| Papers [271-285] of 4357 :: [Page 19 of 291] | | Go to page : <— 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 —> | |
|
|
Face to Face with God, 2007.
This paper analyzes the book 'Till We Have Faces: A Myth Retold' by C.S. Lewis.
1,419 words (approx. 5.7 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer discusses the book 'Till We Have Faces: A Myth Retold' by C.S. Lewis and notes that Lewis has created a complex novel in his retelling of the story of Cupid and Psyche. The writer points out that it is a novel with numerous themes and meanings, one which is very deep and reflects on the very core of the interaction between human nature and spirituality. The writer relates that speaking largely on the power of God, the Divine, love, jealousy and family among other themes, Lewis creates a powerful character in Orual whose transformation reflects on the very nature of God's involvement in life and on love, spirituality, and holiness within an individual. The writer concludes that Orual went through the process of gaining a face through her conversion and through her realization of her own self-deception, Lewis is suggesting that it requires internal awakening of the divine before true conversion and understanding of God can be reached.
From the Paper
"Orual's conversion, and her own struggles with the divine, is reflective of the challenges humans must overcome to discover God. To find God, one must first find God in him or herself. Only through finding the divine inside, can one truly discover God. With the veil over the faces, to borrow Lewis' metaphor, humans have to face, and therefore cannot see the face of God. The face of God is not for humans to see anyway, because it is so pure and divine. However, there will come a day when we all have faces, as the title suggests, and then truly can we discover God. Ultimately, we must discover the Godliness in us as individuals; we must all undergo the conversion of Orual. The love that humans think they feel is not unconditional and it has to be to discover God. Discovering God is finding heavenly love in oneself, and to discover that one must believe in the greater spiritual powers without empirical proof. Psyche found her true happiness by trusting God, and she had beauty that was limitless. In Till We Have Faces, Lewis depicts how humans must go through a conversion, a difficult conversion in which they find true love in themselves in order to understand the true love of God. Only then, can God be discovered."
| |
|
Kant and Mill, 2007.
An analysis of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill's views of morality and their application to certain scenarios.
1,643 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the views expressed by Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill with regards to the metaphysics of morals and utilitarianism. In other words, it discusses moral obligations and motivations. The paper presents various examples where there are issues with morality and describes how Kant and Mill would view the situation and the conclusions they may have drawn.
From the Paper
"Mill, on the other hand, might view Judah's act as one that is morally permissible. For Mill, the principle of utility must factor in the relative pain of Dolores' death, and the pain of those who would be affected by allowing her to reveal their affair. With Dolores dead, Judah, his family, friends, and others would be spared the psychological harm of dealing with adultery and betrayal. No one would have to deal with the horrible divorce that would ensue. However, had Dolores broken up his marriage, then it seems no one, not even Judah or Dolores would be happy. So, in this sense, one would view the murder as a morally defensible action. This, however, does not seem entirely correct, as the pain of Dolores' death seems a much greater slight than the pain that his family would experience by the knowledge of the affair. Mill's principle of utility seems to be able to account for qualitative factors (in separating the two forms of pleasure, Mill obviously views qualitative factors as meaningful in moral calculus), thereby providing the justification that Dolores' murder is unacceptable, as her pain would outweigh the potential pleasure realized by her death, or the pain that would accompany her revealing the affair (cf. Mill 11)."
| |
|
Political Theory, 2007.
A review of the political theories of Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes.
905 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes and discusses the theories of both Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes in an effort to better understand political theory. The paper uses and explains direct quotes.
Outline:
Abstract
Machiavelli's and Hobbes' Perceptions of the Ruler
Political Philosophies of Machiavelli and Hobbes
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Hobbes stands in contrast to Machiavelli, at least on the surface, in terms of his theories on who should rule the state. Whereas Machiavelli advocates the ideas of absolute power, submission among subjects, and the gaining of authority through a display of force, Hobbes seems to be more attuned to the ideas of the nature of man to be essentially free, and the ruling of the state by a democratic type of a body, rather than a solitary dictator or despot. For example, one can consider the following quote from Hobbes: "The right of nature... is the liberty each man hath to use his own power, as he will himself, for the preservation of his own nature; that is to say, of his own life." (Harrison, 2003, p. 67). In other words, Hobbes is saying that every person has within them certain rights, yearnings and liberties; as such, the individual is entitled, and indeed should, pursue their own interests and not be oppressed by rulers. Likewise, rulers should not attempt to force subjects into submission or to rule by intimidation or fear- for Hobbes, power must be earned and maintained through a level of fairness (Rogers, et al, 2000). Within this scope, the ruler should be motivated, in Hobbes' opinion, by serving the interests of the people over whom they govern. Likewise, the citizens would be involved in the political process, and the ruler, having earned the right to rule, would have the duty to effectively lead with conscience rather than sheer force."
| |
|
Atheism, 2007.
A discussion regarding the beliefs of atheists and deists, focusing primarily on atheism.
1,461 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This research explores arguments and counterarguments regarding the existence of God. According to the paper, atheists live in a material world and deny the existence of anything that cannot be seen, felt, or touched. The paper further reports that the key atheist argument is that God does not exist because the essence of God cannot be experienced on earth.
Outline:
Does God Exist?
The Atheist Viewpoint
The Deist Answer
From the Paper
"If we simply live and then die, our actions do not matter. The future does not matter; therefore, humankind must have some higher purpose. Atheists argue that our higher purpose is in service to man and the future inhabitants of earth. Deism does not undermine man's need to serve the future generations of humankind; it simply recognizes and embraces man's higher purpose. If one is dedicated to God and the higher purpose of improving humankind, then one does no have to justify their reason for existence through actions. Both deists and atheists have their sights on the future, the difference is that Atheists must justify their existence through actions. However, they have no investiture in the outcomes of their actions."
| |
|
David Hume, 2007.
This paper looks at the beliefs and works of philosopher, historian and economist David Hume.
4,340 words (approx. 17.4 pages), 0 sources, MLA, $ 114.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer notes that David Hume was seen as a very prominent figure in history both in the Scottish enlightenment and in Western philosophy. The writer notes that interest in Hume's work in recent years has become more centered on the philosophical writing that he did, but it was for being a historian that he originally gained some notoriety. The writer points out that much of what Hume had to say became closely involved with others as they examined their own philosophies and ideas. This made Hume's work much more significant because so much of what he stated and believed in was studied by others and expanded on as time passed. The writer concludes that Hume meant a great deal to many philosophers, and this is part of the reason that his work is still so alive and important today while the work of others of his time have not been as closely studied.
From the Paper
"In David Hume's article on empiricism, he attempts to show how some things that people believe to be real are the product of false knowledge, and there is a difference between things that people perceive to be true and things that actually are true. Hume's theory is that only things that can be proven, such as mathematics, are absolutely true. Other things may seem to be true because something usually happens related to something else, but even though this seems to always be the case there is room for argument in that it does not have to be the case every time, simply because it has happened that way in the past. Hume believes that the only truth is mathematical truth, and that there are many other things in the world that people falsely perceive to be true because they have not subjected those things to an examination that is serious enough to show otherwise."
| |
|
Hedonistic Act-Utilitarianism, 2007.
An examination of the various types of utilitarianism, particularly hedonistic act-utilitarianism, and their applications to life.
3,128 words (approx. 12.5 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 91.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper describes and discusses the concept of hedonistic act-utilitarianism. It discusses the importance of morality in society and how the theory of morality changes depending on how one defines one's social obligations. It then describes the utilitarian theory and how a Utilitarian may view an act. The paper goes on to discuss rule utilitarianism and the various types of utilitarianism, such as hedonism and egoism. The paper concludes by exploring the concept of hedonistic act-utilitarianism and its applications.
Table of Contents:
Heroism and the Call to Duty
Utilitarianism and Justice
Hedonism and Egoism
What, Other Than Pleasure, Is Valuable?
Issues of Utilitarian Impartiality
From the Paper
"According to Hurka and Copp (pp. 357-380) utilitarianisms affects the groups, more so than the individual. Therefore, the same dilution effect can be seen in the division of the greater social good. When one considers the group, everyone receives a smaller piece of the pie. The plausibility of hedonism in a utilitarian act depends on one's definition of pleasure and how the group dynamics work as far as spreading the rewards and punishments to their members. It is plausible to have hedonism and utilitarianism together. However, one must be careful to qualify their definitions. One can speak of the hedonistic acts of an individual or the hedonistic acts of a group. It is plausible for a group to have hedonistic act-utilitarian. However, this is more difficult for the individual because of the differences in perception. The answer to the question lies in which microscope one uses to examine the issue."
| |
|
"Critique Of Pure Reason", 2007.
An analysis of the arguments presented by Immanuel Kant in "Critique of Pure Reason."
903 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Immanuel Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason," which is the great thinker's most critically acclaimed work. It presents Kant's numerous arguments in favor of the possibility of metaphysics and shows how he tried to establish a much-needed link between science and metaphysics. It also discusses how he tried to bridge the gap between reason and metaphysics with the help of priori and posteriori.
From the Paper
"In the Critique, Kant invites science 'to undertake anew the most difficult of all its tasks, namely, that of self-knowledge, and to institute a tribunal which will assure to reason its lawful claims'. This tribunal is 'no other than the critique of pure reason' (Axi) and thus in the book Kant presented numerous arguments in favor of the possibility of metaphysics and tried to establish a much-needed link between science and metaphysics. Kant was fully aware of the shortcomings of both pure reason and pure metaphysics. He understood the problems posed by the two fields in exclusivity and hence tried to bridge the gap with the help of priori and posteriori. According to him we need a priori in order to move to posteriori. He feels that at some level all sciences require priori- i.e. a prior knowledge that mind just happens to possess and which happens to be true as well. The mind, Kant maintains, must be capable of holding true knowledge or generating it. For example it is important for it to know that night changes into day and day into night because of some heavenly changes. When it possesses this knowledge, it can move on to posterior to test the truth of it."
| |
|
Altruism Within Evolutionary Biology, 2007.
An analysis of the paradox of altruism within evolutionary biology.
1,502 words (approx. 6.0 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines, through collected evidence, whether or not altruism can occur under the premise of evolutionary biology. It explains what evolutionary biology is and then explains the concept of altruism. It then goes on to explain why altruism is a paradox for evolutionary biology. The paper presents theories on altruism in an attempt to explain and minimize this paradox.
Table of Contents:
Abstract
Introduction
Background
Methods
Discussion
From the Paper
"There are many different results that are possible within this experiment. First, the expected result is that the majority of individuals will answer that they would act altruistically. However, they could act altruistically in some cases, as when they are giving change back to others, but selfishly when it comes to saving a drowning person and risking their own lives. Another scenario is that they could act selfishly when they are in the room by themselves, but when they are doing so in conjunction with someone else, they might be motivated by the visual sign of someone else to be altruistic. I argue that in most cases individuals will be altruistic and that they are altruistic because it is a reciprocated trait. When it comes to the questions of whether they would act altruistically knowing that the other person would not do the same. I believe the majority of individuals will still act altruistically. Although this result might differ from person to person."
| |
|
Philosophical Understanding, 2007.
This paper looks at philosophical beliefs, particularly as they relate to science and religion.
981 words (approx. 3.9 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 34.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer explains that there is a very basic problem associated with each individual's innately subjective understanding of the world: it makes generalizing feelings or experiences to all of humanity unavoidably inaccurate. In other words, no matter how deeply we might feel about one thing or another, we cannot reasonably assert that anyone else feels the same way. The writer points out that obviously, this presents a problem for religion, because religion is concerned with providing some form of meaning for our existence. Yet, precisely how that meaning is conveyed must fall somewhere in between pure individualism and interconnectedness. The writer concludes that religion could be interpreted as more natural than science: science must operate on the same form of knowledge - faith - that gives any of our lives meaning.
From the Paper
"Throughout the history of mankind there have been two major ways by which human beings have claimed to attain knowledge: through direct observation and through revelation. One of these modes of gaining knowledge has led us down the most practical avenues of our development. It most likely, for example, that the earliest people who discovered how to harness fire did so by observing it in action, and employing trial and error to eventually arrive at a workable technique. It is far less likely that these individuals were simply inspired to rub two sticks together in a particular manner independent of any empirical knowledge achieved over the course of their lives. In other words, few people would accept the idea that God told the first person who made fire how to go about it."
| |
|
Utopian Writers of the 17th Century, 2007.
A review of different concepts of utopia as expressed by 17th century utopian writers.
6,330 words (approx. 25.3 pages), 13 sources, MLA, $ 147.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses and analyzes the utopian literature and ideas put forth by writers and philosophers in the 17th Century. It reviews and analyzes this literature from the perspective of literary critics and the writers who carve out utopian ideology and circumstance. It discusses the views that pinning down a definition for utopia is an exercise in opinion and not substantive fact.
Table of Contents:
Definitions Of Utopia: James Holstun
Definitions Of Utopia: Sir Thomas More
Definitions Of Utopia: J.C. Davis
Definitions Of Utopia: J.H. "Jack" Hexter
Eastern Definitions Of Utopia: Buddhism, Daoism, And Confucianism
Utopian Luminaries: Francis Bacon
Puritanism As Utopia
Utopian Luminaries: Mary Astell
From the Paper
"Once she had pulled herself out of the black hole she had been in, Astell was determined to do something positive for other women; and moreover, she wanted to help women in ways that transcended mere economic issues. She saw the "moral and spiritual destitution of many more" women than those she counted among the very poor and homeless, and she was very concerned for wealthy women who lacked humanistic values, according to Sutherland's critique. As Astell got her feet in the ground and became solvent, and later moved in high society, she "was deeply shocked by the superficiality of the lives of most women." Many of these wealthy women were just as impoverished morally as Astell had been impoverished materially and financially. In Proposal Astell describes in excellent narrative that she was "horrified by the waste of time, of intelligence, of talents given by God," Sutherland continues. And so, the book proposed the establishment of a "Protestant Nunnery" where women who were not married "could take refuge in a life of holiness and service.""
| |
|
Marx the Individual, 2007.
This paper discusses Karl Marx and the subject of individualism.
2,064 words (approx. 8.3 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 65.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer notes that Karl Marx is best known for his incisive analysis and acidic criticisms of capitalism, including the ideology that reinforces and legitimizes it. The writer points out that Marx is especially critical of modern theories of individualism. The writer discusses Marx's critique of individualism as developed and demonstrated in the political writings of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, two of the greatest champions of individualism. The writer explains that Karl Marx is known for his "Communist Manifesto" and "Capital", writings that would change the course of history. The writer concludes that ultimately, Marx's entire way of thinking is a critique of the individualistic ideas of Hobbes and Locke.
From the Paper
"Most of Marx writings suggest an understanding of the world that is not in terms of individualism as Hobbes and Locke, despite their differences, have championed. This ties into Marx's ideas that eventually the classes that are dominated by the capitalists will come to rise and overthrow the system and create a much more communal society- communism. However, before this can become a reality Marx has to define the world in different terms than Hobbes and Locke. People have common interests and unite behind those interests to Marx; those interests are being exploited as workers or being the capitalist doing the exploiting trying to protect and further one's interests. Therefore people are united by a common interest one way or the other. There is no individual freedom as the system, whether feudal or capitalist, tells people what they should do and how they should further themselves. The natural state of freedom is not existence to Marx. Furthermore, Marx does not believe that people are necessarily at a state of war, but rather are acting rationally in a system dominated by classes and the need to accumulate resources. Ultimately, Marx's entire way of thinking is a critique of the individualistic ideas of Hobbes and Locke."
| |
|
Aristotle and Capital Punishment, 2007.
This paper discusses Aristotle, teleology and the death penalty.
1,768 words (approx. 7.1 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 57.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer discusses capital punishment, which is a controversial issue in today's society. The writer notes that it is questionable whether man is justified morally to take another man's life, particular when it comes to an official or sanctioned killing. The writer discusses that Aristotle created a notion that came to be known as teleology that can help to understand the ethical issue. The writer explains that within this notion, Aristotle offers four causes that can help to explain the 'why' aspect of any why-related questions.
The writer concludes that Aristotle's logic is genius and powerful and shows things for what they really are. Further, the writer maintains that the death penalty is unethical because it assumes things to be true that are not necessarily true.
From the Paper
"Teleology means the end of the process, and in consider capital punishment as an ethical issue the end of the process must be considered first. The end to capital punishment is to put to death the person guilty of the crime. However, this is not necessarily the end, or reason for capital punishment. Capital punishment is intended to punish a person by taking his or her life. But there can be a second interpretation of the ethical issue of capital punishment and that is that the end of capital punishment is the prevention of a crime in the first place. Thus according to teleology, capital punishment could be considered to have two different ends. As an ethical issue, capital punishment is a much deeper issue than simply molding a bronze statue, which is the end to the Aristotelian example. Much can be left up to interpretation, and therefore a deeper look at the two possibilities for capital punishment viewed from the Aristotelian viewpoint on causality and teleology. If the end product is necessary to explain the event, then there are two ways to explain capital punishment. Capital punishment is capital and thus death is the final result. But also, punishment implies punishment for doing something wrong and thus the punishment is intended to prevent something from being done wrong in the first place, and that is a second possible end."
| |
|
Group Think, 2007.
This paper examines group think behavior, using its portrayal in the film "Twelve Angry Men" as a basis for discussion.
1,665 words (approx. 6.7 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer first explains that group think is a way of thinking when a group of people are together and decisions are often made due to loyalty and cohesiveness rather than critical evaluation. The writer studies evidence of group think apparent in the storyline of the film "Twelve Angry Men". The writer notes that perhaps the most important remedy for group think was clearly portrayed and that was the presence of critical evaluators who point out the errors of key members of the group. The writer shows how decisions were made via group think and then looks at how the members of the jury in the film were shown how their original argument is not sound.
From the Paper
"In the film Twelve Angry Men, the situation is a little different. The members of the group are on a jury and have never met before, nor will they be likely to meet again afterwards. They have only one task to accomplish, and that is to decide on the guilt or innocence of an 18-year old boy from the ghetto accused of murder. For the boy, the stakes are high because the law mandates the electric chair if he is found guilty. In the beginning of the deliberations, eleven of the twelve members are already in agreement. They have heard the prosecution's case and found no fault with it. They believe so strongly that the boy is guilty they feel invulnerable (at least, as long as they stick together, that is, as long as they are cohesive). As a group, they want to hurry up and find him guilty, so they can go home."
| |
|
"Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals", 2007.
An analysis of Immanuel Kant's "Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals".
1,316 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how, beginning with his preface to the "Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals", Kant is unambiguously clear in his assertion that moral dictates hold universally, since if a law is to be morally valid, then it must carry with it absolute necessity. It also discusses how for Kant, morality is fundamentally based on his three formulations of the categorical imperative and how in general, Kantian morality does little to resolve many of the everyday moral debates present in contemporary society.
From the Paper
"Despite the appeal of the categorical imperative, follows its dictates proves to be seemingly impossible, and even in some instances, undesirable. When adhering to the principles of Kantian morality, it is clear that moral reasoning is reduced to a strict moral calculus, whereby there is only one correct answer to the question, "What am I to do?" This process, moreover, does not allow for any deviations from this strict normative standard, and morally ambiguous areas become non-existent. However, in some situations, certain actions that are in violation of the categorical imperative might be morally necessary. For example, during the Holocaust, people often had to lie to the Nazi SS when harboring Jews in their home. It seems obvious that lying violates at least formulations one and two of the categorical imperative. "
| |
|
Business Ethics, 2007.
A discussion of the importance of good business ethics in today's corporate environment.
1,273 words (approx. 5.1 pages), 10 sources, APA, $ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the issue of corporate responsibility and the consequences of a lack ethics on today's business environment. The author attempts to define ethics and cites various studies which illustrate which ethical values people hold to be most important. The paper further discusses the intersection of ethics and sales. The author concludes by describing the relationship between ownership of values and ethical behavior.
Outline:
Introduction
Defining Ethics
Finding the Connection of Ethics and Performance
Alleviating Ethical Meltdowns
Summary
From the Paper
"There are as many definitions of ethics as there are of academicians, researchers, and scholars studying the topic. To align ethics with a specific religion is erroneous; there are many religions in the world that embrace honesty and truthfulness, yet do not provide the impetus for followers to willingly select these ethical approaches to interacting with others. One scholar, Josephson (2001), suggests that ethics involve first the ability to discern right and wrong, and second, the commitment to do what is good and aligning with what ethical conduct is. Ethics then requires action to be undertaken; to be ethical is to act in a consistently transparent and honest way. Josephson (2001) is specifically referring to the values a person has as shaped by their cultural, economic, religious, spiritual and social interactions accumulated over their lives. Ethical choices, according to Josephson (2001), place an equal weight of the values of an individual and their choice of behaving ethically or not. In a study conducted at the Institute for Global Ethics (1996), 272 individuals were asked to identify the 5 values from a list of 15 that were most important to them. Researchers found that the value of truth was by far the most frequent choice. What also emerged were the top three values of truth, compassion, and responsibility. When individuals were asked to pick the most important value, compassion was far and away the greater one chosen. The research went on to show that this small set of core values that is cross-cultural and universal."
|
|
|
