Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Introduction to Ethics Quizlet
Introduction to Ethics Quizlet
Kant essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Who am I? Where does the world come from? What is my stance on these questions? At first glance, these seem like simple questions with simple answers, but the truth is that it has taken me all semester to even start developing my stance. If find that the answers to these questions developed as I learned about the philosophies of Thomas Aquinas, Immanuel Kant, and Socrates. From these philosophers, I have come to believe that I am a relative empiricist born with innate morals who believes that God created me and the world, but above all I have come to the realization that I truly do not know anything for certain while I can search my entire life for answers.
Who am I? I find that I am a relative empiricist with innate morals that I do not always seem to follow. I determined that I am mainly empirical but I am also a little bit rational when I agreed with Kant’s idea that humans get our knowledge from our senses, but our perception of those senses is dependent on a person’s mind. Thomas Aquinas also helped me realize that I am mainly an empiricist because I realized that I also look ...
"Where did man come from? Where did time begin? Who, or what, created all things?" These are questions that mankind has sought to answer from the beginning of existence as it is known today. Many stories and fables have been told and passed down from generation to generation, yet two have survived the test of time and criticism.
Humans are, by nature, filled with curiosity. We incessantly seek to learn about the universe. Not surprisingly, we simultaneously strive to learn about ourselves. What is our place in the world? How do we grow into the people we are meant to be?
Rationalism and empiricism have always been on opposite sides of the philosophic spectrum, Rene Descartes and David Hume are the best representative of each school of thought. Descartes’ rationalism posits that deduction, reason and thus innate ideas are the only way to get to true knowledge. Empiricism on the other hand, posits that by induction, and sense perception, we may find that there are in fact no innate ideas, but that truths must be carefully observed to be true.
Empiricism by nature is the belief that there is no knowledge without experience. How can one know what something tastes like if they have never tasted it? For example, would someone know that an apple is red if they have never actually have seen one? Someone can tell you an apple is red, but, if you have never seen one, can you really be sure? One must first understand what empiricism is before one can assess its validity. Empiricism can be defined as the view that experience, especially of the senses, is the only source of knowledge (Free Dictionary). The existence of empiricism will be understood through an examination of the attack on innate ideas and the origin of ideas, filling the 'Tabula Rasa'; the objection
In conclusion, my worldview encapsulates the fact that a God exists and he has created the human race in his image. Being created in his image, I am bestowed with God’s character of love, kindness, righteousness, forgiveness, and all other great attributes expressed by him. Our duty as those who claim the title “Christian” is to live with a Christ like attitude and to walk the walk instead of just talking the talk. I need to put my knowledge, talents, and skills to work for Christ till his return. The choice to live my life for him is what gives my life meaning and purpose.
To begin with the question of rationalism versus empiricism, it is important to understand, first, what it is that rationalists argue. This school of thought infers that all knowledge comes from within, an innate source that arrives with us at birth. Rationalists "suggest that only the truths we arrive at through our minds alone can count as knowledge".(White & Rauhut, pg.64) They argue that the conclusions that we arrive at through our senses are not adequate enough to count as legitimate knowledge. Instead, this school of thought maintains that because the world that we experience through our sense is in a state of constant change it can, therefore, not be relied upon in deriving distinct and reliable truths, also known as absolute truths.
Nash, Ronald H., (1999). Life‘s ultimate questions: an introduction to philosophy, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49530, page 284, quoting Arthur Holmes, “ The Justification of World View Beliefs”
I now realize that there a variety of ways of thinking, and it is up to me to decide whether or not I want to follow and believe the theories and ways of thinking. If I were to summarize this class into one sentence or statement, I would say that my eyes have been opened to the vast world of profound intellects. The key topics that have been discussed in this paper include an explanation of my epistemological stance and where my roots originated, an exploration of my views and the textbooks views on reality and freedom, a discussion on where God is placed in my world and life, an description on how I make appropriate ethical decisions, an analysis on my greatest influencers in my life, an elucidation on how I observe life and purpose in life, and an overview on how this class has assisted me in life. In reflection, I now realize where I fit inside this world, and I often reflect and ponder the knowledge that I have attained throughout my time in this class and in many other classes previous to this one. Philosophy has broken the mental barriers that I have placed in front of my ways of thinking, and I can see that there is so much more to learn in this
The universe, and what it means to be alive is almost impossible to define; yet that does not stop humanity from trying. “Lonergan’s philosophy of the human person reveals that being human means having an unlimited number and variety of questions about life and the universe.” (Morgan, 1996). There is no limit on the number and variety of questions the human person will ask, "the most subversive people are those who ask questions” (Gaarder), as a result there are many varied and opinionated answers. This essay will explore three different theories on how one might find answers to life's ultimate questions. At one point or another, every human being has asked the question why: Why am I here? What is my purpose? What is the point? It is in our nature as human beings to reason, to think, to ask, it is what separates us from the rest of creation, and with this ability to reason, we are left with one question: Why? Throughout history many have tried to answer this question, some have come to the conclusion that meaning is found through God, and one’s faith. Others feel that life begins meaningless, and it is up to the individual to give life meaning; then there are those who believe that life has no meaning, and we are all essentially, just waiting to die, "The meaning of life is that it ends." (Kafka).
Unlike rationalists, empiricists believe that sense perception is the main source of knowledge. John Locke explained this by dividing ideas into 2 parts: 1) simple, and 2) complex. Simple ideas are based only on perception, like color, size, shape, etc. Complex ideas are formed when simple ideas are combined.
To the empiricists, our mind is a blank slate when entering the world and only through experience are marks left on it. Empiricists are content with believing in conclusions that are probable rather than absolutely certain (Lawhead). Our sense experiences may not provide complete certainty as rationalists would like, but it is all we have to go on. Empiricists are against the speculation that rationalists tend to make. Empiricists believe every idea, concept, or term must be tested by tracing it back to an original experience from which it was derived (Lawhead). Empiricists also differ from rationalists by claiming that we have no innate ideas. While some ideas may seem universal, the empiricists would say these are expressions of the relations of our ideas or the generalizations from experience (Lawhead). For example,
Empiricism is the belief that all knowledge and ideas come from the senses and that the only way we can know anything about the world is through those senses. This has a tendency to be true in the fact that people learn from their mistakes. Growing u...
...an one position alone. Rationalism uses and accepts the ideas that are believed to be true all the time, but the problem is denying those that have the slightest bit of doubt. (253) It is okay to be skeptical of certain aspects, but not when you deny everything. Rationalism can be quite difficult to follow, because it’s is fairly challenging to deny your surroundings and partially true facts. It is also problematic as it emphasizes that facts are completely correct before they are accepted or they are denied, an example of perfectionism. Empiricism explains life in a much better aspect, rather than using reason to explain the world, senses and experiences help to explain what we have been through. Our world cannot be explained through assumptions only, perhaps we can combine the idea process with the ideas of empiricism to help us further understand life in general.
For many, personal morality is something left unexamined except in difficult situations which runs contrary to Socrates great admonition. The prophet Isaiah wrote, “Come now, let us reason together, says the LORD.” This examination is healthy but a worthy discipline for every human being. My moral philosophy is derived from a creator God revealed through the person of Jesus Christ as revealed in the Bible.
Do you know yourself? If you were to look in the mirror right now could you see the image of you staring back? If you were standing in front of God right now could you explain to Him who you are? If you were to write a paper right and answer the prompt: “Who are you” could you do it?