How (it may be asked) can any part of the conduct of a member of society be a matter of indifference to the other members? No person is an entirely isolated being; it is impossible for a person to do ...
| Notification [x] |

| Author | Feedback | Action |
|
05/03/2010 Additional terminology is always helpful for the learners of metaphysics. It is important to be able to know what certain words and phrases mean when spoken by a lecturer who is going to go into much more detail later on in the lecture. Some common words and phrases used by lecturers include: afterlife, third-eye, other side, aura, white light, coming through, life contract, presence, and soulmate. After a brief introduction to these words, one will begin to get familiar with the lingo which is constant in books, lectures, tapes, videos, and readings. . . .no man can serve both Locke and Hegel. Nobody can claim to offer an "empirical" account of something called "the inclusive integrity of 'experience,'" nor take this "integrated unity as the starting point of philosophic thought," if he also agrees with Hegel that the starting point of philosophic thought is bound to be the dialectical situation in which one finds oneself caught in one's own time. (Rorty, Richard, Qtd. in Cahn, New Studies in the Philosophy of John Dewey. Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England, 1977, P. 81) |
||
|
07/03/2010 Plato says their performance determines whether the Love is Common or Heavenly. This differs greatly from the materialistic society we live in today. Today people are more concerned with Common Love than Heavenly Love. They judge people and see beauty by its external appearance not its intrinsic inner beauty. They dwell in Common Love which leads to divorce, and unhappiness. They desire Heavenly Love, but fail to recognize that Pausanias was correct. There are two kinds of loves. The love that attracts the eye, and lust; and the love that moves the heart, the love that is judged not by physical beauty, but by internal beauty. This love finds physical beauty without internal, Heavenly beauty, ugly. |
||
|
09/03/2010 Plato's theory of the soul can be found in his major work, *The Republic*, where it is a response to the challenge of the Sophists as to why one ought to live morally. The Sophists in Plato's time were men who used philosophy for profit, inventing moral loopholes to get people out of obligations, or to excuse what would otherwise be considered immoral behavior. The skeptics ask why one ought to be moral when morality is apparently a social device for maintaining order. But if there are no consequences to "immoral behavior," then there is no motivational pressure for morality. . . .no man can serve both Locke and Hegel. Nobody can claim to offer an "empirical" account of something called "the inclusive integrity of 'experience,'" nor take this "integrated unity as the starting point of philosophic thought," if he also agrees with Hegel that the starting point of philosophic thought is bound to be the dialectical situation in which one finds oneself caught in one's own time. (Rorty, Richard, Qtd. in Cahn, New Studies in the Philosophy of John Dewey. Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England, 1977, P. 81) |
||
|
01/03/2010 The Social Contract also keeps people from being totally alienated and affords them better protection. If a large group of people enter a Social Contract, they can more easily defend themselves against their enemies, and criminals who live in societies with no Social Contract. Thus in spite of giving up some individual rights for the Social Contract, they have not lost any more freedom, because all within the society have surrendered their rights freely and equally, and suffer the same inequality. In other words, all things being equal, man is still free, and maintains autonomy. Everyone must surrender his or her rights for the social contract to work. If one person gives up their rights and another does not, the person who does not has power over the other person and there is no contract. However, it is to a person benefit to agree to the social contract, because by giving up the freedom of Natural Liberty an individual gains Civil Liberty. Natural Liberty is the freedom man maintains in the State of Nature. Civil Liberty is freedom you have in society, freedom gained from the social contract. Rousseau argues in chapter eight of the Social Contract, What man loses by the social contract is his natural liberty and an unlimited right to everything he tries to get and succeeds in getting; what he gains is civil liberty and the proprietorship of all he possesses. If we are to avoid mistake in weighing one against the other, we must clearly distinguish natural liberty, from civil liberty. . . (Rousseau, P.196) Mill believes that a person has the Liberty to do what he wants as long as he does not harm others. If he does not harm others that is the part of his life that "concerns himself only," but if a person's actions are harmful to other beings then that is the part of his life "which concerns others"(74). Mill states that many people would object to his arguments about individual Liberty: |