justification to injury someone. I will argue that there is a potential objection to the claim of Socrates’ argument. I will show that it is possible to oppose the idea that with or without prior injustice from someone it is unjust to do injury to them; by showing that without prior injustice it is justifiable to injure someone. Finally‚ I will illustrate why Socrates would be unable to produce an adequate reply to this objection due to the fact that the only thing that is important in life is justice
Premium Plato English-language films Socrates
In 1990‚ the government decided that they wanted to know more about humans and what made us unique. To do this‚ they started the Human Genome Project in order to try and sequence the entire human genome and get a better idea about how the human body works. In 2001‚ this goal was realized with an entire map of the human genome was sequenced. From there‚ doctors and researchers were able to start to have a better understanding of human genetics‚ and could start working out potential cures for certain
Premium Human genome Human Genome Project Genetics
........................................................................................................... 3 2. MODERATED VIEWS ON CONSENT AND RECIPROCITY BY THE ICJ. ........................................ 3 a. The ratione temporis objection: Was there a dilution of India’s sovereignty? .................. 4 b. Reciprocity between States: Are there inherent limitations? .............................................. 6 c. The surprise attack: Does it indicate a lack of good
Premium United States Declaration of Independence United States Law
I‚ as a senior at Rutgers University‚ am one of hundreds of millions of people who could devote a substantial quantity of less money on things that do not boost any effectiveness but my own. For the equivalent quantity of money I spend on an iClicker‚ I could provide a family in Zimbabwe access to the basic necessities of life. Singer argues we have widespread obligations to the world’s poor‚ but we can meet them without being deprived of all of our worldly assets and possessions. This essay aims
Premium Ethics Morality Virtue
Pereboom’s hard incompatiblism. These objections will come in the form objections made by other philosopher plus my two cents worth on hard incompatiblism as well. The main thing about hard incompatiblism is that we are simply not free in the right ways to be considered morally responsible for are actions; this means that it would be improper to have person be blame or praise worthy for their actions. One of the standard definitions of moral
Premium Free will Determinism Libertarianism
I divide my work into three main parts in congruence with the style of St. Thomas Aquinas. The first part of this paper deals with the exposition of the main contention of St. Thomas with regards to the common good. This includes some of the objections that are in disagreement to the main argument of St. Thomas with regards to the common good. The second part‚ then‚ speaks of the main thoughts of St. Thomas on the concept of the common good as the end-point of law. This is subdivided into two
Premium Natural law Thomas Aquinas Aristotle
Another objection is that in everyday circumstances it is impossible for humans to make a morally just decision (“Defense”). An additional counter-argument that struck me the most was the statement that utilitarianism sets standards that are deemed "too high for humanity" (“Defense”). What this objection projects are the predisposed and unwarranted capabilities of the human race. According to this statement
Premium Utilitarianism Ethics John Stuart Mill
Abstract Artifact Theory about Fictional Characters Defended — Why Sainsbury’s Category-Mistake Objection is Mistaken Zsófia Zvolenszky* Institute of Philosophy‚ Eötvös University (ELTE) Abstract. In this paper‚ I explore a line of argument against one form of realism about fictional characters: abstract artifact theory (‘artifactualism’‚ for short)‚ the view according to which fictional characters like Harry Potter are part of our reality‚ but (unlike concrete entities like the Big Ben
Premium Literature Fiction Reality
purposes. The final question of this objection is: does it matter if God is finite and imperfect? This designer obviously has much more power and intelligence than that of humans and being finite and imperfect should not hinder its ability to create. If God is infinite and imperfect‚ why would he use his infinite and perfect power to create such flawed beings as humans? The objection dealing with the conclusion of multiple Gods asks the same question as the first objection. What is changed by the conclusion
Premium Universe Teleological argument Nature
The knowledge argument is an argument against physicalism that was first formulated by Frank Jackson in 1982. While Jackson no longer endorses it‚ it is still regarded as one of the most important arguments in the philosophy of mind. Physicalism is the metaphysical thesis that‚ basically‚ everything in this world-including cars‚ humans‚ animals‚ research papers‚ even our sensations-are ultimately physical. The knowledge argument attempts to refute this thesis by appealing to the following made-up
Premium Mind Philosophy of mind Philosophy