Information on Writing Philosophy Papers
Please familiarize yourself with the university’s academic honest policies if you have not already done so. They are available here: http://www.rochester.edu/college/honesty/docs/Academic_Honesty.pdf . Note in particular that it is a violation of these policies to use material from any source (other than yourself) in your papers without attribution and, where relevant, use of quotation marks. This applies especially to copying and pasting material from websites, which should always be avoided. You may, of course, make limited use of academically respectable web resources where relevant, as long as they are properly cited (I'm not picky about the exact format of your citations, as long as they contain the relevant information) and any quoted material is clearly placed in quotation marks (though this should still be a very limited portion of your paper). However, you should never make any use at all of student 'essay mills'--websites that offer students canned student essays for 'research' purposes: these essays are not research and do not meet the standards for scholarly sources; they have no place in the writing of your papers.
General Guidelines for Writing Philosophy Papers
- Clarity and straightforwardness of thought and language are crucial: avoid flowery styles and long, superfluous introductions and conclusions. (No paper should ever start with a sentence like: "Since the dawn of time, mankind has pondered the question of...") The bulk of your paper should consist of philosophical exposition and analysis, in plain but precise language.
- If you are writing an essay in response to an assigned essay topic, the most important thing is simply to make sure you answer the question that was asked, carefully and thoroughly. Avoid getting off on tangents that are not crucial to your topic, and avoid sweeping generalizations you can't support in the paper. In addition to the quality of exposition, one of the central things we look for in a philosophy paper is how well the thesis in question is supported. Even if the reader thinks some of your claims are false, your paper can be excellent if you do a solid job of defending your claims.
- If you are asked to explain something, do not merely summarize what an author or lecturer has said. Explain and illuminate the relevant ideas or arguments in your own words, as if you were trying to help a fellow student gain a deeper understanding of them.
- Avoid excessive quotation! Stringing together quotes is not explaining a position or an argument, and does not display your understanding of the material. Even paraphrasing in your own words is not enough. Again, explanation involves clarifying the claims, bringing out hidden assumptions behind arguments, noticing ambiguities as they arise and nailing them down, and so on.
- In addition to careful explanation of positions or arguments, some paper topics ask for critical evaluation of those positions and arguments. An example of critical evaluation of an argument would be my lecture criticizing Thomson's argument for the conclusion that abortions wouldn't violate a fetus' right to life even if it were granted to have a full right to life. (I developed and used a distinction between positive and negative rights, and argued that the central parallel she appeals to in her argument fails to go through, since it involves a conflation of positive and negative rights.) Some paper topics ask you to do the same sort of thing, and if you're writing on such a topic, be sure that this component of your paper is strong and well developed.
- Proofreading of papers is a necessity. So is decent grammar: incoherent grammar makes the effective communication of ideas impossible.
- As for which topic you choose: You should choose something you're most interested in and have the most to say about. Beware of any topic that seems too easy: If it seems simple--like something you can dash off in a few paragraphs--then that's a good sign that you're not thinking deeply enough about it, and you should probably write on another topic. So choose your topic carefully.
- This is important: If you use someone else's words, you have to use quotation marks and cite the source in a footnote. If you don't, it's plagiarism, which constitutes cheating and is a violation of the honor code. See note at top.
Sample Short Paper and Commentary
For Illustrative purposes only
Sample Essay Question: Is Socrates' position in the Crito, concerning the moral authority of the state, consistent with his view that one should never do anything that is wrong? Is it consistent with what he says, in the Apology, about what he would do if commanded by the state to cease practicing philosophy, or about what he did when commanded by the Thirty to capture Leon of Salamis for execution? Explain.
(Note: page references are to a different edition than the one you have; paragraphs should be indented, but are not here due to limitations of html formatting; I have not here included footnotes for the same reason; and your papers should be double-spaced, rather than single-spaced.)
Socrates on the Moral Authority of the State
In the Crito, Socrates makes some surprisingly strong claims about the moral authority of the state, which might even seem to be inconsistent both with another fundamental claim he makes in the Crito and with certain claims he makes in the Apology. I shall argue that although these claims seem to be in some tension with each other, the crucial claims about the authority of the state in the Crito can plausibly be interpreted in such a way as to remove any real inconsistency with the other claims.
The first, rather striking claim about the moral authority of the state occurs at 51b of the Crito. Socrates argues that, because of the state's role as a provider of security, education, and various important social institutions (such as marriage), the citizens of the state are its "offspring and servants"; and from this he concludes that citizens are subordinate to the state and its laws to such an extent that if a citizen ever disagrees with the state's laws or orders, he "must either persuade it or obey its orders," even if the latter amounts to suffering death. The implication for his own case is clear: Socrates had tried to persuade the court of his innocence and of the injustice of his execution (as detailed in the Apology), but he had failed; therefore, he argues, he must now obey the court and accept his death sentence--even though he still thinks that he is in the right on this matter.
The second, closely related claim, comes only a few paragraphs later, in 51e and 52. Socrates there argues that by virtue of remaining in the state, a citizen enters into an implied contract with it to obey its commands. More precisely, the claim is again that a citizen who has a disagreement with the state must either persuade it that it is wrong, or else obey it. In the voice of the personified laws: "either persuade us or do what we say" (52a). The implication, again, is that if one fails to persuade the state to change its mind, for whatever reason, then one must obey its orders. A citizen has no moral right to continue to resist the state, even if he is convinced that he is in the right and the state is in the wrong.
Now as mentioned above, these claims seem directly opposed to certain other claims Socrates makes. Most importantly, earlier in the Crito itself, Socrates had stressed that "one must never do wrong" (49b). Indeed, this serves as the driving principle behind the rest of his argument in the Crito. But is this really consistent with maintaining that one must always obey the state, if one fails to persuade it that something it orders is wrong? The obvious objection is that the state might well order one to do something wrong--e.g. because one of its laws is an unjust one, as Jim Crow laws were. In that case, Socrates' claim that one should never do anything wrong would entail refusing to do what the state orders--even if one is unsuccessful in persuading the state that it is wrong. Thus, Socrates' claim that one should never do wrong seems inconsistent with his claim that one must always obey the final orders of the state.
Secondly, it might be objected that Socrates' view of the moral authority of the state is inconsistent both with what he did when ordered by the Thirty to capture Leon of Salamis for execution, and with what he says he'd do if ordered by the state to cease practicing philosophy (both from the Apology). When the Thirty ordered him to capture Leon, he refused, on the grounds that this would have been wrong (unjust and impious). (Apology, 32c-d) This seems to be a recognition that one is morally obligated or at least permitted to disobey the state when what it commands is wrong--even if one fails to persuade it of its wrongness. And similarly, Socrates makes clear that he would disobey the state and continue philosophizing if it were to order him to stop--again, on the grounds that it would be wrong for him to stop philosophizing (recall that he saw philosophy as his life's mission, given him by the god). (Apology, 29c-d) Again, this seems to contradict what he says in the Crito about the supreme moral authority of the state and its laws and orders.
I believe, however, that it is possible to read the crucial passages about the authority of the state in the Crito in such a way as to render them consistent with Socrates' exhortation never to do wrong, and with his remarks about disobedience in the Apology. To see this, it is necessary to distinguish first of all between two issues: (a) what the law might require you to do, and (b) what the law might require you to endure. With this distinction in mind, consider the following possible interpretations of Socrates' claim about the moral authority of the state in the Crito:
(i) Citizens must obey any law or order of the state, whatever it asks them to do or to endure;
(ii) Citizens must endure whatever any law or order of the state says they must--including the law that verdicts arrived at through proper procedures shall be carried out--but citizens need not and morally should not do what is prescribed by an unjust law.
Now which of these positions is it most plausible to attribute to Socrates in the Crito?
There are passages that might seem to suggest i (e.g. 51e, 52a), but again, the obvious problem is that it seems inconsistent with his fundamental principle that one should never do wrong (49a)--at least on the assumption, which Socrates clearly accepts in the Apology, that the state is not infallible as regards judgments of right and wrong. Thus, a more charitable reading would interpret the passages about the moral authority of the state as referring implicitly to cases where the state does not require one to do anything unjust, but merely to endure something (or perhaps to do something that is not itself unjust, such as rendering some political service).
If the passages are read in this way, we can interpret Socrates' claim as ii above. When he says that one must obey the state's final laws and orders, what he means is that one must do anything it tells one to do within the bounds of justice, and that one must endure anything it tells one to endure. Thus, Socrates was not obligated to capture Leon of Salamis, and would not be obligated to cease philosophizing if ordered to, since that would be doing something wrong (i.e. something that is not within the bounds of justice); but he is obligated to accept and endure his punishment, as long as it was arrived at through proper judicial procedures. The latter is true, according to Socrates, even though the punishment is wrong; for by suffering it, he is not himself doing anything wrong, but only enduring something wrong. This is perfectly consistent with Socrates' exhortation never to do anything wrong.
Thus, what at first appears to be a blatant contradiction among Socrates' various claims is fairly easily remedied if we interpret the relevant passages in the Crito as making the claim in ii rather than the claim in i above. This interpretation is supported not only by the fact that it helps to reconcile Socrates' seemingly contradictory claims, but also by the fact that Socrates' examples of obedience to the state over one's own objections all involve having to endure something, rather than having to do something. He speaks in Crito 51b, for example, of having to "endure in silence whatever it instructs you to endure, whether blows or bonds, and if it leads you into war to be wounded or killed, you must obey." Though he does not explicitly formulate his claim as in ii above, his focus is clearly on the issue of having to endure something prescribed by the state, over one's own objections. Therefore, it is consistent with the text to interpret him as making only the claim in ii, which is fully compatible with his claim that one must never do wrong, and with his claim that under certain conditions one should refuse to do something the state orders (such as refusing to capture someone for an unjust execution, or refusing to cease carrying out your divine mission as long as you live).
As for the plausibility of Socrates' view, I believe that it is still overly demanding, even when qualified as in ii above. It's unclear why any of the factors Socrates mentioned should give the state such overriding moral authority that one should be morally obliged to endure execution without resistance even in cases where the state is genuinely in the wrong. It seems more plausible to hold that if one stands to be unjustly executed, one can rightly resist this punishment (even if it would equally be permissible not to resist). One could do this, I think, without showing any contempt for the laws, or challenging their authority, since one still grants the state's authority to do its best to carry out the punishment, and simply asserts a moral right to do one's best in turn to avoid such wrongful punishment. But that's a topic for another paper.
Note, first of all, the concise, crisp introduction. The problem is plainly stated, and then I explain clearly what I'm going to do in the paper--all in just a few sentences. There's no rambling introduction with sentences starting with "Since the beginning of time, mankind has pondered the mysteries of etc."
The style is straightforward, striving for clarity rather than literary flair. Jargon is avoided as far as possible.
After the introduction, the problem is stated in more depth and detail, with textual references. Notice the spare use of quotes. I quote only a few words here and there, where necessary to illustrate the points. This might be extended to a few sentences, if necessary, but beware of over-quoting and letting someone else's words do your work for you. (The worst mistake is just stringing together quotes, which accomplishes nothing.) Notice also that textual references are given for the quotes, as well as for paraphrased passages. (Normally, I'd use footnotes and have complete citations, but I'm limited by html format here.)
Notice how, in describing the problem, I try to elucidate it, rather than just summarizing it.Summary is not explanation. Instead, I try to make clear where exactly the tensions among the various claims seem to arise and why, and how they apply to Socrates' own case. I've tried to go well beyond the superficial statement of the problem in the essay question, to illuminate and develop it.
Now having done that, one might just stop and claim to have answered the question: "No, the various positions are not consistent, and Socrates is just contradicting himself." But that would be a very superficial paper. Instead, I tried to dig beneath the surface a little bit, and to notice that the central claim can be interpreted in more than one way. So I first of all made a distinction between two possible interpretations, which in turn depended on a distinction between what you might be commanded to do and what you might be commanded to endure. That distinction enabled me to argue for an interpretation of what Socrates is claiming about the moral authority of the state that renders this claim consistent with his other claims. (Noticing and exploiting distinctions is a large part of what doing philosophy is all about.)
Whether or not you agree with that particular argument, you can see the difference between bringing the discussion to that level of detail and merely staying on the surface. So even if you would have taken a different position, the point is that a good paper would still be engaging with the issues at that level of depth, rather than remaining on the surface. If you think Socrates really is contradicting himself, for example, you might then also discuss the distinctions I pointed out, but then argue for an interpretation along the lines of the first interpretation instead, despite the inconsistencies with other things he says. (Of course, you'd have to be able to give an argument for why the text should be understood in that way, despite the fact that Socrates winds up with rather glaringly conflicting claims on that reading.)
Again, notice that I am striving for clarity, precision and thoroughness, along with a straightforward organization for the paper.
Philosophy of Life
...“All that I’m after is a life full of laughter” (Life After You- Daughtry). Everyone has their own personal outlook on life. Some people feel like money and success bring them happiness, others feel like love is all they need. As Aristotle once said, "Happiness is believed to be the most desirable thing in the world..." (Aristotle) Everyone wants different things. I however, feel like you don’t need a lot to be happy in life, it’s the little things that count. Having your family and friends, and people who care about you, falling in love and having that person with whom you can disclose your trust with, helping other people and putting them before yourself, expressing your feelings and emotions, and living your life to the fullest every single day are all my ideas of reaching ultimate happiness. You learn from the experiences and events you go through, if you don’t take the risk, you’ll never learn to fall. Not everyone is fortunate enough to have a family who cares about them, or friends who would do anything for you. Luckily, I have both of these in my life. Even though I do not always get along with my family, I still love them, and they love me. We all want what’s best for each other. The same goes for friends, my friends and I could spend every hour of every day together and it still wouldn’t be enough time. I could not imagine going a day in my life without any one of the people that I love. "A friend is a second self" (Aristotle). Every time I laugh or......
Words: 1379 - Pages: 6
Philosophy in Life
...Everybody has a different view on the world. All citizens have a different opinion on how people should act and what traits make a good person. Some one might consider loyalty, honesty and tolerance to be very important. I agree that these traits are vital, but I believe that the ability to be optimistic is the most essential trait. I also think having a sense of humor and a smile is very important. Voltaire once said “Life is a shipwreck but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboat.”This is one of my favorite quotations. Human existence isn’t flawless, but why should we dwell on the imperfections of life when we can smile at the almost faultless. I believe that life is too short to waste on negativity. Being positive means looking out the window at a thunderstorm and saying “This is good, the plant will be watered” or “don’t worry, it will clear up.” I consider myself to be very positive; I always look at the bright side of a bad situation. This is one of the keys to my happiness. If you look up the definition for laugh in a dictionary, it would say “to make sounds from the throat while breathing out in short bursts or gasps as a way of expressing amusement.” Laughter is much more than that. It is like a cure for cancer or an umbrella in the rain. Laughter can shield you from the harmful rays of grief, if exposed to these rays you are at risk of a frown and/or tears. I believe comedians are the true doctors of this world. They give you a free prescription every time......
Words: 450 - Pages: 2
Philosophy in Life
...heal the sick, or even to just spend the rest of your life with a certain someone. Whether we want to believe it or not, God does have a plan for all of us. The really sad part about it is that we don’t realize until it is too late. For this I truly believe that everyone has a mission to complete throughout their lives. I feel that everyone should take pride in what they do and how they look. If I don’t it is a reflection on how I perceive myself. If I set a goal for myself, but did not reach that goal at least I can be proud of the hard work and effort I did put in, and also in the goals I have met. I respect myself, and I want others to respect me too. I live a normal life and just like everyone else I’m on a pursuit of my own happiness. But I know that I am going to suffer and have to dedicate myself to get there because nothing in this world is that easy to achieve. Education is one of the most important things in our life in order to be successful. I’m in college now and it’s really frightening to know that I still have three years left of school. I know I have to be focused in school and that I have to give all my effort to graduate and get a job. I’m living with my sister now, who is a nurse. She told me that it wasn’t that easy to be where she is now. She had to make some sacrifices and dedicate her whole life in it. My family and my girlfriend is the best and most important people in my life. They always support me and give me advice on......
Words: 393 - Pages: 2
Philosophy of Life
...In some ways I’d say it is good to feel pain or else your life is not real, to live life without pain and hardships, makes you lazy and ordinary. No man has ever become great by sleeping all day long. To attain success pain must become a secondary objective and the goal to be achieved primary. Focus is most important, and that is when it does not matter whether you slept 2 hours or 8, or whether you ran 8km or 100m but what is important is whether you have achieved what you set out to do. Having said this we must not set our goals low, in order to gain satisfaction at having achieved it. Our goals must be reasonably high, if you aim for the stars you might at least land on the moon. Richard Branson never imagined that being dyslexic and dropping out of school at a young age would prevent him from reaching where he wanted to. He set his heights on what others would have seen as impossible, but it is this high level of self belief that got him to where he is now. When Ferdinand Piëch laid down 10 parameters in order to manufacture the VW Phaeton, half his engineers walked out believing those parameters were beyond possible. But today we see the Phaeton will all those parameters included, and still making it cheaper than the Mercedes S500. To aim high and dream big is nothing wrong as long as you do not keep dreaming. Motivation, hard work, perspiration are all tools to achieve the impossible. Success comes with 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration. To be inspired is not......
Words: 341 - Pages: 2
Philosophy of Life
...Philosophy of Life My Philosophy I have never lived by one solid philosophy, but rather rose to live by three. I like to believe that all three have different meanings, but in general they basically stand for everything that I think I am made up of. My three philosophies are: work hard, take pride in myself and the accomplishments that I make, and also everyone is on this planet for a reason. The people around are a big role in how you view things. For example, my mother was a dancer, and I am a dancer, but my sister believes that dancing is one of the most disgusting things in the world. This example shows that someone that was raised in the same house as me could view thing depending on their drive for a goal. The first of my three philosophies, to work hard, can be very easily explained. In my few young years of living I’ve come to feel that if money or a gift given to me by another person because I earned the reward is much more valued. In other words, knowing that I worked hard, did a good job, and deserve a reward makes me feel good inside. I also feel that all persons should have to work and support themselves. My grandmother taught me young that, if a person doesn't wish to put forth any effort and work hard to support themselves, then that person deserves nothing. This philosophy that was taught to me showed me that nothing is hand given anything that I want has to be earned. The next of my three philosophies is to take pride in myself and the......
Words: 389 - Pages: 2
Philosophy of Life
...My Philosophy I have never lived by one solid philosophy, but rather rose to live by three. I like to believe that all three have different meanings, but in general they basically stand for everything that I think I am made up of. My three philosophies are: work hard, take pride in myself and the accomplishments that I make, and also everyone is on this planet for a reason. The people around are a big role in how you view things. For example, my mother was a dancer, and I am a dancer, but my sister believes that dancing is one of the most disgusting things in the world. This example shows that someone that was raised in the same house as me could view thing depending on their drive for a goal. The first of my three philosophies, to work hard, can be very easily explained. In my few young years of living I’ve come to feel that if money or a gift given to me by another person because I earned the reward is much more valued. In other words, knowing that I worked hard, did a good job, and deserve a reward makes me feel good inside. I also feel that all persons should have to work and support themselves. My grandmother taught me young that, if a person doesn't wish to put forth any effort and work hard to support themselves, then that person deserves nothing. This philosophy that was taught to me showed me that nothing is hand given anything that I want has to be earned. The next of my three philosophies is to take pride in myself and the accomplishments that I make.......
Words: 618 - Pages: 3
Philosophy of Life
...Time is life Time is money; time is life, especially in this modern society of ours. It is important not only to businessmen but to people from all walks of life. Punctuality is a habit. We can, if we like, get into the habit of doing things at the right time. But it is not easy to do this. Many people have a tendency for being late for one reason or another. No one likes to wait but we often let people wait for us, don’t we? It is much easier to put things off, and say we will do them tomorrow or next week. Because it is easy to be unpunctual, many of us get into the bad habit of always being late for everything. And once we get into this bad habit, it is every hard to get out of it. An unpunctual person is an enemy to himself, and a nuisance to everyone else. In school, the boy who is always late and behind with his lessons gets into trouble and learns little. An unpunctual clerk soon will lose his job. And a friend who always keeps you waiting may lose your friendship. The idea of punctuality is very important. You lose out on opportunities, respect and time when you are late. To be punctual means to do what you should do on time, and a punctual person is in the habit of doing things at the proper time and is never late for his appointments-which is especially important in the current, fast developing society. To a worker, time is productivity. To students, time is knowledge....
Words: 271 - Pages: 2
Philosophy of Life
...“All that I’m after is a life full of laughter” (Life After You- Daughtry). Everyone has their own personal outlook on life. Some people feel like money and success bring them happiness, others feel like love is all they need. As Aristotle once said, "Happiness is believed to be the most desirable thing in the world..." (Aristotle) Everyone wants different things. I however, feel like you don’t need a lot to be happy in life, it’s the little things that count. Having your family and friends, and people who care about you, falling in love and having that person with whom you can disclose your trust with, helping other people and putting them before yourself, expressing your feelings and emotions, and living your life to the fullest every single day are all my ideas of reaching ultimate happiness. You learn from the experiences and events you go through, if you don’t take the risk, you’ll never learn to fall. Not everyone is fortunate enough to have a family who cares about them, or friends who would do anything for you. Luckily, I have both of these in my life. Even though I do not always get along with my family, I still love them, and they love me. We all want what’s best for each other. The same goes for friends, my friends and I could spend every hour of every day together and it still wouldn’t be enough time. I could not imagine going a day in my life without any one of the people that I love. "A friend is a second self" (Aristotle). Every time I laugh or...
Words: 369 - Pages: 2
Philosophy of Life
...MY PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE I cannot remember as a child asking myself the "why and what" questions about life. What is its purpose and what to do? Why do certain things happen? Why are we here? Why? I may be saying this for I think at this age; I'm living happily, with my family, playing with my friends and neighbors, going to school, and all about kids fun. Hence, living life like what my parents want it to be. However, later on as time passes by, and as I grew older, everything seems to sink in and slowly and slowly, concern and obligation comes to arise, decisions to make and responsibility to take. This responsibility includes those of the personal and social aspects. On a personal point, our obligation is to take care of ourselves, stay healthy and live happily. While socially, I strongly believe in the saying, do unto others, as you would like them to do unto you. Although abiding this rule is quite not easy, but trying to do this has no payment at all, besides, it will help the society to run smoothly as possible without too much strife. For this reason, we as humans are conscious enough to be able to make assessment, evaluation, and realization whether our action is the right one or not. Despite the fact that Life is complex and complicated to define, I understand that everybody has a different vision of Life on the world. All have different opinion and view on how they should act and what traits make a good person. As they say - what would be the point of......
Words: 1433 - Pages: 6
My Philosophy Life
...My Personal Philosophy of life. My Personal Philosophy of life. Philosophy of life will be different between each person. A persons philosophy will vary depending on ones life experience. I believe that no two people will have seen life in the same way. There would be many people that have similar philosophy on life but none of them would be exactly the same. I will share my ideas and thoughts on what is my philosophy of life. The way have experience life has made me change my way thinking more then once, am sure it will change again. What is my purpose in life? What is anybodyâ€™s purpose in life? Thatâ€™s a question that we all deal with, why are we here, what is the point of life? There is the thought that are purpose of life only known by God. That he has chosen it for before we were ever born, and that part of the reason is to be here for someone else. If I would have asked this questions three four years ago I would have answered with, I have no idea. Back then I really had know idea why am here, or what am supposed to be doing. It seem that all I cared about was to go party. I would live with the philosophy of, live one day at a time. I was in the army then and all I worried about was that day, oh payday needed money to party. I didnâ€™t worry about trying to get promoted or move up, thatâ€™s what must soldiers strive for. I basically was just trying to skate through life. Things changed in my life that I will get into later. I can know say that the purpose of me......
Words: 406 - Pages: 2
Philosophy of My Life
...MY PHILOSOPHY IN LIFE FINAL PAPER IN HUM 2 1.) “Do not worry for tomorrow but worry for today.” -Rosie My philosophy of life has something related to one of the classical philophers named Aristippus on his motto; “Eat, drink, and be merry, tomorrow you will die”. 2.) “If you really want peace in your mind then think peacefully. I believe troubles and worries about everything big or small are just state of mind. If you really wanted to be at peace then live for it. If you worry, you can never have a peaceful moment.” -Rosie My philosophy of life had influenced by one of the nine (9) classical philophers Epictetus mentioning that peace of mind is very important because it makes a life of tranquility, serenity and composure possible. 3.) “Follow your heart and happiness will follow.” -Rosie I had to agree to the philosophy that had believed by one of the very known and influenced philosopher, Aristotle. He has a strong conviction that happiness is the realization of Man’s highest nature. 4.) “There are many times in all of our lives where we find ourselves knowing exactly where and what we should be, yet our world and circumstances through no fault of our own, seems to build walls and barriers to our dreams. –Rosie Zeno of Citium has his own philosophy about virtues. According to him human being is virtuous when they wish that which is willed by God. Living according to reasons and reasons tells us that all that happens must happen in order to actuate a superior willed...
Words: 266 - Pages: 2
Philosophy in Life
...that the doctor does everything he can to make sure that Jake follows. Michael and myself believe that while it is the doctor's duty to provide sound medical advise and care, it is not the doctor's place to make the patient's medical decisions for them. While the doctor should certainly should advise that Jake that diet and exercise would be the better course of action, it is not the doctor's place to withhold possible treatments because he believes that he knows the best. While he is better informed than the patients on medical issues, it is always up to the patient to decide the best course of treatment for themselves because they are the foremost expert on their life. Katie makes a fundamental misstep by assuming that the best medical treatment is the best treatment. Medicine is a way to enhance and preserve the life and health of individuals, not to dictate their lives. Patient's reject courses of treatment all the time because, while it may be in their best interests medically, it will interfere with the way they want to conduct themselves in their lives. Patients reject amputation and chemotherapy regularly in the real world because, even though that gives them the best chance to survive and heal, the quality of their lives is important to them. It is not the place of the doctor to determine what levels of discomfort the patient should put up with, it is his or hers. Upon further discussion, Katie insisted that the doctor was not withholding treatment but that he was......
Words: 859 - Pages: 4
Philosophy of Life
...My Personal Philosophy Essay People develop and shape their personal philosophy during the whole life. Some circumstances may radically change our views, depending on our age, social status and personal qualities. As for me, at this stage of my life I can’t say it for sure that my personal philosophy is complete and well-shaped. In my research paper I want to express my views on several sides of human life. I’d like to attract attention to such concepts as sense of life and happiness, good and evil, morality and faith in God, love and death, eternal life values, karma and religion. I’ll answer the questions what love and happiness mean for me personally. I understand that the concept of life philosophy is really versatile and it’s hard to express personal views on so many aspects. That’s why my research deals with only those things which are important for me at this stage of my life. If you look at life from different sides for some period of time, and then gather all your thoughts into one picture – that would be your life philosophy. Humans strive to find out and clearly define the sense of their living, and feel unhappy and desperate without it. Each person has his own sense of life and discovers it for himself only. There are people who live their lives without asking what they are living for. Personally I have always been concerned with this question and I think it is important to have at least some slightest peace of sense in life. Sometimes I feel myself broken and......
Words: 2770 - Pages: 12
Philosophy of Life
...2/21/2015 2/21/2015 James Turner Philosophy-1101 James Turner Philosophy-1101 Philosophy of Life And Other Essays By. B.J. Gupta Philosophy of Life And Other Essays By. B.J. Gupta B.J. Gupta gets right to the point in his book “Philosophy of life”. He does not use outlandish sentences and problematical paragraphs to explain what he is saying. The book starts out by his explanations of philosophy, and Gupta gives two examples of what philosophy meant in the past and what it means nowadays. Back when philosophy was developed a philosopher had been considered a thinker, and it did not matter on what subject. Nowadays, a philosopher is a thinker of non-materialistic subjects like knowledge. Those subjects like science, history, and economics have their own sets of thinkers labelled scientist, historian, economist etc. Gupta is saying that philosophy used to touch on many subjects, and even though these other subjects are not called philosophy, philosophy is in their DNA and always will be. (Gupta, p. 1) Then Gupta gives an example of “Philosophy of Life” he got of the internet, which is “Any philosophical view or vision of the nature or purpose of life or of the way that life should be lived”. (Random House, Inc., 2015) He does not give his own definition on the subject, but he does go on explaining that everyone has his or her own outlook on the philosophy of life, you do not have to be a philosopher to have an opinion on the matter. Some......
Words: 3060 - Pages: 13
Philosophy of Life
...Guinyard June 29, 2016 HUS 102 B01 Philosophy of Life Philosophy of life will be different between each person. A person’s philosophy will be different depending on one’s life experience. I believe that no two people will have seen life in the same way. There would be many people that have similar philosophy on life but none of them would be exactly the same. I will share my thoughts on what is my philosophy of life. The way I have experience life has made me change my way of thinking more than once, I am sure it will change again. What is my purpose in life? What is anybody’s purpose of life? That’s a question that we all deal with, that’s why we are here, what is the point of life? There is the thought that our purpose of life only known by god. That he has chosen it before we were even born, and that part of the reason is to be here for someone else. If I would have asked these questions some years ago I would have answered with, I have no idea. Back then I really had no idea why I’m here, or what I was supposed to be doing. It seemed that all I cared about was to go party. I would live with the philosophy of, live everyday like it’s your last. I worked part time jobs then and all I worried about was that day, oh payday need money to party. I didn’t worry about trying to get promoted or moving up in the companies, that’s what most people strived for. I basically was just trying to skate through life. Things changed in my life that I will get into later. I......
Words: 955 - Pages: 4