons that classical liberalism may be undermined to such a degree that some form of theocratic ideology replaces it. Additionally, the paper describes the history and development of classical liberalism and its influence in politics and society in general.
From the Paper
"Analyzing these issues in the context of classical liberalism's survival in the twenty-first century reveals that liberal doctrines of individual rights and citizenship are always threatened because of fundamental flaws in human nature, especially self-interest and self-righteousness. Most social, political, economic, and religious actions people engage in are self-serving. They rationalize this, and persuade themselves and others that they are acting in the best interests of society, but this is little more than self-delusion."
"Fortunately, classical liberalism has survived the tensions and challenges imposed by other ideologies, for as Churchill observed, despite its flaws and the flaws of its citizens, liberal societies are like a life raft. The raft may leak constantly, may be rocked by rough waters, and may be navigated by unscrupulous captains, but it rarely sinks because the bonds that hold it together are stronger than the currents pulling it apart."
| |
|
"What is an Author?", 2007.
An analysis of Michel Foucault's understanding of authorship, according to his essay, "What is an Author?".
2,180 words (approx. 8.7 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the famous French philosopher and writer, Michel Foucault and his understanding of authorship, according to one of his most well known and controversial essays, "What is an Author?". It discusses his argument that our current social understanding of authorship is fundamentally flawed. The paper then looks at the validity of his statements and suggests that his argument remains largely compelling.
From the Paper
"Altogether, Foucault determines that authorship has only manifested itself in artistic and intellectual expressions which possess the potential to threaten the basic power structures of our society. This is why it does not affect all forms of expression in the same manner or to the same degree. Since he has argued that it is essentially a worthless way to attempt to genuinely understand a piece of literature and even the individual human being who is responsible for producing it, he is left with the conclusion that it must be useful for limiting the spread of information and keeping power mechanisms within society properly functioning: "How can one reduce the great peril, the great danger with which fiction threatens our world? The answer is: one can reduce it with the author. The author allows a limitation of the cancerous and dangerous proliferation of significations within a world where one is thrifty not only with one's resources and riches, but also with one's discourses and their significations," (Foucault)."
| |
|
Nietzsche's Philosophy, 2007.
This paper examines Nietzsche's impact on literary modernism.
2,152 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses Friedrich Nietzsche and the founding of modernism. The paper describes the various aspects of this genre, as well as Nietzsche's philosophy. The paper explains his ideas that control over life no longer came from outside humanity but human beings had control over their own inner workings. The paper explores Nietzsche's belief that "God is dead", which was perhaps one of the most world-defining statements made in recent history.
Outline:
Modernism
Nietzsche and His Philosophy
Blending the Two
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Literary modernism is a movement that occurred roughly between 1890 and 1939, although these parameters are somewhat flexible. Modernism was a multi-faceted approach to literature, focusing not just on setting and symbolism, but also on language, time, perspective, characters' internal reality and ambiguous endings, as well as other characteristics. With the changes that modernism brought to literature, writers were able to more fully explore the characters that populated the stories, rather than focus on the meanings behind the stories themselves."
| |
|
Gramsci and Marx's Philosophy, 2007.
This paper explains Antoni Gramsci's philosophical ideas in relation to Marxism and historical ideology.
762 words (approx. 3.0 pages), 1 source, MLA, £ 16.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper defines the various differences and relationships with Marxist thought that Antoni Gramsci provides in his study of philosophy. The paper discusses Gramsci's spontaneous philosophy that revolves around the idea of common sense. The paper explains the inherent differences Gramsci finds in relation to Marxist issues of contradiction within society.
From the Paper
"The major difference between Marxism and "spontaneous philosophy' for Gramsci is that intellectual order do not include common sense ideology; while Marx seeks out the differing method of "contradictions" to evaluate economic and social infrastructures. The spontaneous element of thinking in Gramsci's (1971) theory is controlled through the process of historical negation, as "common sense" is only a trend within historical patterns."
| |
|
Descartes' Philosophy, 2007.
This paper examines the philosophy of Rene Descartes.
1,174 words (approx. 4.7 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 24.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses the philosophical investigations of Descartes in his "Discourse on Method and the Meditations" and "Meditations on First Philosophy". The paper explains his ideas of senses and perception, the mind-body dualism, the nature of reality and the materials and methods of philosophy as a discipline.
From the Paper
"In the Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes presents what has come to be called the Cartesian dualism, referring to the idea that the mind and body are separate and that the mind is incorporeal. The senses are part of the body, presenting images and sensations to the mind. The fact that the senses may deceive creates doubt as to the nature of reality and the nature and utility of knowledge. For Descartes, the one thing that cannot be doubted and that is true each time it is expressed by a person is that the person knows that he or she exists. Descartes says he might doubt everything else because his senses may deceive him, and he may thus deny that he has a body and senses because he perceives these things only through what he has called the senses, and all this data might be false."
| |
|
Argument against Cloning, 2007.
This paper looks at the issue of stem cell research and provides an argument against cloning.
3,153 words (approx. 12.6 pages), 16 sources, MLA, £ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer discusses that ever since Dolly the sheep was cloned in 1996, cloning has been a controversial issue in contemporary medical ethics and biomedical research. The writer notes that cloning has many advocates, as it seems to offer the prospect of cures for diseases and illnesses that are currently incurable. However, the writer points out that it also has vociferous opponents, many of whom believe that scientists have no business interfering with sacred human life processes and beliefs. The writer maintains that the media furor generated by this admission highlights the importance of this issue. Moreover, the writer discusses that there is the ongoing problem that few scientific successes have been achieved in cloning. It remains unknown whether cloning will be utilized to cure diseases in our lifetime. This essay attempts to find the facts beneath the sensationalism, and argues that cloning is undesirable.
Outline:
Introduction
Background Information
Therapeutic Cloning
Reproductive Cloning
Benefits of Cloning
The Potential Benefits of Therapeutic Cloning
Limitations of Therapeutic Cloning
Limitations of Reproductive Cloning
The Arguments against Cloning
Arguments against Therapeutic Cloning
Arguments against Reproductive Cloning
Conclusion
From the Paper
"As mentioned above, the first reported successful clone was that of Dolly the sheep. This was an example of reproductive cloning, in which an embryo is created in order to grow it into a replica of the creature from which it is cloned. This is the most controversial application, as it involves creating life - and potentially, even creating human life. The process is the same as the beginning stages of therapeutic cloning, described above. However, instead of killing the embryo by harvesting stem cells, scientists allow it to continue growing, and then implant it into a womb. In the rare cases when this is successful, the embryo then grows to term and is born - an exact, new-born copy of the donor from whom the nucleus was taken."
|
|
|
