Cloning

What is your position on cloning. Do you have different positions for different types?

1. Human cloning

2. Cloning animals for food

3. Any other kind of reproductive cloning

4. Therapeutic cloning

Human Nature

I know we are going to continue this discussion in class another day, but I though I'd post this so that people who can't make it to class either today or next week could join the discussion and also so that we could discuss it without all the sidetracking and the loudness (if you were in class you know what I mean :) ) So here you go.

Does human nature exist? If so what is it? Is there a difference between human nature and instinct? How can you prove the existence or non-existence of human nature?

Well there you go: DISCUSS :)

Freedom of Speech

Consider this scenario: Someone creates a website where he posts how to make a homemade bomb and encourages people to use those bombs. Two weeks later a completely different person with no relation whatsoever to the creator of the website blows up a building. He is arrested, but what about the person who made the website? Should he be held responsible for this bombing? Should he have not been allowed to post this, what about freedom of speech? Now consider this scenario: Someone writes a wilderness survival guide and includes directions to make a homemade knife. A criminal uses this guide to create a knife and then stabs someone with it. Is the creator of the guide responsible for the stabbing? Should he still be allowed to write survival guides?

So should we have laws stopping people from writing instructions on how to make and use weapons? And if so at what point does that become a violation of our rights?

The Root of all Evil

Money. Our modern society is mostly built on it these days. Over the years, money has become more and more imbedded into our lives and our habits. Out of money is power, the rich and wealthy can rule the financial empire. But also, we can get dragged away by the pleasure of wealth. Just look at the recession! Bad spending habits, credit card debt, foreclosure, you hear it all over the news every night. And yet, we may try to fix it, but we keep falling into the same habits over and over again, digging that hole deeper and deeper. We are hooked on a drug, and it's called money. Our whole society is hooked!

Based on how it is right now in the present day and time, how do you think our society will change? How will we be effected by wealth?

Insanity and the Death Penalty

Imagine you are the judge on a high profile case,

A young woman has committed 6 murders. She has been brought before trial and convicted guilty. It is clear to you, beyond reasonable doubt that she is. It is also clear to you that she is clinically insane. She has a rare and extreme form of insanity. Your options are capital punishment (lethal injection) or a mental hospital with therapy. It is possible to fully recover from her disease but it is not likely, here are the percentages:

70% of people with her disease never recover

10% make a partial recovery but are never safe to live in normal society

15% make a partial recovery and can function to some level in society

5% make a full recovery

What would you sentence her to?

Continuing our discussion about punishment...Imagine this scenario

Okay. Continuing our discussion today about punishment, consider this scenario:

A teenager decides to try an illegal drug without telling his friends or parents. It has a negative take, and, under the influence of the drug, kills four innocent people.

The jury is deciding between two punishments: A) Death Row. B) Life sentence in jail.

Which do you think they should choose and why?

Problems and thinking about the future.

Okay so, picture this. You're faced with a problem, and it really brings you and your mood down. But then you think of the future and think, 20 years from now, will this matter? Will this seemingly big problem that I am facing right now still seem so big in 20 years? For most people, the answer is no. You would think back, "Oh I remember that problem." But nothing more.

Also, another way of doing this without thinking of the future is looking at the classic "I'm so small" theory. You think, I'm one person in one city in one state in one country in one continent in one world in one galaxy in one universe so how could problems of such a small person matter so much?

Do you think that this is a negative or positive way of looking at problems? Could it help you deal with things in a better way? Is looking at the future always the best way to go?

Any other thoughts on stuff like this?

-SJP III

Test Post

This is a test post (duh)

Everything and nothing: a paradox

Can the concept of everything and the concept of nothing coexist? If nothing is real then the concept of nothing itself isn't real. Which means that nothing can be real and nothing can be not real. However if you say that everything is real that means that the concept of nothing is also real but if nothing is real then everything isn't real so nothing is the only thing thats real but if nothing is real then nothing itself can't be real which means that nothing can't exist which means that everything is real...

I got this idea from Sophie's comment

In our own defense

What can we justify doing in the name of defense? We have created thousands of weapons to defend ourselves in case of weapons that our enemies MIGHT create. In doing this we bring new weapons into the world that might never have come into being. We also force our enemies to create more weapons to defend themselves, but then we have to defend ourselves again. So where does it stop?

Are we ALONE?

Are we the only ones that are alive in this universe? Are there such things as aliens? Other kinds of living things? I know that it was proven by scientists and all, but really... It seems impossible to think that we're the only ones here.

Technology

We are growing up in a very technologically advanced world. In the past century, we have made the computer, the internet, the iPhone (YAY!!!), cameras, that awesome 3D stuff used in Avatar, and many other things that will probably come in the future. But have you ever thought that maybe, technology will take over the world? Like someday, we'll be like the people in Walle, fat blobs sitting in motorized chairs? I wouldn't want this to happen to us, but I do feel that there are some technological things that we have left to discover. Do you think in the future, we will be having too much of a good thing? Too much technology? Or do you think that we will be able to compromise, and not get like that?

OH MY GOD THAT GAVE ME ANOTHER REALLY GOOD IDEA.

Okay so at one point in us climbing up on this technology ladder (hehe I love my metaphorical thinking) we will have to crash. Do you think before us modern humans, one of the older hominids had a "technology rise and crash"? And with that point stated, do you think that there will even be a technology crash? What do you think? :)

The Universe

Okay, this is probably the most unoriginal thing that will ever be posted on this blog, but how do you think the universe was created? To elaborate, how do you think that something came out of nothing?

Little Puzzles

If you are what you eat, then technically aren't cannibals the only real humans?

What Does Death Feel Like?

I probably asked a lot of people this already, but WHAT DOES DEATH FEEL LIKE? People always say, "Nothing". Then, what does feeling nothing feel like? I can't imagine feeling "nothing". What does "Nothing" feel like?

Why is our age so dumb?

If you think about it, most big discoveries in history and science were made in the ancient times. Isn't there still so much to find out about our world? Why have humans in this age been so crippled by knowledge? The modern age now has so much more resources and databases and machines that we can find out so much more stuff! So why have we not been able to find out anything? You would think that people so long ago would have been at less advantage to find answers to the world than us today. Has every question been found out? Of course not! Then why are modern humans at such a loss?

What's Out There

Scientists haven't been very far out into space, so how can we know that we are not on some cosmic cow? A bit overdone but still a valid point. Our planet could be on some jelly-like substance, or we could be microscopic, just thinking we are huge like in Horton Hears a Who. One might say, that is ridiculous, but is it?

Do You believe in luck?

What is luck? We define it as something good happening, and bad luck as something bad happening. But is that really luck? If something good happens to you, what makes it luck? What defines something as lucky or not lucky? Is luck a cause and effect thing? Doesn't everything in the earth happen because of cause and effect? Can anything (any effect) happen without a cause? Luck is defined as something that happens like a miracle, without cause and effect. And if nothing can happen without cause and effect, why does luck happen? What is it made of?

What is real?

Is real what we perceive, is it what we understand, is it what is actually? The last is the most common definition. But how can we know what is real? Is it what one if us sees? What about what the rest of us see? We know color isn't real, we know we can't really touch anything, so what is real? And more importantly does it even matter? If we live happily with the world as we see it why try to find a different one

Peace or Justice?

My mom was watching this show called 24 and it had this great philosophical lesson. The president of the United States was about to get the world to sign a world wide peace treaty eliminating war on Earth between all nations. But just days before the peace treaty is going to be signed the president of the I.R.K. (a foreign country) is poisoned. His wife is forced to take over the country, but is devastated by her husband's death and wants to find the person who killed him. Later, the President, A.T.U. (anti-terrorist unit) and Jack Bower (protagonist) discover that the Russians were the ones to kill him. Jack's girlfriend discovers this first and is determined to expose the Russians, so the Russians take her out. (Making Jack a VERY ANGRY MAN WITH A GUN).

Jack is determined to do the same thing and expose the Russians so he goes to the president so that he can get permission to interrogate their prisoner for evidence against the Russians.

Instead the President is more interested in peace and decides to lock Jack up in order to keep the peace treaty, knowing that if the new president of the I.R.K. found out she would never sign. Jack is arguing with her and he says: "I want justice" and the president says: "I want peace".

So which is more important? Justice or peace? This question doesn't have to apply exclusively to this show. In general which is more important?

Insanity

People come up to me all the time (cough cough Sophie-sorry Emma :) ) and say "You're so insane." But what defines insanity? The dictionary says that insanity is "the state of being seriously mentally ill". But what defines "mentally ill"? Everybody's mind is different, as is everybody's perception of insanity. Plus the people could just be acting how their parents taught them. So is there really any way to determine if someone is insane?

The Stab Case

Decide who should win this case and why:

Defendant: Mark
Other guy: Tristan

Tristan's claim: Mark was walking along with me and we were talking about his girlfriend who cheated on him. He was really mad, and I was making jokes, he joked that he would stab me, and then he did! In the arm with a pocketknife! I was just rushed off to the hospital. Shouldn't he get arressted for stabbing me?

Mark's claim: I was walking along with Tristan, really mad at my girlfriend for cheating on me, and I said "Okay, if you say that one more time, I swear TO GOD I WILL STAB YOU WITH THIS POCKETKNIFE!" Then Tristan deliberately said something about my girlfreind, and I stabbed him. It wasn't sharp, and he deserved it. He knew that I was going to stab him, but he didn't take me seriously. It's not my fault because I warned him before, when he had a chance to stop me or go away, and all he did was egg me on so I stabbed him. And I agree, it's not moral, but I wasn't stabbing to kill, and he asked me to do it.

Who should win this case and why?

Afraid of Planes?

Most people would say, if you asked them if they were more afraid of flying in a plane or driving in a car, would say flying in a plane. Maybe it's because they don't do this every day, or because it seems to be simply a more frightening thought. Plane: flying thousands of feet above the ground with no control over what is going to happen to you. You are in an extremely heavy plane, relying on propulsion, fuel, and a good pilot to get you to your destination. Car: You are sitting in a small, flimsy compartment, driving along with millions of other cars that you are extremely close to. You are in control of the car, but cannot control what other cars may do. Although car crashes are SO MUCH MORE FREQUENT than an occasional plane crash, people still respond "plane". My thought is that they are afraid that they do not have control. There is that word again. People like control. When you're in a plane, you have no control. You're sitting in a plane relying on someone else to take you thousands of miles across land and ocean whereas in a car, you are relying on yourself to take you wherever you need to go, even if it may include risking your life at a much higher scale. This relates to my last post. Does this mean that people find control more important than their own safety?

MUA HA HA HA POWER

It seems to me that our whole society revolves around power and who is better than who. It is shown in the animal kingdom as well. The fast, healthy bunny will survive, where as the slow sickly one will not. Though our human society has tried to change it, people seem to still be better than others and have more power. The whole concept of money revolves around this. Things have value, some things are better than others so they have more value. Someone always needs to have more than another. There needs to be a leader that has power over all and that is better than everyone. The entire human race believes they are better than any other race. They, or should I say we, believe we are smarter, more efficient, more powerful, and all controlling. We have taken over the world to take control. To have power. Better, Power, smarter, more efficient, controlling. These are all words that describe the way the human race is built up. Why do you think this is?

Immortality

This post was inspired by squabs's post. I was just thinking about immortality. Living forever sounds pretty great but really. Imagine that everyone you love dies and you are the only one still alive. All of your loved ones die and your the only one alive, knowing that it is useless to get attached because you know that in the end they will die too. When I was 7 I asked one of my friends if they could have any super power in the entire world what would it be and she answered I would live forever. At the time I didn't really realize how awful that would be. Living knowing that everyone that I loved will die and I will live forever... Just a thought :P

Can We touch Anything????

Though a strange thought, it is worth thinking about. The concept of touching. The dictionary definition is: to come close to an object as to be or come in contact with it. Are we coming in contact with it or is there something in between? Aren't there tiny molecules seperating us from it?If we come in contact, wouldn't we physically connect with that object? The dictionary definition simply states "an object". Does that mean that we are not able to touch humans? Or Air? What are your thoughts?

The Big Bang Theory

How do you think the Big Bang Theory exactly start?

The Value of a Life

When a person is killed purposefully, it is considered murder. However, when someone goes hunting, they kill many animals with the full knowledge 0f what they have done and the opinion that it is not murder. Why would people do that when they wouldn't to humans? Many say that animals like deer are overpopulated, but they aren't nearly overpopulated as us. What do you think about an animal's life versus a human's life?

Possible Immortality and the Implications

Scientist have been researching growing replacement organs for people, recently they've been able to replace a mans liver. This research could save many lives and could even eventually lead to almost complete immortality, and it might not be too far away, scientists believe that in the next 20 years they'll be able to create a replacement heart. At first this sounds like a wonderful thing, and it could very well be. However, how would immortality affect laws, populations, crime rates, and people's ethics? Should only certain people get immortality? Who would decide and how? And what would people be willing to do if they didn't fear dying?

Rene DesCartes Views Contrary to mine...or just a fancy title for my disagreements

Before I state my argument, let me just say that I am having the feeling that this is something I can't express in words. Okay. That didn't come out right. Have you ever had the feeling that you have this great idea and then when you write it down, or use words to tell somebody, it doesn't sound so great anymore? It's like the words that you chose changed your idea when you said/wrote them. (We could probably start a discussion about this after?) That's the way I feel about this idea. So, it might not sound great, or intelligent, or even SANE! But it was something in my mind...so here goes!

Rene DesCartes said that in order for him to have the idea of a perfect being, there had to be one.

Okay. There are many things wrong with that statement.

First, let me restate: In order for HIM to have the idea... He was only thinking about himself. What is "perfect" to him, might not be considered "perfect" for another person. So, with stating this idea, DesCartes had to take into account the possibilites of several different "perfect ideas" and "perfect beings".

Second: The view of having the idea of a perfect being largely depends on the idea that you, yourself, (the thinker) is imperfect! If you think of yourself as perfect, you are implying, in essence, that you are your own perfect being! Not everyone may believe that they are imperfect, another flaw (I believe).

Third: If there is a perfect being, why does it have to be God (here I capitalize for the same reason Mr. Sewell did)? Who said that the ONLY perfect being is God? This once again relies on the person. God might be the "perfect" being to some people, but to others, there is some other supreme being that overpowers him in all things perfection.


You might not agree with my posts, and if you don't (or do) please tell me! But please take into account what I said earlier, about words.

Some Ideas I had Branching Off Sophie's Post (A world of Color)

Okay, so Sophie said that there really is no color. Well that got me thinking, if one is blind, how would they perceive color? Even if they are told what color is like, how do you think they would imagine colors look like? Do you think we (humans) are born with understanding of color? And then if what Sophie’s post says is true, that there really is no color, than do you think that that would mean that the world would be in black and white, or nothing at all? What do you think?

All Philosophers Please Read

I post this as an entry so everyone reads it.  It is an addendum to my first comment under Sandra J. Polk III’s post, “A World of Color.”  Please read both her post and my comment; then either come back to read this or read the addendum below the first comment.  At times, I will need to clarify language so we’re basically on the same page.  Many times, posts or comments will raise the opportunity to address the whole class.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wanted to add and clarify my first comment.  First, the issue of the question, "So what?"  When I ask this question (as I may do more), I do not mean to be flippant at all – even though the question by itself seems to have that connotation; I don’t think it has to by the way. 

Instead, I ask the question honestly to elicit more questions and responses.  In effect, it is shortcut for, "So what follows from the observation/proposition/

assertion?"  Since I am a student of mathematics, science, philosophy, theology, history, and culture, I am intensely interested in where and how these disciplines intersect, and how to resolve conflicting (or even contradictory) propositions among those disciplines.

Some questions or responses that I can think of in response to the “So What?” question are: “Does the fact (if it is one) that color does not exist, and is a mere human perception due to the sun’s light, call into question the basic reliability of our senses and should we change our behavior because of it?  If so, how?” or “Do scientists believe this is an objective (independent of human existence) scientific truth, and if so, then why do they think some truths are objective, but others are not?  Is it only a matter of the strength of evidence or are underlying philosophical assumptions also at work?” or “Some philosophers and language academicians in literature think meaning is constructed by the interpreter of the text and not in the text itself, but if that’s the case, then what are the implications for a proposition like, “There is no such thing as color?”

Lastly, everyone cite your sources (usually a URL I would suspect).  Everyone would probably like to read the original articles from which ideas for posts come.

~Reasons

A giant plate of pie: The way I see things

So, I was looking at other people's worldviews that they had posted, and I came to a conclusion. It's your personality, your attitude that determines the way you handle situations, therefore determining your worldview. Let's use this metaphor: The world is a giant plate of pie. If you are a person with a wide worldview, a person who goes out and does things for fun, sees sights, talks to people, meets new freinds, you eat a lot of the pie in your life. You see a lot of the world. In other words, the world has unlimited offerings, but it's your personality that determines how much you take a chance, and how much of the pie you decide to eat. What do you think?

A World of Color

Our world is a fake. A world of color, that's what we live in, people say. But do we? Recent studies have shown that there is no such thing as color. Color, the colors that we see, don't exist! They're just the sun's rays playing tricks on our eyes. But if that's true, and there is no such thing as color, what can we use to describe what we see? How do we say something without saying, "What color is it?" In that question, what would we replace as the word color? If there are no colors, what color is everything?

Is 2012 or any sort of apocalypse likely to happen?

I think that some sort of apocalypse is likely to happen to the world, even if it happens to be the death of the sun. I think that it is a high possibility that man may run out of resources before then. I think that way the world is going, we will end up dying off before we loose our sun.

No Time?

People say that inside a black hole, there is no time. But what is time? How can we know for sure there is time? And if we did go into a black hole, what do you think would happen? What would the absence of time bring about?

Lily's (slightly pessimistic) World Views

I think a worldview is how someone views the world in relation to their life. It can be affected by their religion, personal opinions, etc.

In relation to my answer above, everybody has a worldview, because everybody has things going on in their lives. For example, if one’s hobby was to sit around all day watching TV, their worldview would be that the world is a very busy place that one can escape with television.

One worldview I have heard (many, many times) is the statement “War is bad.” For the most part, wars are bad, but some wars are necessary.

My worldview is that the world is that the world is a cruel, cruel place with little happiness. I think this is true because for every person living in a mansion that has servants and butlers, there is a person living in poverty with no sufficient home. I’m not a pessimist, I am merely stating the truth.

An interesting dilema-true story

There was a lady in a coma with especially low chances of recovery and her parents wanted her to live. However, her former lover wanted to pull the plug and let her go so he could get a new girlfriend. The plug was eventually pulled. What would you have done if you were in charge of the situation?

My world veiws-sorry they're late

World Views

· What is a worldview

o I believe that a world view is any particulary person’s views, or opinions, on the world, life, humanity, ethics, culture, etc.

· Does everyone have a world view?

o I believe that it is impossible for a sentient living being to not have a world view. We all have opinions, thoughts, feelings, politics, beliefs, cultures. Even a person that is isolated from the rest of humanity would have a world view. It would just be drastically different from most.

· Name at least one world view of which you are aware.

o Anything really is a world view, whether it is your politics, or 1your religion, or your morality, or your culture it is a world view.

§ For example one world view in morality is the belief that for example all stealing is wrong, despite circumstances or desperation.

· What is your forming world view? Do you think it is true?

o I am not sure how to answer this question, because I believe that each person can have many separate

Insist on Your Rights!

"To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it."
~ G. K. Chesterton

• Do you think this quote is always true?  Whether "yes" or "no," justify your answer.
• Can you imagine and explain a situation in which the two things (right to do something) and (being right in doing it) actually align?

• Could this quote change our family lives, communities, American culture?  If so, how?  If not, why not?

Elijah's Worldview Answers

1. What is a World view
A) A worldview is when you see the world through all peoples eyes. To put it more simply when you think about all others around you.
B) A worldview is the way you perceive the world

2. Does everyone have a world view
A) I think people who think only for themselves have smaller world views. The more selfish you are the smaller your view is
B) I think that every person sees the world in a completely different way. Everyone has one.

3. Name at least one worldview of which you are aware?
A) There are multiple world views depending on the characteristics of the people who’s view it is
B) I think there are several world views. Where one person would say the world is lost another finds hope. Where one person sees a place to take from another finds a way to share.

4.What is your (forming) worldview
My world view alters during my mood. Most of the time I believe human beings are selfish people. When I’m in a really bad mood I think of humans as a cancer slowly killing the world. However I believe that if different choices were taken we could live in a greater world.

My World Views

1) What is a worldview

· A worldview is how you see the world today. Whether it is in politics, war, etc.

2) Does everyone have a worldview? Justify your answer.

· I think that everyone has a worldview. I mean it is basically your opinion on what you think of the world.

3) Name at least one worldview of which you are aware? If possible, explain

something about it.

· I’m aware that most people in politics have their different views on the world. This is also occurs in religion.

4) What is your (forming) worldview? Why do you think it is true?

· Undecided.

Various Topics

Please comment on any, or all, of the writing prompts below. I will respond to as many comments as I can. Please understand it is not physically possible for me to respond to everyone’s comments on every post. Remember, review and proof your comments before you post. Additionally, and be sure to stick to the topic and build a good argument so others may supplement it, or take issue with its premises.

1) A neurophysiologist, while establishing correlations between certain brain functions and the feeling of pain, begins to wonder whether the “mind” is distinct from the brain.

2) A perennial skeptic, accustomed to demanding and not receiving absolute proof for every view encountered, declares that it is impossible to know anything.

3) You can’t legislate morality!

4) In spite of their stress on the use of reason, some philosophers readily concede that reason has its limits. Is the ideal of reasoning in a purely objective way (i.e., uninfluenced by bias or other factors) really possible? If not, then what?