Philosophy Originated From The Greek Language. It Is Made Up Of Two Wo

Philosophy originated from the Greek language. It is made up of two words: "philein" which means to love and "sophia" which means wisdom. There are three fundamental questions in the field of philosophy which are referred to as the Existential Concerns. "What can I know?", "What ought I to do?", "What is the meaning of life and my place in the universe?" These complex questions are discussed in the basic areas of philosophy. Epistemology is the theory of knowledge. The major question in this area is, what is truth? There are various theories about the correct answer. One explanation is the Correspondence Theory of Truth. This theorem puts forth the idea that the only real truth has tangible evidence to back it up. For example, a witness to a crime. That person was the only one, other then the direct people involved who know what happened. However, religion and science are two forms that go against this theorem. Another theory is nothing is truth. This consists of the idea that we cannot know anything with certainty. The followers of this theorem are usually classified as being "skeptical". Another explanation for truth is considered Sense Perception. Sense Perception is subjective and relative, therefore it is not a tangible form of knowledge. There is still one more form of determining the truth, mathematics or Intellectual Knowledge. For example, if I were to ask you to add two and three, the only true answer you could give me would be five. The is not a subjective or relative example. Many people consider math to be a universal truth. There are various questions associated with the area of ethics. Each of them deal with morals. Morals are defined as the right conduct or duties of a man. The first question is, are there any universal moral values? Moral relativists will either deny or be in favor of the existent of universal values. One instance where I can explain this idea, is with the Nuremberg trials of 1946. Post World War II, several top officials of the Nazi regiment were put on trial for the "crimes they committed against humanities". However, they didn't plead guilty. Their defense was that they were simply following orders and the laws presented by the state. Do you believe that is a suitable reason for their actions? If so, you believe that universal moral values do not exist. That each country and/or group of people have separate rights and wrongs associated with their culture. On the other hand if you feel that the Axis Powers were correct in putting these officers on trial, then you believe that there are basic moral values, that should be obeyed. The term for this is Equal Dignity. Therefore you believe in a Universal Justice also known as Cicero Natural Law Doctrine. The second question that is discussed, when speaking of ethics, is "What principles should guide my actions or choices?" In other words, what do I base my decisions on? Most people judge their behavior by what is good, fair or just. Others by what will bring them pleasure. These people believe in hedonism. There are individuals that determine their actions by fear, self-preservation or instinct. Furthermore another question is, what makes a society a just one? There are two sides to this question. A major issue concerned with this argument is the imprisonment of convicted criminals. On one hand, some people believe in retributive justice. They understand that one should repay their debt to society, if necessary. They believe in rehabilitation. On the other hand, those who believe in distributive justice are under the concept, that equal wealth is the answer to making a society just. These people believe that everyone should be treated the same. Finally, the last question dealing with ethics is, what is the relationship between laws and morality? Laws are the rules established by an authority. Many people think that laws should be written with the pure intent of creating and therefore, keeping a society in order. Others feel that laws should be written with moral rights in mind. For instance the topic of abortion. Although the law was passed that it is legal for a woman to get an abortion, many believe the law in morally wrong. These people believe that, a child is a life from conception and should have the right to live. Whether they are correct or not, is the law a moral one? Then, the question should be asked who

A Life You Love essays

A Life You Love essays Today is the day I will save your life; I will die for your husband and best friend, But for me, this is hardly a difficult task; I cant find a better way for my life to end. The last hope for my salvation, I pledged to be by your side, Though my love is unrequited, this intense passion has not died. That day I shared my feelings with you; I hope my message was clear, I would not hesitate to die for you, and those you hold most dear. My sweet Lucie, please understand, this is something that I must do, This is my opportunity to leave my mark, and make my dreams come true. I know you would die without your husband, and your happiness is my only goal, To die and let you live life to its fullest would be the deliverance of my debauched soul. I had been hurting and suffering for years and years, my only feeling was pain, I know if I dont save your husband, all this sorrow will have been in vain. Kiss your dear husband and child for me, and shake your old fathers hand, Make sure you have them remember me, and let them know Ill be in a much better land. I went through life wasting my talent, and gave up a brilliant career, Only because, I felt inadequate to those lawyers I thought I could never come near. You were the last dream of my soul, and even though you dont feel the same way, Look back on this time and know I love you, please commemorate this day. I see a bright future ahead of you, one filled with joy and love, From this day forward Ill be your angel; Ill look down at you from above. Night after night, my heart was aching, and my pillow was soaked with tears, But you became my sole inspiration, and you dissipated all my fears. I know that Charles means everything to you and of course so much more, I know youd be pained without him and that would break my heart to its core. ...

How to Make Hydrogen Gas (4 Methods)

How to Make Hydrogen Gas (4 Methods) Its easy to generate hydrogen gas at home or in a lab using common household materials. Heres how to make hydrogen safely. Make Hydrogen Gas - Method 1 One of the easiest ways to obtain hydrogen is to get it from water, H2O. This method employs electrolysis, which breaks water into hydrogen and oxygen gas. water9-volt battery2 paperclips Unbend the paperclips and connect one to each terminal of the battery.Place the other ends, not touching, into a container of water. Thats it!Youll get bubbles off both wires. The one with more bubbles is giving off pure hydrogen. The other bubbles are impure oxygen. You can test which gas is hydrogen by lighting a match or lighter over the container. The hydrogen bubbles will burn; the oxygen bubbles will not burn.Collect the hydrogen gas by inverting a water-filled tube or jar over the wire producing the hydrogen gas. The reason you want water in the container is so you can collect hydrogen without obtaining air. Air contains 20% oxygen, which you want to keep out of the container in order to keep it from becoming dangerously flammable. For the same reason, dont collect the gas coming off both wires into the same container, since the mixture could burn explosively upon ignition. If you wish, you can collect the oxygen in the same way as the hydrogen, but be aware this gas is not ve ry pure. Cap or seal the container before inverting it, to avoid exposure to air. Disconnect the battery. Make Hydrogen Gas - Method 2 There are two simple improvements you can make to improve the efficiency of hydrogen gas production. You can use graphite (carbon) in the form of pencil lead as electrodes and you can add a pinch of salt to the water to act as an electrolyte. The graphite makes good electrodes because it is electrically neutral and wont dissolve during the electrolysis reaction. The salt is helpful because it dissociates into ions which increase the current flow. Tools: 2 pencilssaltcardboardwaterbattery (could go as low as 1.5 V with the electrolyte)2 paperclips or (better yet) 2 pieces of electrical wire Steps: Prepare the pencils by removing the erase and metal caps and sharpening both ends of the pencil.Youre going to use the cardboard to support the pencils in the water. Lay the cardboard over your container of water. Insert the pencils through the cardboard so that the lead is submerged in the liquid, but not touching the bottom or side of the container.Set the cardboard with pencils aside for a moment and add a pinch of salt to the water. You could use table salt, Epsom salts, etc.Replace the cardboard/pencil. Attach a wire to each pencil and connect it to the terminals of the battery.Collect the gas as before, in a container that has been filled with water. Make Hydrogen Gas - Method 3 You can get hydrogen gas by reacting hydrochloric acid with zinc. Zinc Hydrochloric Acid → Zinc Chloride HydrogenZn (s) 2HCl (l) → ZnCl2 (l) H2 (g) hydrochloric acid (muriatic acid)zinc granules (or iron filings or strips of aluminum) Hydrogen gas bubbles will be released as soon as the acid and zinc are mixed. Be very careful to avoid contact with the acid. Also, heat will be given off by this reaction. Homemade Hydrogen Gas - Method 4 sodium hydroxide (found in certain drain clog removers)aluminum (included in the drain removal products or you can use foil) Aluminum Sodium Hydroxide → Hydrogen Sodium Aluminate2Al (s) 6NaOH (aq) → 3H2 (g) 2Na3AlO3 (aq) This is an extremely easy method of making homemade hydrogen gas. Simply add some water to the drain clog removal product! The reaction is exothermic, so use a glass bottle (not plastic) to collect the resulting gas. Hydrogen Gas Safety The main safety consideration is making certain hydrogen gas isnt allowed to mix with oxygen in air. Nothing bad will happen if it does, but the resulting air-hydrogen mixture is much more flammable than hydrogen on its own because it contains oxygen, which acts as an oxidizer.Store hydrogen gas away from an open flame or another ignition source.

Is leadership something that comes naturally Essay

Is leadership something that comes naturally - Essay Example (1999) are of the opinion that leaders are made since extensive training is needed in any case, therefore those who thinks that leaders are born will be unable to explain why then training and development sessions are held in order to make a leader more successful. Eric Garner (2005) is against the saying that leaders are born. It takes certain efforts in order to become a leader. Garner are of the opinion that it is not enough to be born with certain qualities, a person also has to be aware of how these could be used in order to produce results. Wally Bock (2006) adopted a balanced approach while expressing his views on the subject. He says leadership comes both naturally and with education and experience. He says that it cannot be just one of the two, otherwise we would have had leaders who have no educations at all and they would be very successful or in the other case we would have had leaders who are alike since they have received the same education and were trained to become a model leader. A vast majority of writers are agreeing with the opinion of Bock. They, however, argue about which qualities have to be inborn and which qualities should come with education and experience. They say that anyone can learn to become a leader. However, there are some qualities that cannot be taught, the so called intangible ones, and the ones that cannot be measured and explained, for instance, natural decision making, complex problem solving, and self-development and group development. On the other hand, there are many qualities that can be learned, for instance, time and task management, communication skills, negotiation skills, ways how information can be presented, debating and most importantly motivating. Without developing the abilities that are even inborn apart from learning new ones a leader will never become successful. Duggan and fellows (2007) suggest that for becoming successful in profession, leaders must focus on self-development, therefore, be quite

Germany Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 16

Germany - Essay Example He was excluded and spent his time of seclusion to translate the new testament into German and later got back to Wittenberg, married and that is how Protestant and Lutheran started. He entered Erfurt Monastery in 1505 and joined the Augustinian Order of Hermit as he learnt the Bible and Catholic teachings. He first read the Bible in 1503 that was rarely read and was happy when he came back from the library. By the time he hid in Wartburg Castle between 1521 to 1522, he translated the New Testament from Latin to German dialect. The protestant renovation began as a movement of doctrinal and moral reform (Gonzalez, 2010 p. 1188). The reformation had been infusing crosswise Europe for a couple of years. Luther was lucky to have a protector as well as supporter known as Fred the Wise. Gonzalez (2010 p. 1192) states that the creation of the portable kind by Gutenberg and this also meant that the books, pamphlets, Bibles and many more belonging to Martin Luther could be widely dispersed

The AIDS inflicted citizens in Africa Essay Example for Free

The AIDS inflicted citizens in Africa Essay The dilemma regarding the AIDS inflicted citizens in Africa is a modern day paradox. On one hand, mankind can achieve huge strides in the research necessary to control the malady which has already killed so many. On the other, modern civilization risks the exploitation of fellow human beings born into a more unfortunate and primitive lifestyle deficient in modern healthcare. In general, the debate which takes precedence above all others is the question of equality in the context of morality. According to the traditional perspective of Immanuel Kant constructed in his Metaphysics of Morals, the universal presumption of moral principles is that they apply to all rational autonomous beings at all places and at all times. Thus, Kant would argue that the medical care provided to trial participants in Africa should be equivalent, or at least comparable, to the treatment offered to citizens in more advanced societies as long as it does not compromise the rational autonomy of the people involved. To approach the issue from Kants perspective, it is important to first delineate the considerations Kant would reason to be the most morally relevant when attempting to provide a conclusion. In his work, Kant clearly outlines three general principles about moral duties as well as other considerations which can are applicable to the situation. First of all, it would be essential to determine if giving inferior treatment to uneducated individuals in Africa is a choice based on a sense of duty, or if ulterior aims might exist. On first glance, this seems to lead to an initial conclusion that failing to provide volunteers with comparable treatment is an unfair and immoral choice based on monetary and political motives. However, further analysis reveals that the rational autonomy of the individuals in question must also be considered. Providing the luxurious treatments seen in more advanced countries to people in Africa may violate their rational autonomy by tempting or deceiving them into an action they would not normally undertake. Therefore, any choice made in regards to AIDS treatments must reflect a desire to do what is right while preserving and respecting the rational autonomy of the individuals. Kants second consideration would be to base the moral quality of his decision on the intentions of that choice, not the actions consequences. Thus, the issue cannot be resolved by developing a best case scenario, but must be determined by distinguishing which option is enacted with the best moral intentions. In this way, it is likely that the most morally acceptable choice would be the one which puts Africas citizens on an equal consideration with the rest of the world, and so would include providing identical treatment. Thirdly, it is important to make sure that whatever direction is taken, it is taken out of respect for the moral law and for no other reason such as need or desire. To fulfill the third principle, an action cannot violate the categorical imperative. Otherwise, the decision cannot be considered as a moral action. The moral law, as Kant explained, is a universal formula that ensures all actions are undertaken with pure motives without consideration of the consequences. When deciding whether or not to give Africans the same health benefits that AIDS phase II trial volunteers would receive in other countries, even if they are very expensive, it is important to determine whether the choice could be applied universally. In other words, Kant would compare the options faced by pharmaceutical companies by placing all of them in the categorical imperative, and observe which options are inherent contradictions. When weighing the options using the categorical imperative, the results once again suggests that providing African volunteers with equivalent treatments takes precedence over all other options. The concept of appropriate treatment, if determined only on monetary, social and political status, would seemingly contradict itself if it were considered a universal law. Kant would argue that by issuing care by status, people would be applying a different standard to their own behavior than they would want applied to themselves and everyone else. The problem with the contradiction argument, critics might argue, is that it may prove difficult if not impossible to provide supporting evidence that universalizing the maxim would result in a contradiction. Advocates would then turn to another method of formulating the categorical imperative to support their position. In the alternate interpretation, known as the second formulation, the categorical imperative serves as a requirement that we must not treat other rational beings as mere means to our own purposes. This tactic allows proponents of equal treatment to establish their position without attempting to prove any inherent contradictions. Instead, they simply have to show that by failing to meet the precedence of care in other countries, pharmaceutical companies are treating people as ends not as means. Critics may also claim that a truly moral decision would factor in the hard work of the manufacturers of the antiretroviral drugs, as well as anyone else involved in the trials. Kant would not dismiss this assertion. In Metaphysics of Morals, Kant does not attempt to claim that all actions must always be undertaken out of a sense of duty, he simply outlines the necessary components required to establish an individuals own autonomy based on reason. When considering the dilemma faced by pharmaceutical companies, the only critical consideration is whether the ultimate decision conforms to moral law. They may also argue that the drugs given to Americans and Europeans are so much more expensive to Africans that it cannot be deemed appropriate to treat African volunteers with them. To this argument, Kant would refute the idea that the term appropriate should not be applied universally. In his perspective, all humans are rational autonomous agents who deserve the same treatment. If a law or rule cannot be applied universally, a.k.a. fails the categorical imperative, then it should not be considered moral. The philosophy of the Metaphysics of Morals appears to lend itself nicely to the dilemma of conducting phase II trials in Africa by clearly addressing the major moral concerns involved while at the same time respecting the complexity of the conflict. Kant would recognize that other peoples livelihoods and incomes can be considered when deciding whether or not to provide expensive treatments in Africa, as long as the ultimate decision does not violate moral law. Pharmaceutical companies must insure that they are not manipulating or violating the rational autonomy of their possible test subjects in Africa, but may still consider other variables such as profits and benefits to society. Consequently, pharmaceutical companies appear to have a moral duty to provide adequately equal care to all phase II trial participants in Africa, providing they take steps to insure they are not violating anyones rational autonomy in the process.

political views of federalists and republicans :: essays research papers

The political views of the federalist and the republicans towards the government of the United States of America were different. The republicans stressed equality of rights among citizens allowing people to govern themselves. The federalists believed in a stronger government one in which was sovereign and had superior power over the local governments.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The republicans view almost always proved to be a disaster but the republicans believed that if a republican government could succeed anywhere, it would be within the virtuous communities of the United States of America. The republicans felt that replacing a monarchy government with a republican government would give the people many more rights and freedoms. Many people thought that it required too much public integrity for the people to govern themselves and live independently. It would require the people to obey laws and maintain order with the absence of monarchy forces.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The federalists view saw the republicans view as a weakness. They insisted on a stronger common government. The federalists had an understanding that there could only be one sovereign in a political system, one final authority that everyone must obey and no one can appeal. They thought this was the only effective way in creating an effective central government. The independent states seemed to think it was clear that each one of them were independently sovereign, although based on history only small countries were suitable for the republican government. With history proving the republicans wrong for trying to create a republican government in the states the federalists were slowly trying to create a stronger central government. There first step was making the sovereign states agree to the Articles of Confederation which established a close alliance of independent states. The federalist central government was referred to as a â€Å"confederacy†. political views of federalists and republicans :: essays research papers The political views of the federalist and the republicans towards the government of the United States of America were different. The republicans stressed equality of rights among citizens allowing people to govern themselves. The federalists believed in a stronger government one in which was sovereign and had superior power over the local governments.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The republicans view almost always proved to be a disaster but the republicans believed that if a republican government could succeed anywhere, it would be within the virtuous communities of the United States of America. The republicans felt that replacing a monarchy government with a republican government would give the people many more rights and freedoms. Many people thought that it required too much public integrity for the people to govern themselves and live independently. It would require the people to obey laws and maintain order with the absence of monarchy forces.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The federalists view saw the republicans view as a weakness. They insisted on a stronger common government. The federalists had an understanding that there could only be one sovereign in a political system, one final authority that everyone must obey and no one can appeal. They thought this was the only effective way in creating an effective central government. The independent states seemed to think it was clear that each one of them were independently sovereign, although based on history only small countries were suitable for the republican government. With history proving the republicans wrong for trying to create a republican government in the states the federalists were slowly trying to create a stronger central government. There first step was making the sovereign states agree to the Articles of Confederation which established a close alliance of independent states. The federalist central government was referred to as a â€Å"confederacy†.