INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY,unit 4, question #1, - Essay Example

Question #4-Explain why Aristotle is known as the commonsense philosopher? Philosophy is perhaps one of the most complex s in the intellectual world. According to Thomas White, author of the book entitled Discovering Philosophy, philosophy often involves “conceptual issues and principles” such as “reality, knowledge, right, wrong, and justice”(White, 2008). There have been many great philosophers throughout history, and Aristotle is among the most influential. In fact, Aristotle’s is known as the commonsense philosopher due to the emphasis he places on moral responsibility.

In discussing Aristotle’s contributions to philosophy Thomas White states “Aristotle is very much a commonsense philosopher, and commonsense tells us that people should be held responsible for what they do”(White, 2008). Therefore, because Aristotle believed and philosophized that people are responsible for their own lives and actions, which is the definition of commonsense in the realm of philosophy, Aristotle would definitely fit into such a category of philosopher. The idea of Aristotle being a commonsense philosopher is further shown through his discussions and thoughts on voluntary and involuntary actions.

White defines voluntary actions as those that are “under our control,” and involuntary actions as those that “result from constraint or ignorance”(White, 2008). In Aristotle’s view, humans should be held responsible and accountable for the actions that they themselves have chosen and should not be held responsible for actions that were forced upon them or done through ignorance(White, 2008).However, Aristotle does seem to make the distinction between responsibility and accountability in regard to involuntary actions.

It appears that this is where morality plays a large part as a person should be held more accountable for involuntary actions if those actions had a negative impact on the overall well-being of humanity. These voluntary and involuntary actions may be positive or negative, and both types of actions are related to the concept of well-being (White, 2008). By maintaining this viewpoint that humans must be held responsible or accountable for their actions, both good and bad, Aristotle is showcasing his commonsense approach to philosophy.

Commonsense generally means knowledge that everyone has or should have. Aristotle’s contribution to philosophy uses a lot of the moral and ethical reasoning that already exists in a civilized society, but was not fully understood at that particular point in history. Aristotle brought this kind of thinking and reasoning to the surface, which established his role as a commonsense philosopher.ReferencesWhite, T. I. (2008). Discovering philosophy (2nd ed., Prentice Hall portfolio ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Question #4-Describe Skinners Walden Two Philosophy and psychology are two academic areas which often experience a lot of crossovers in terms of theories and influential people. This is mainly due to the fact that both psychology and philosophy have so much to do with the human mind. Acclaimed psychologist B.F. Skinner, for example, contributed greatly to both fields due to his work with behavior and conditioning, and his philosophical views on freedom and happiness. Skinner combines psychology and philosophy in his Utopian novel entitled Walden Two.

According to Thomas White, author of the book entitled Discovering Philosophy, Skinner’s novel—Walden Two—showcases Skinner’s belief that freedom does not exit in humanity. White states that, according to Skinner, “the world is constructed in such a way that there is no freedom or genuine choice”(White, 2008). This belief is expressed through interactions between two important characters in the novel named Castle and Frazier(White, 2008). Additionally, within Walden Two, Skinner discusses his belief that humans only need a few things to be happy such as “health, a minimum of unpleasant labor, a chance to exercise talents and abilities, personal contacts, and relaxation/rest”(White, 2008).

Ultimately, Walden Two reflects Skinner’s background and expertise in behaviorism and conditioning. Skinner’s entire career was founded on the principle that all of human behavior is learned through conditioning such as reward and punishment(White, 2008). This particular viewpoint does not really allow for the idea of freedom because it basically sees people as animals who only behave the way they do because they have been trained to do so. Skinner likely developed his theories about human behavior and freedom because of his extensive experience and studies with animals(White, 2008).

Skinner incorporates this mindset into his Utopian novel. Skinner’s Walden Two showcases the philosophical viewpoint of determinism. According to Thomas White, determinism is the belief that humans are not really responsible for their actions because the world has essentially trained people to be the way they are in terms of their actions and behaviors(White, 2008). The characters of Frazier and Castle, therefore, in Walden Two discuss the premise that people are not free and that feelings of being free are false and dangerous(White, 2008).

Instead, the character of Frazier appears to believe that the positive or negative reinforcement humans receive in life guides a person’s behavior so strongly that it rules over every subsequent interaction. Essentially, Skinner’s novel is a story that is built very heavily upon Skinner’s psychological and philosophical beliefs. It carries scientific concepts such as determinism, conditioning, and behaviorism, which presents humans as products of their environments and training. In many ways, Walden Two, makes humans out to be much more simple than most people, including many psychologist and philosophers, would like to think.

ReferencesWhite, T. I. (2008). Discovering philosophy (2nd ed., Prentice Hall portfolio ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.Question #3 Describe the empirical and rationalistic arguments for the existence of God. The existence of God is one of the most widely debated and discussed ideas in philosophy. Typically, the arguments about the existence of God are divided into two distinct categories: empirical and rationalistic. According to Thomas White, author of the book entitled Discovering Philosophy, empirical arguments tend to be based on “evidence and observable data” while rationalistic arguments tend to be based on “mental operations like mathematics and logic” (White, 2008).

White discusses a few of the most popular and prevalent empirical and rationalistic arguments for the existence of God. “The argument from design” and the “governance of the world” argument are two of the most prominent empirical arguments for the existence of God. The argument from design was first argued by a Christian named William Paley in the 18th century(White, 2008). Essentially the argument of design states that the world is simply too complex and “intelligently crafted” that there has to be a creator behind it all(White, 2008).

The other empirical argument, “governance of the world,” was developed by Saint Thomas Aquinas and essentially says that people lack intelligence, and that there has to be a God or “a being endowed with knowledge and intelligence” that is “directing” these unintelligent people in their lives in order to get to the “best result or end”(White, 2008). Without this intelligent being to guide humans, people would not be able to survive because they lack the ability to choose wisely.

It appears that Aquinas was pointing to the success of humanity in order to prove that God exists as a governing force. On the other end of the spectrum lies the rationalistic arguments. The main rationalistic argument discussed by White is the “ontological argument.” This particular view was constructed by Saint Anslem who was a medieval philosopher. Essentially this argument states that God is real because people believe that something greater than themselves must exist(White, 2008). In some respects, this argument means that God exists because man wants him to and has created God from his thoughts.

In this argument, God is a concept which lives within the mind. Ultimately, the empirical argument appears to be more faith based and religious in nature than the rationalistic argument. However, both arguments ultimately concede to the existence of God. Both sides showcase deep thought into the matter, but like most philosophical concepts, there is no tangible proof to suggest either one is entirely correct.ReferencesWhite, T. I. (2008). Discovering philosophy (2nd ed., Prentice Hall portfolio ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Question #1- Explain Newtons Law of Motion Oftentimes, it does not really seem like science and philosophy would have much in common. Science usually has some basis in facts and figures, while philosophy has more to do with intangible concepts. However, according to Thomas White, author of the book entitled Discovering Philosophy, these two areas of study have a lot in common because both “try to explain the nature of reality”(White, 2008). Also, historically, science is an extension of philosophy, according to White(White, 2008).

One of the most influential theories to have developed within the confines of science and philosophy are Newton’s Laws of Motion, which were developed by Sir Isaac Newton. Newton’s Laws of Motion are described by Thomas White as being the “basic natural laws…from which every other law of nature can be derived”(White, 2008). The first law states that “every body continues in its state of rest..or uniform motion…unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed upon it”(White, 2008).

Basically this law means that an object will either stay still or keep moving unless it is stopped or pushed into motion, depending on its current state, by another object or force. The second Law of Motion states that “the change of motion is proportional to the motive force impressed; and is made in the direction of…the line in which that force is impressed”(White, 2008). The basic idea within this law is that an object’s speed and direction will be proportional to the direction and speed in which the other object or force hit it.

For example if a person kicked a ball, the ball would only go in the direction that the person kicked it in and would only go as fast as the force behind the person’s foot. The third Law of Motion states that “to every action there is always…an equal reaction”(White, 2008). This law deals with the concept of balance, to a certain extent. An example of this would be a see-saw. One person goes up on the seesaw, and the other person goes down on the seesaw. This would be a classic equal action and equal reaction scenario According to White, Newton theorized that these three laws “account for all the movement and change in the universe”(White, 2008).

The fact that these laws were established several hundred years ago and have not been replaced speaks to the accuracy and credibility of Newton’s theories. In essence, Newton’s Laws of Motion are incredibly simple, but like many philosophical and scientific theories, they have changed the landscape of the world forever.ReferencesWhite, T. I. (2008). Discovering philosophy (2nd ed., Prentice Hall portfolio ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.