Phil

In: Philosophy and Psychology

Submitted By MLN123
Words 1580
Pages 7
Abortion
When I was growing up, my mother told me the truth that many years ago she wouldn’t give birth to me if she had made her decision. My family back then was not very poor, but my parents already had my older brother and sister. In the late of 1980s, the government in my country advised that every family should only have two children. Parents who had the third child would be fined with higher taxes. Therefore, my father suggested that she should have an abortion because my family couldn’t afford the fine. My life at that time was in great danger. It all depended on my mother’s decision. And she decided to keep me. Abortion has been an intensely debated issue in the United States today. It is very difficult to find someone who doesn't have an opinion about abortion, and probably a strong opinion at that. There are usually two sides of every issue: the pros and cons. There are many opinions on this topic, however, a good place to start is whether or not law has the authority to rule over morality and whether the laws that we have now bring enough attention to the moral value of abortion. Along with these concepts abortion can also be viewed through the eyes of the utilitarian approach to ethics which focuses on both pleasure and pain and the ability to maximize pleasure over pain. On the other hand, Libertarian considers abortion issue is a necessary thing when we need to protect human freedom.
A fundamental utilitarian makes a judgment according to how much general well being and happiness a certain act brings about. According to Jeremy Bentham’s Utility Principle, the morally right thing to do is always whatever brings about the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people. To Bentham, happiness is pleasure. Therefore, under the utilitarian’s point of view, the good side of abortion is to minimize the pain of the child and parents. For example, if the…...

Similar Documents

Business Ethics Phil 320

...Topics for Consideration Paper I Phil 320 1) Business or corporate leaders charged with unethical practices may (and often do) rightly point out that everything they did was perfectly legal. They broke no laws. Does that mean that their actions are necessarily ethical? What is the difference between a law and an ethical decision? 2) To what extent is the ‘free’ market at all compatible with moral considerations? (This, like almost all meaningful questions, is not going to be an either/or kind of thing.) Should we view business enterprises as bound by ethical obligations in the same way that we feel those obligations as individuals? Or is it legitimate to view commerce as operating largely independently of moral considerations? 3) How far should an individual’s responsibility extend? With the development of new technologies in transportation and communication, we are more aware of the consequences of our choices in faraway places than ever before. A truly rigorous stance would lead to absurdly paralyzing situations. Owning a car, buying affordable clothing, or just eating many foods (practically all), could be seen as ethically dubious. And yet it is often the case that we avoid certain businesses if we know that they treat their employees unfairly. How do we draw the line? 4) The same question (as above) can be asked of corporations. For example, Peter A. French argues that “corporations should be treated as full-fledged moral persons” with “whatever......

Words: 306 - Pages: 2

Phil Study Guide

...Phil 4 Midterm Study Guide Introduction: - Ontology is the study of being, kinds of things that exists, the different kinds of being. What is ultimately real? - Material: spatial/public/mechanical - Immaterial: nonspatial/private/teleological - Materialism: Matter is truly real and immaterial things are not - Idealism: Ideas are ultimately real - Dualism: Reality is both material and immaterial - Monism: There’s one single reality Lau Tzu (Laozi): - Taos analogy to water: water takes all shape, water doesn’t compete, it does nothing yet there’s nothing it can do, takes no form, all forms can be taken. - Taos analogy to uncarved block: un-carved block is preconceived, preconceived thoughts/values makes it harder to respond to present situations. - Taos analogy to valley spirit and the female: nonbeing “spirit of value with divine female”. Value -> space-> spirit -> life. Life fills empty space. Always allows for nonbeing. - The Tao that can be told of not the eternal Tao because the name that can be named is not the eternal name. - The Tao is the source of all reality because “The nameless is the origin of Heaven and Earth and The Named is the mother of all things.” - The saying there is a doing that comes from not doing is when the action emerges from you instead of it being something that you think about. Plato: - Form is immaterial reality - The divided line represents B as the highest point in the scale of reality, A being the lowest......

Words: 844 - Pages: 4

Response Paper Phil 201

...A Response to the Article: "On Being An Atheist" by H. J. McCloskey Joshua Cottrell PHIL 201-D32 Professor Pensgard August 12, 2013 The belief in a Creator and a literal God has been a subject of many arguments down through the centuries. Despite a written record and a large contingency of believers, there has arose a strong group of people who believe there is no God and that man just happens to exist and that there is nothing beyond this life. In 1968 H.J. McCloskey published an article entitled "On Being an Atheist". He argued that theories such as the Cosmological or Teleological arguments did nothing to prove in his mind the presence of God. He strongly believed that evil further cemented the idea that a righteous God did not exist. With his writing he attempted to empower the atheist and once and for all prove that God did not exist. I. "Proofs" McCloskey indentified theistic arguments for God as "proofs", and in so doing opened himself up to much scrutiny. He quotes a colleague as saying "...most theists do not come to believe in God by reflecting on the proofs, but to come to religion as a result of other reasons and factors." I do not believe that his colleague was referring necessarily to Cosmological or Teleological arguments as "proofs", as McCloskey ends of doing. I believe his associate was merely stating that most people do not come to religion because they see the sky and think there must be a Creator. There are a number of......

Words: 2242 - Pages: 9

Phil 201

...Stacy Mottola PHIL 201-D05 25NOV2013 Essay 1 Many question whether or not what we are seeing and are experiencing is real or just part of our imagination. This question is one that has been proposed for hundreds of years by philosophers like Descartes and Plato. How is it possible that a Greek philosopher, a philosopher from the seventeenth century and the movie The Matrix can be so similar? It is the intent of this paper to compare and contrast these questions in relation to the movie The Matrix. The main thing that stands out for each one of these is the question of the reality of the world in which we live. Our sense of being is called into question in each of these examples. Are our senses correct or are we simply living in a dream world that is made up? The Matrix is a computer system that has taken control of peoples everyday lives. Each individual is hooked up to this computer that generates a dream world where everyone believes that they are actually living a realistic life. In the Matrix Morpheus a leader of a group of people who have rebelled against this system come to the knowledge that they are not living real lives. In his recruitment Morpheus meets with Neo and attempts to show him the truth. Learning this Neo sees that what you can see, touch and feel are not exactly real, their senses have betrayed them. In the excerpt from Descartes he makes several statements which also question the reality in which our perceptions believe we are......

Words: 755 - Pages: 4

Phil 201

...COURSE SCHEDULE PHIL 201 Textbooks: Dew & Foreman, How Do You Know? A Short Introduction to the Issues of Knowledge (unpubl.) Evans, Philosophy of Religion: Thinking About Faith (2009). Foreman, Prelude to Philosophy: Critically Thinking about Foundational Beliefs Hasker, Metaphysics: Constructing a World View (1983). Holmes, Ethics: Approaching Moral Decisions (2008). Wood, Epistemology: Becoming Intellectually Virtuous (1998). WEEK/ MODULE READING & STUDY ASSIGNMENTS POINTS DUE DATE 1 3/17-3/24 Foreman: chs. 1-3 3 presentations 3 study guides Course Requirements Checklist Class Introductions Quiz 1 0 0 60 Wed,3/19 Mon,3/24 Mon, 3/24 2 3/25-3/31 Foreman: chs. 5-7 2 presentations 3 study guides Quiz 2 60 Mon, 3/31 3 4/1-4/7 Hasker: chs. 1-3 1 Word document 4 presentations 3 study guides Group DB Forum 1 Quiz 3 100 60 IP Fri, 4/4 R Mon, 4/7 Mon 4/7 4 4/8-4/14 Dew & Foreman: ch. 3 Wood: chs. 1-2 3 presentations 3 study guides Quiz 4 60 Mon, 4/14 5 4/15-4/21 Dew & Foreman: chs. 7, 10 Wood: ch. 4 1 Word document 2 excerpts 3 presentations 3 study guides Essay Quiz 5 120 60 Mon, 4/21 Mon, 4/21 6 4/22-4/28 Evans: chs. 1-3 1 book excerpt 2 presentations 3 study guides Quiz 6 60 Mon, 4/28 7 4/29-5/5 Evans: ch. 7 Holmes: chs. 1-3 1 article 2 presentations 3 study guides Response Paper Quiz 7 200 60 Mon, 5/5 Mon, 5/5 8 5/6-5/12 Holmes: chs. 4-7, 14 1 presentation 3 study guides Group DB Forum 2 Quiz......

Words: 349 - Pages: 2

Phil Essay

...PHIL 1F90: Spring 2011. Second Essay Question ONE (to be answered as a straight-forward philosophical essay): Silenus, the satyr, is, or perhaps pretends to be, a determinist. After all, everything about the satyr, both his nature and nurture, come directly from his creator, Hench. And certainly, at the beginning of the story, Hench accepts full responsibility for the satyr’s actions. But he eventually changes his mind. How can the satyr, all of a sudden, become morally responsible for his actions? What exactly changed in Hench’s thinking? Michael Gorr is a compatibilist. Does his position make better sense than either the determinist or the libertarian? Explain. Question TWO (to be answered as a philosophical essay but with your auto-biography as illustation): “There is little wonder that Silenus, the satyr, is a determinist because everything about him, that is, both his nature as well as his nurture, were outside his control. He had absolutely no say in the matter. But, when I think about it, this is equally true of me as well. How do I, as a human being, differ from the satyr (except for the half-goat, half-man part)? After all, I am nothing more than the causal result of my nature in combination with my nurture and therefore, just like the satyr, I too am not responsible for who I am, what I do, or even what I think. If everything about me is caused and outside my control, then I cannot really be free or morally responsible. I could not have done...

Words: 699 - Pages: 3

What Should Phil Do

...Question # 1 - Did Phil commit plagiarism? If so, what did he do wrong, and how could he have prevented this problem? Yes, Phil did commit plagiarism. According to the Academic Dishonesty and Plagiarism Policy, students are obligated to summarize, paraphrase, and use quotations to indicate that the content being used originated from another source. Phil failed to follow these guidelines when compiling his paper. Instead, he copied exact text without putting quotation marks around the material which is clearly defined as being dishonest. He could have prevented this problem by reading Professor Wemmick’s guidelines for the assignment before starting his paper which defines all aspects of plagiarism. If he took notes from the resources and then developed his own opinions instead of copying and pasting directly in his paper then he could have prevented this problem. In addition, Phil should have used quotes and cited the specific material he pulled from his resources. Question #3 - What are Phil's responsibilities? To whom is he responsible? What rules and guidelines should he follow? I agree with Trane that Phil was responsible for his work and allocated task within the assignment. To include submitting his paper in APA format and in accordance to Professor Wemmick’s guidelines. In addition, he was responsible for submitting his part of the assignment on time and without avoidable mistakes. I believe Phil could have avoided these errors by being organized and allocating......

Words: 577 - Pages: 3

Phil 201

...Tiffany Tyree Phil 201 Individual Project 2 Thursday, April 16, 2015 Metaphysics Study of Existence What's out there? Epistemology Study of Knowledge How do I know about it? Ethics Study of Action What should I do? Politics Study of Force What actions are permissible? Esthetics Study of Art What can life be like? Metaphysics: ◦What is real? What is real in life is what you make your life out to be yourself. Real is hugging your children and having the person that you love telling you that they love you for life? Real is the pain that you feel when you lose your brother and greave. You do not know if you will ever see this person again because you don’t know if there is a spirit world. ◦Is the physical world more or less real than the spiritual or psychological world? It’s hard to explain if the spiritual world or the psychological world are real or if it is just something that we have been lead to believe so we have spent years rolling over and over in our minds and made ourselves believe that it is real. From the time we are babies we are lead to believe that there is a heaven and angels and such. We are lead to believe in Santa and the tooth fairy and the Easter bunny, but who is to say that any of that is real except what we believe in our own minds and hearts. ◦Is there such a thing as a soul? If so, how does it survive outside of a physical body? I want to believe that there is such a thing as when we are buried that we have a soul that lives on in a......

Words: 1653 - Pages: 7

Phil 201 Essay

...Phil 201 6/14/15 Comparisons of The Allegory, Descartes and The Matrix While in the reality of his world, the main character of The Matrix, Neo finds himself doubting what really is and really isn’t. The writers of The Matrix did an excellent job of drawing similarities to that of Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” and Descartes’s Philosophical ideas. There are many similarities between the Allegory as well as to the Philosophical differences to The Matrix. The first major similarity that I noticed between the Allegory and The Matrix is the fact that both Neo and the character in Plato’s work had a feeling that something was not right. The both seemed to want to gain a deeper knowledge of the world around them and believed the world was not all it seemed but that it was more than what it seemed. They believed there was a deeper meaning to what was around them. They both accepted this and began the search for deeper meaning. This allowed both Neo and the slave to understand that they are not really in control of their world. At any moment something could change. In Neo’s case the computer programmer could change a code and have a building fall on him or possibly make someone disappear from his life. In the slaves case his life, since he was born, was ran by the farmers that he worked for within the cave. Their lives are very similar. Neo, even though he did not realize it was in the same position as the slave. He was a slave himself. The differences between The Allegory and...

Words: 643 - Pages: 3

Phil 201

...PHIL 201Response Paper Response to “On Being An Atheist” by H.J. McCloskey H.J. McCloskey attempted to contradict the arguments proving Gods existence used by theists in the article “On Being an Atheist”. Although there is no sufficient proof in the cosmological argument of their being a perfect creator, it does however provide evidence of a singular being. The evidence of an almighty creator is provided by the simple element of complex design. However, though this almighty creator allows the existence of evil in the world, He was not the one to create it, and, as such, has a purpose behind its existence. The existence of God can be logically concluded, contrary to McCloskey’s beliefs, using the philosophical inquiry. McCloskey refers to the cosmological, teleological, and design arguments throughout his article, and discuss how theists use them to prove the existence of God. McCloskey may, perhaps, believe that these arguments are unsuccessful because his different beliefs allow his approach to be different. Contrary to proof, these aspects of cosmological, teleological, and design are more accurately represented when used as evidence or as simply arguments. Dr. Mark Foreman describes proof, in his presentation of “Approaching the Questions of God’s Existence”, as something that involves a characteristic of complete certainty. As McCloskey refers to the many arguments as “proof” he implies that the arguments are thought to be facts of absolute truth. If this were......

Words: 1717 - Pages: 7

Phil

...Tianna Dockett PHIL 101 Final Exam 1. Retributive justice is a legal principal that dictates that punishment for a crime is acceptable as long as it is a proportionate response to the crime committed. In this type of justice system, a crime is typically seen as being done against the state or government, rather than against an individual or community. The standard of fairness is likewise found in the thought of reasonable play. On the off chance that individuals accept that a reasonable procedure was utilized as a part of choosing what it to be dispersed, then they may well acknowledge an irregularity in what they get in correlation to others. 2.3. As a record of political association on the bigger scale, Plato's protection of a aristocratic government was unrealistic to win wide endorsement in fair Athens. He utilized the characters Glaucon and Adeimantus to voice pragmatic complaints against the arrangement. They are particularly concerned (as Plato's Athenian counterparts may well have been) with some of its procurements for the gatekeeper class, including the support of both men and ladies, the disposal of families, and the instruction of youngsters. Likewise, Plato accepted that the hobbies of the state are best saved if kids are raised and taught by the general public overall, instead of by their natural folks. So he proposed a basic (if startlingly new) plot for the reproducing, sustaining, and preparing of youngsters in the gatekeeper class.4. Using a...

Words: 1277 - Pages: 6

Phil 111 - Affirmative Action

...Looking at Affirmative Action Timothy Eby Southern New Hampshire University Introduction to Critical Thinking PHIL - 111 Dr. Jean Suplizio October 11, 2015 Looking at Affirmative Action THESIS: Explore segments of the inherent disadvantages associated with affirmative action, as experience by non-minority college applicants. Present a relevant objection(s) and a response to the objection. DEFINITIONS: Affirmative action is defined as: “… programs required by federal statutes and regulations to remedy discriminatory practices in hiring minority group members; i.e. positive steps designed to eliminate existing and continuing discrimination, to remedy lingering effects of past discrimination, and to create systems and procedures to prevent future discrimination; commonly based on population percentages of minority groups in a particular area. Factors considered are race, color, sex, creed, and age. National Labor Relations Board v. Fansteel Metallurgical Corporation, 306 U.S. 240” (Black, 1990, p. 59). An additional definition can be found in the widely accepted Random House law dictionary: “… any step by a public or private employer, school, institution, or program, beyond the mere cessation of intentional discrimination, to promote diversity, provide opportunities, and alleviate the effects of past discrimination on the basis of race, sex, national origin or disability” (James, 2000, p. 20). REASON # 1: Colin Powell, the 65th United States Secretary of...

Words: 1677 - Pages: 7

Islamic Phil

...Muna Mohamed David G. Phil 1125 April 6, 2016 Any verbal denial of any principle of Muslim belief is considered apostasy. If one denies the unity of God or declares to a belief in reincarnation, then that person is guilty of apostasy. Apostasy means, to abandon the religion or a religious principle after accepting it. Moreover, Al-Ghazali was known as one the most influential thinkers in the history of Islam and his aim was to bring humanity closer to God. He was viewed as a faithful Asharite theologian in which one who believes that God is the only direct and indirect cause of actions. In this paper, we will examine Al-Ghazali’s reasons of the three teachings on which the philosophers are guilty of apostasy, and review ibn-Rushd’s defense of philosophy in the Decisive treatise, and decided whether ibn-Sina should be considered an apostate. Al-Ghazali illustrates three philosophical teachings that were apostasy and unorthodoxy. One of the first point is the philosopher’s belief in the eternity of the world. In other words, philosophers claim that the world is eternal and that the emanation of the first intellect and other beings happens because of the necessary causation of God’s essence, therefore the world as a whole is coexistent and coeternal with God. Ibn Sina believed that God does not have knowledge of the specifics of everything that takes place, rather he is is only aware of what takes place in the general sense. Ghazali replies to this saying that God’s......

Words: 790 - Pages: 4

Phil 2001 Hw1

...PHIL 2001: Homework 1 1. Explain the Hobbesian state of nature and why life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short"? Provide a short (1-2 paragraph) critique of this view. The Hobbesian state of nature is how Hobbes believe mankind would operate without any form of government. This state of nature is incredibly tumultuous, dangerous, and volatile. In Hobbes opinion, humans are naturally prone to conflict. Hobbes also believes that humans are all created equal both intellectually and physically, which contributes to this conflict. Since they are all equal, no one possess enough power to keep them in “awe”. It is for these reasons that Hobbes believes life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short”. I disagree with Hobbes regarding his ideas that everything a man does benefits himself in some way. We can see this time and time again in human nature. A great example of this is when people donate a kidney to a loved one. They gain nothing from this, but are still more than willing to do it. This selflessness is so engrained in us, it can even be seen in our movies and TV shows. The classic scene where someone jumps in front of a bullet to save their friend has been acted out hundreds of times. Another point of contention I have with Hobbe’s view of the state of nature, is his idea that a strong ruler must exist to swiftly punish those who defect from the state. I favor Rousseau’s view that this harsh ruler is not necessary because people will not naturally want to......

Words: 1254 - Pages: 6

Phil 347 Week 1

...Case Study: Week 1 Franca Thomas PHIL 347: Critical Reasoning Professor Bret Fuller Chamberlain School of Nursing Case Study: Week 1 Identify the main point and the supporting points of each argument: 1. Throughout history, people have disagreed about moral issues.  This isn’t true about science, because science is objective, and people can come to objective agreements.  If morality is not like science, and science is objective, morality must be subjective.  Morality, then, is just a matter of opinion. Main point: If morality is not like science, and science is objective, morality must be subjective. Supporting points: Throughout history, people have disagreed about moral issues.  This isn’t true about science, because science is objective, and people can come to objective agreements. Morality, then, is just a matter of opinion. 2. We should help people that are starving in other countries.  We have plenty of things that we can share without adversely affecting our own lives, and we are morally obligated to help people who are less fortunate than us if we can do so without giving up anything of comparable importance to the aid that we are giving. Main point: We should help people that are starving in other countries. Supporting points: We have plenty of things that we can share without adversely affecting our own lives, and we are morally obligated to help people who are less fortunate than us if we can do so without giving up anything......

Words: 620 - Pages: 3