Socrates was a fascinating yet exasperating philosopher who influenced many Western thinkers of today.

Socrates was a fascinating yet exasperating philosopher who influenced many Western thinkers of today. Socrates unusual methods of his time made him a philosophical martyr. Today Socrates methods and philosophies are used almost on an everyday basis by most people in the world. Socrates helped to shape our modern everyday values. Socrates was born (470BC) and lived in Athens, Greece for all of his life. Athens was filled with several sophers, traveling teachers who taught for money. Athens was a beautiful city with buildings covered in gold. In Socrates's time, he saw many of the gorgeous buildings such as the Acropolis and the Parthenon The center of the city or the agora was where one could most often find Socrates. It was here that he taught his philosophies. Socrates was described as ugly. He was potbellied with large bulging eyes and a snub nose. Anyone who knew him knew that inside he was "perfectly delightful." Socrates considered himself a "philo-sopher," or one who loves wisdom. He thought he was different from other philosophers of his time, according to him most bragged about how much they knew about their particular subject, when in fact they knew very little. Knowing this, Socrates considered himself a true philosopher- one who knows they know little about life and is troubled by knowing that. In 399 BC, Socrates was

  • Word count: 667
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Religious Studies & Philosophy
Access this essay

Outline and explain two criticisms of the teleological argument

Outline and explain two criticisms of the teleological argument The word teleology comes from the Greek word telos which means 'an account of' and originally meant the final ends, but now takes the meaning that everything has a purpose and a goal. The teleological argument attempts to establish the existence of God relevant to the observations of order and purpose in the universe, the teleological argument is also referred to as the argument from design as it takes the view point that there is evidence for the God, the designer. Although as Antony Flew had discovered that really it is an argument to design where as an argument from design infers that it argues from the premise that the world had been designed which petition principi, assumes what it is trying to prove. William Paley's argument from analogy begins with him imagining himself kicking a stone whilst walking, and then later finding a watch; he asks the same question of 'how did that object come to be here?'. Paley can accept that the stone may have been there forever, but the watch which is a man-made object surely could not have been there forever, therefore there must be something about the presence of the watch which requires further explanation. Paley notes down the differences between the watch and the stone, he discovers that the watch has means, ends and adaptation as it is able to tell the time; the

  • Word count: 844
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Religious Studies & Philosophy
Access this essay

Assess Kant's philosophy: How successful do you find his approach?'

Stacey Mottershaw 61/Wb 0th November 2003 'Identify and explore the central features of Kant's theory. How successful do you find his approach?' Immanuel Kant was born in 1724 and is known as being one of the greatest philosophers of all time. He is also one of the last philosophers to create an entire philosophical system that covers most of the major issues in ethics. In this essay I am going to be looking into Kant's Ethical Theory and the first and second formulation of his categorical imperative test. I am going to evaluate how successful they are in completing the aims they were originally given. Kant is a deontologist who only ascribes worth to the deontological approach and he does not administer his theory around consequences. This means that he believes all agents should perform their actions out of duty, with no other motivation and with no regard to the consequences of the action. Deontological theories differ over the basis or grounding of duty. For some, the duty is to God's will whereas to others (including Kant) the duty would be to the moral law, which is generated by the application of reason. He believes that to do something out of duty is to do it simply because it is the right thing to do. If a moral agent acts merely out of duty because it is the right thing to do then Kant would ascribe them moral praise. However, if they performed the same

  • Word count: 1221
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Religious Studies & Philosophy
Access this essay

Plato's Theory of Forms

Essay Answers- Plato's Theory of Forms Plato had many philosophies but the main one was his theory of forms, which we sometimes refer to as the theory of ideas. Plato's Forms are not mental entities, nor even mind-dependent. They are independently existing entities whose existence and nature are graspable only by the mind, even though they do not depend on being so grasped in order to exist. He believed that as well as the world that we live in and experience, which is a material world, there is another eternal world of concepts or forms. This eternal world is more real than the world, which we experience through the senses and it the object of knowledge not opinion. The world of sense experience has constant change, and this was a popular topic in philosophy as there is no truth or evidence that the world never stays the same from one moment to the next. Plato believed that that the answer was that there is certain truth, but this material world cannot reveal it. It can only present appearances, which lead us to form opinions, rather than knowledge. The truth is to be found on a different plane, in the non-material world of ideas or forms. Plato believed that if something was real, it had to permanent and unchanging. He thought that reality and perfect. When the Socrates asked him complex questions such as 'what is beauty?' or 'what is justice?' he was not trying to

  • Word count: 3492
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Religious Studies & Philosophy
Access this essay

Before answering whether both poetry and science enjoy equal success in expanding human knowledge, one must first understand what poetry and science are and what they do.

Before answering whether both poetry and science enjoy equal success in expanding human knowledge, one must first understand what poetry and science are and what they do. Poetry is an artist's way of abstractly conveying his or her ideas through writing so as to stimulate the emotional side of the readers. Science on the other hand, is an objective way of clearly stating facts so as to stimulate the "formal" or fact craving side of the readers. Poetry presents an object in order to convey a particular message or feeling, whilst science merely presents an object objectively and describes how it is, clearly, in every way possible. Therefore, it is clear that the purpose of these two approaches is quite different. Furthermore, the ways of knowing in poetry and science are somewhat different. Poetry's ways of knowing are mainly emotion and language, while sciences are mainly language and reason. However, although they have language in common, both of them utilize language in different ways and for different purposes. As is obvious from above, both approaches aim to expand two completely different parts of human knowledge. Poetry aims to expand the aesthetic while science the scientific. Therefore, they cannot be assessed on their ability to expand human knowledge based on the same criteria but rather, they should both be assessed based on individual criteria in their

  • Word count: 1403
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Religious Studies & Philosophy
Access this essay

Does Aristotle regard the description of an ideal state and the analysis of actual states as distinct or as related subjects of political enquiry?

Ian Bishop Does Aristotle regard the description of an ideal state and the analysis of actual states as distinct or as related subjects of political enquiry? Aristotle regards the state as a natural entity, which is possessing of a telos, that is, an end. This end is assumed to also be the best condition that a state can reach; that being the provision of the capacity to live the good life for the citizens of the state. The ostensible purpose of The Politics is to determine whether this goal is being achieved by current states, and how it might best achieved in the future. The failure of current states to provide these circumstances motivates Aristotle to inquire into the properties of a hypothetical 'ideal state', and relate his findings to existing states. Clearly then, there is at least and academic relationship between the study of existing states and the ideal state to which they are compared. However, for Aristotle I believe that the relationship is far deeper than this, for the telos of providing the good life is the same for both ideal and actual states in Aristotle's view. Thus, it seems to me that not only are the studies of ideal and actual states related, they are ultimately identical for Aristotle. Aristotle clearly intends actual state and the ideal state to be considered simultaneously. This is immediately apparent in the way that the actual

  • Word count: 1743
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Religious Studies & Philosophy
Access this essay

Ethics - Terms to know

ETHICS TERMS TO KNOW Worldview--The way the world is seen & made sense of; framework of individual understanding. e.g. Deism - God abandoned creation Nihilism - Reality has no value; traditional values unfounded Existentialism - Life has no meaning but what we give it Eastern Pantheism - Polytheism, i.e. Hinduism Naturalism - Secular humanism / modernism; God is irrelevant--nothing exists but natural world New Age Pantheism - All is one; no distinction between plants, people; all are God Judeo-Christianity - There is only one God who created universe; God is involved w/ creation Post Modernism - God is dead; truth is a social construct; relativism prevails Ethics--The explicit, philosophical reflection on moral beliefs and practices. (The difference between ethics and morality is similar to the difference between musicology and music. Ethics is a conscious stepping back and reflecting on morality, just as musicology is a conscious reflection on music). Descriptive Ethics--Stating actual moral beliefs. Normative Ethics--Study of what is really right or wrong. Metaethics--Study about field of Ethics. Metaethics Theories Objectivism--There are correct and incorrect answers. Subjectivism--There are no correct or incorrect answers. Absolutism--All moral rules hold without exception--there is only one truth; opposite of relativism, contrasts with

  • Word count: 684
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Religious Studies & Philosophy
Access this essay

Is Any Account of the State of Nature Convincing?

Is any Account of the Condition of Mankind in the State of Nature Convincing? (30) The State of Nature is a hypothetical state where there is no government, no state, and no laws to rule over mankind, which allows us to understand the question of 'why should I be governed?' The movement from the State of Nature to a government or a state, many philosophers argue, is based on the need for a social contract, supported by Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau. The social contract is an agreement between the people to live together under the laws in our society (according to Hobbes, this contract can either be tacit or explicit), though the reason that we enter this social contract differs due to the many conditions of the nature of mankind in the state of nature, as each account offers a very different view on humanity. Hobbes depicts a savage State of Nature (referred to as a 'State of War' in Leviathan), and to understand this State of Nature, we must first understand its components - people. Hobbes puts forward that the most fundamental desire of mankind is that of 'self preservation', and that it is indeed a 'natural right'. Hobbes believes that, as there is no law or authority to stop us acting on this desire, we are liable to do almost anything to stay alive, with no regard for the well-being of others. As this is a fundamental desire for the whole of mankind, Hobbes reasons that

  • Word count: 1166
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Religious Studies & Philosophy
Access this essay

How might a moral relativist respond to the claim that people should always tell the truth? Assess the strengths and weaknesses of relativist views of ethics.

A. How might a moral relativist respond to the claim that people should always tell the truth? B. Assess the strengths and weaknesses of relativist views of ethics. (A) To tell the truth is morally right, but telling a lie can also be morally right. Can the contradictions both be justified if the motive is love? Can we lie if the intention is love, or by always telling the truth are we "better people"? Some relativists claim that as long as the intention is love, then an action is morally right. In a relationship, when the crucial moment arrives and your partner turns to you and says, "Do you love me?", how best do you respond? Morally, can you justify lying to someone about love? The law of love says that you can not refrain from action. If refrain denies you from following a certain course, then can lying be accepted? Dependant upon whether you do love the person or not, the best approach to take will be a matter of your personal opinion and beliefs. Fletcher would deal with a situation relative to love. Relativism, "relativizes the absolute, it does not absolutize the relative". If the absolute is such that, you should tell the truth because it is the loving thing to do, then relativism would say that, maybe saying "Yes, I do love you", may be justifiable, but it may also cause the most pain in the long run. This relativist approach is held by consequentalists. The pain

  • Word count: 1369
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Religious Studies & Philosophy
Access this essay

Utilitarianism VS Kantian Deontological Ethics

Utilitarianism VS Kantian Deontological Ethics Utilitarianism is a theory of metaethics. This means that it is grounds for what we mean when we say something is good, bad, right or wrong. This differs from normative ethics, which addresses which things that we encounter in real life are good or bad. Utilitarian ethics is based on quantitative maximisation of some good for society or humanity and its main advocate was Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832). It is a form of consequentialism, thus focusing on the outcomes of actions and placing emphasis on the ends over that of the means. The good that is required to be maximised is often happiness or pleasure, though some utilitarian theories might seek to maximise other consequences. Utilitarianism is sometimes summarised as "The greatest happiness for the greatest number." As a form of consequentialism, utilitarianism states that we must first consider the consequences of our actions, and from that, make an appropriate choice about our action that would generate the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people (or in some forms of utilitarianism, people and animals). In modern times this is, perhaps wrongly, interpreted as stating that an action is judged entirely by its consequences, and so can be morally good even though the intentions of the action may have been villainous or wicked. Thus, this interpretation

  • Word count: 3981
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Religious Studies & Philosophy
Access this essay