1. One overlapping theme I have noticed is that philosophical concepts are almost never have a definition answer to their validity. For example, the theories of mind we encountered were all subject to intense criticism. One theory was not considered “correct” while others were “false.” It seems as if no matter the amount of scientific or numerical data, the answers to philosophical questions will never be answered fully. Going along those lines, I have learned even a satisfactory answer is never enough. At a high school football game this year, I talked about philosophy to my former high school principal. I told him how I disliked philosophy because I like concrete answers. For example, many mathematical equations or formulas can be proved
…show more content…
It cannot be proved scientifically and is always prone to debate. I believe it is necessary to keep philosophy in mind because science will not always be there. When claims are made, claims about those claims will be made. It parallels with the second-order ethical claims regarding morality. Occasional people say something along the lines of, “I did not mean too. It is just part of human nature.” Studying the philosophy of human nature gives us the opportunity to question if something is really part of human nature. Is selfishness just part of human nature? Are they biologically wired to be selfish or are their certain factors that cause selfishness? Studying the nature of mankind gives us a starting point to start asking questions. I better appreciate the nature of happiness after taking this course. The discussion that stood out for me is that happiness (at least according to Aristotle) is the only intrinsic good. For example, I want to be in college in order to get a good job. I want a good job to make money. I want money to live comfortably. I want to live comfortably because it makes me happy. No matter the situation, the result appears to be happy. When I think of this, I also think of Socrates’ argument that people do not knowingly do what is bad for them. They lean towards the good. For both cases, the desired result is happiness and
It cannot be proved scientifically and is always prone to debate. I believe it is necessary to keep philosophy in mind because science will not always be there. When claims are made, claims about those claims will be made. It parallels with the second-order ethical claims regarding morality. Occasional people say something along the lines of, “I did not mean too. It is just part of human nature.” Studying the philosophy of human nature gives us the opportunity to question if something is really part of human nature. Is selfishness just part of human nature? Are they biologically wired to be selfish or are their certain factors that cause selfishness? Studying the nature of mankind gives us a starting point to start asking questions. I better appreciate the nature of happiness after taking this course. The discussion that stood out for me is that happiness (at least according to Aristotle) is the only intrinsic good. For example, I want to be in college in order to get a good job. I want a good job to make money. I want money to live comfortably. I want to live comfortably because it makes me happy. No matter the situation, the result appears to be happy. When I think of this, I also think of Socrates’ argument that people do not knowingly do what is bad for them. They lean towards the good. For both cases, the desired result is happiness and