Worldview Application Paper: Military
I am an empiricist, one who gains knowledge from experience. Not only am I majoring in Health Science, but I tend to read research articles like any teenage girl would read the latest gossip magazines. The best example of how empiricism is applied to my everyday life is actually my diet. Although I strongly dislike vegetables I find myself eating kale to support a healthy lifestyle. I am not sure when it started, but I have become my own scientific study. That is, I tend to try different “variables” and see how they interact with my own body, comparing and contrasting personal experience with current scientific literature. In regards to the military, I think empiricism is a great way to see if something …show more content…
I do not believe that it should be within our government’s jurisdiction to tell people what to do, especially when using military power to do so. Forces such as these cost, at best, a few dollars and at worst, the loss of lives. How I came to this worldview is not something that I necessarily remember, but I think it all boils down to political socialization. Again, this is not something I decided to be in one moment, but a cumulation of tiny events that have slowly shaped my opinion. Whether correlation or causation, it is very interesting that though I did not choose Whitworth (and its students) for its politics; the majority of Core 350 students and professors appear to be on the same political spectrum as I.
Recently I read an editorial published on September 16th, 2015 in The New American, in which, the author argues that women can and should serve in the military, but not in combatant positions (McManus). Warfare and military are not simple problems. Numerous lives are at stake and spending has ripple effects throughout our economy. Personally, my brother is in the United States Air Force and I really wish he were not. As an electrical engineer he would be paid more out in the civilian world, and, more than that, he does not need a guilty conscience for an organization …show more content…
If we got rid of our armed forces not only would we save countless lives, but billions of dollars as well. One would suppose that governmental power and control would dissipate as well. However, using empiricism, economists would say that if we disposed of the military thousands of people would lose their jobs, to this I ask, would you rather lose a job or your life? Both have some sort of empirical value, but one seems to outshine the other, and, in all reality, most, if not all, of the military jobs are transferable to civilian life. Empiricists would also argue that without war our earth would be overpopulated, but I would like to mention that dying of natural disasters and other natural causes seems to be inclusive of that problem as well. You do not see doctors withholding statin drugs to patients with heart problems simply because our earth is overpopulated. In fact, if we were to argue over means of population control, then it would make more sense to save the young and healthy than the old and sick. More of my opponents, specifically authoritarians, would perceive my ideas to be unrealistic and shortsighted, that we as a civilization will not be able to function without governmental control of a strong military, but there are plenty of concrete examples of countries who do not have armed forces that are doing just fine. Even if complete disposal of our military is not found to be plausible, we can
I am an empiricist, one who gains knowledge from experience. Not only am I majoring in Health Science, but I tend to read research articles like any teenage girl would read the latest gossip magazines. The best example of how empiricism is applied to my everyday life is actually my diet. Although I strongly dislike vegetables I find myself eating kale to support a healthy lifestyle. I am not sure when it started, but I have become my own scientific study. That is, I tend to try different “variables” and see how they interact with my own body, comparing and contrasting personal experience with current scientific literature. In regards to the military, I think empiricism is a great way to see if something …show more content…
I do not believe that it should be within our government’s jurisdiction to tell people what to do, especially when using military power to do so. Forces such as these cost, at best, a few dollars and at worst, the loss of lives. How I came to this worldview is not something that I necessarily remember, but I think it all boils down to political socialization. Again, this is not something I decided to be in one moment, but a cumulation of tiny events that have slowly shaped my opinion. Whether correlation or causation, it is very interesting that though I did not choose Whitworth (and its students) for its politics; the majority of Core 350 students and professors appear to be on the same political spectrum as I.
Recently I read an editorial published on September 16th, 2015 in The New American, in which, the author argues that women can and should serve in the military, but not in combatant positions (McManus). Warfare and military are not simple problems. Numerous lives are at stake and spending has ripple effects throughout our economy. Personally, my brother is in the United States Air Force and I really wish he were not. As an electrical engineer he would be paid more out in the civilian world, and, more than that, he does not need a guilty conscience for an organization …show more content…
If we got rid of our armed forces not only would we save countless lives, but billions of dollars as well. One would suppose that governmental power and control would dissipate as well. However, using empiricism, economists would say that if we disposed of the military thousands of people would lose their jobs, to this I ask, would you rather lose a job or your life? Both have some sort of empirical value, but one seems to outshine the other, and, in all reality, most, if not all, of the military jobs are transferable to civilian life. Empiricists would also argue that without war our earth would be overpopulated, but I would like to mention that dying of natural disasters and other natural causes seems to be inclusive of that problem as well. You do not see doctors withholding statin drugs to patients with heart problems simply because our earth is overpopulated. In fact, if we were to argue over means of population control, then it would make more sense to save the young and healthy than the old and sick. More of my opponents, specifically authoritarians, would perceive my ideas to be unrealistic and shortsighted, that we as a civilization will not be able to function without governmental control of a strong military, but there are plenty of concrete examples of countries who do not have armed forces that are doing just fine. Even if complete disposal of our military is not found to be plausible, we can