sound.
sound.
I don't believe this argument is successful, simply because it is possible to believe something with no evidence whatsoever, the consequences of which may or may not be blameworthy; such as believing that there exists somewhere in the world a living Tyrannosaurus Rex.…
Bohlander and Snell’s definition of sexual harassment “refers to unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature” (Bohlander & Snell, 2013, p. 112). Thus, Peter Lewiston did not make any direct form of harassment based on the books definition of such; he did fall under the “Equal Employment Opportunity Commission” (EEOC) forms of recognized sexual harassment. Lewinson created a “hostile environment” which the EEOC recognizes, “can occur when unwelcome sexual conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with job performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment” (Bohlander & Snell, 2013, p. 112). As a result Lewiston created a sexually hostile environment for Gilbury based on the constant approaches, and unwanted or requested gifts; even though Gilbury had reputedly stopped his advanced in a proper manner.…
James Patrick Holding’s article talks about how “demagogues” like Dawkins find it hard to believe that creationists’ views are accepted and the double standard shown by them in accepting a thesis. The author seems to be offended as indicated by how he can mention “a lengthy list of the insulting rhetoric Dawkins has heaped upon the creationists”. Holding questions the credibility of the beliefs supported by Dawkins, who seems to be raising doubts on the view point of the creationists because the view belongs to a minority alone. Holding believes that people like Dawkins rarely put an effort in researching a particular idea, but they add those beliefs in their “agenda” only if it proves to be beneficial for them. The readers get the hint of irony that Holding tries to convey through his article that even though Dawkins supports the ‘Christ myth’ through his actions, he happens to give a statement of how there is a possibility of the existence of Jesus. The mockery in the article is pretty obvious as first Dawkins is said to have worked in a film called “The God Who Wasn’t There” – a film that supports the idea of how Jesus did not even exist at all. The author further mentions how the “Christ Myth” remains unsupported by any of the historians and the “leading proponent of Christ myth over the past century – is not a historian, but a professor of German”. The readers begin to doubt the credibility of Dawkins after reading this article and whether he and his “ideological cohorts” actually care to research a prevalent idea before they declare their endorsement of it. Even though people like Dawkins make sure their beliefs are free from any kind of doubts, most of the readers would definitely become cautious in believing the claims of these people after reading this…
The use of rhetorical sentences helps get the reader thinking about the controversy between evolution and creationism. Dawkins and Coyne appeal to pathos as they set the tone of frustration and aggressiveness towards creationism. Creating this tone gets the reader more excited about the topic and more understanding to the author. Juxtaposition appeals to logos and allows the readers to understand why it would be illogical for creationism and evolution to be in the same category. It is much easier for the reader to compare evolution and creationism when two examples are given very close to each other. The authors’ appeal to logos is their most powerful tool in convincing their audience. They make many great points about why evolution should stand apart from intelligent design. Overall, Dawkins and Coyne were effective at persuading the audience in their favor. They appealed to ethos, pathos, and logos effectively causing the audience to be more invested into the argument and more likely to agree with them. These tools prepare the audience for their warning at the end of the essay about teaching controversies that are not really controversies. The authors say teaching creationism in the schools or any other false controversies would lead to the end of quality science…
Design arguments, also sometimes known as teleological arguments, from the Greek ‘Telos’ for goal and ‘Logos’, meaning reason, hence reasoning for a goal or purpose and that purpose being God’s existence. These arguments endeavour to ascertain God’s existence, by inferring from evidence of design and purpose in the universe, and claim that there must have been a designer of this. Design arguments start from experience, so they are a posteriori and use inductive reasoning, as we infer from a specific observation, a general conclusion.…
For decades, historians have debated the purpose of the United States Constitution. Some, such as Charles Beard claim that the constitution is an economic document meant to secure power in the hands of the wealthy. Others, most notably Henry Commager have challenged Beard’s analysis and claim that the Constitution was drafted with political motives instead. To make his point, Beard primarily discusses the writers of the constitution, and only assumes what the document itself will say. Commager makes a more convincing argument since he uses both the Constitution itself and the framers’ words as evidence.…
In the article written on February 13, 2010, NPR’s Ira Robert Krulwich talks with Barbara Smuts about why her glasses got all steamy when she went to the mountains of Rwanda to visit a wild gorilla preserve. Before Barbara Smuts became a psychology professor at the University of Michigan, she was also a field biologist in Africa where she studied animals such as baboons and chimps. According to Barbara, she sat with female gorillas, and across from where she was sitting; she caught a young female gorilla staring at her. This female gorilla had a friendly look. After a while, the gorilla stood up and walked over to her. She stood right in front of Barbara and pressed her forehead up against Barbara’s forehead. Gorilla’s breath caused her glasses…
Freeman and Friedman have very contrasting opinions on the goals and responsibilities of a business. Freeman supports the Stakeholder Theory in suggesting that anyone who has a stake in the firm deserves to be treated as a participating determining factor in the direction of a firm. They are not just a means to the end. Friedman pretty much says the opposite. He believes that businesses have no responsibility outside of those who have ownership in the company. In devising my own opinion, being part of the Millennial generation I feel that we lean more towards Freeman’s argument.…
Tim Wise had a different childhood than most, he was raised by the phrase "Race matters." As a pre-schooler he was sent to a mostly black school and learned to respect black authority figures. This resulted in him being more racially aware while growing up. His main argument was that racial inequality still exists today. As he went through college, he became very involved in a group that advocated for better rights for people in Africa. Several weeks later, he was asked what he had done to address racism in his own city, New Orleans. He then realized he hadn't done anything in his own town. He began working for the next twenty years to advocate for racial equality still exists. The argument is made that white people are blind to their advantages and privileges. According to Wise, white privileges is built into our system and has helped us without us knowing. White people in the US have had many more privileges compared to people of color, it's just built into the foundation of our…
In his article, On Being an Atheist, H.J. McCloskey tried to show that atheism is a more reasonable and comfortable belief than that of Christianity. McCloskey argued against the three theistic proofs, which are the cosmological argument, the teleological argument and the argument from design. He pointed out the existence of evil in the world that God made. He also pointed out that it is irrational to live by faith. According to McCloskey, proofs do not necessarily play a vital role in the belief of God. Page 62 of the article states that "most theists do not come to believe in God as a basis for religious belief, but come to religion as a result of other reasons and factors." However, he feels that as far as proofs serve theists, the three most commonly accepted are the cosmological, the teleological, and the argument from design. It is important to note that he considers these arguments as reasons to "move ordinary theists to their theism." (McCloskey 1968) This is not necessary the case and contradicts the former statement that most theists do not hold to these proofs. As such, the attempt to dispute these arguments as a reason not to believe in God is almost not worth attempting. If theists do not generally hold to these proofs as reasons for faith, then why bother trying to dispute them to theists? Continuing to do so seems as though he is motivated to prove a point few are not interested in disputing, and thus is purposely trying to set up theist belief as ridiculous; in other words, he is looking to pick to a fight. This is not an intellectual objective article. Bias necessarily forfeits intellectual objectivity.…
After reviewing McCloskey's article it is clear to say that he wanted to truly appeal to an atheist audience. McCloskey refers to the arguments as "proofs", which means that he is trying to insinuate that these arguments are not scientifically proven and are not based on facts. A proof is a statement that is unquestionable and lead to an end. He also implies that the arguments cannot definitely establish the case for God, so therefore they should be abandoned because this way he can use that term to make the argument that God exists less plausible. Specifically, the cosmological argument, teleological argument, and arguments of design in general cannot be proven and cannot point to an end, but they do provide possible arguments that God does…
The class did not have any reading assignments for this week as we are going to watch the presidential debate during class. During this time, I will keep in mind the material and concepts we have been discussing so far in class. A topic that seems to reappear in class is the debate on whether environmental degradation should be considered an impairment to humans. This goes back to David Orr’s article and relates to Rebecca Pope’s article presentation.…
I am most convinced by the arguments presented by irrationalists and their ability to circumnavigate many arguments by ineffable means. Rationalism is described as "the philosophy that is characterized by its confidence in reason, and intuition in particular, to…
Swinburne concludes his work with the cumulative argument and believes that when the arguments are considered in isolation of the others they don’t prove God, but put together, they make an overwhelming argument which cannot be denied in the grand scales of Atheism Vs Theism. But it has been argued the theory is logically and mathematically flawed as taking many low probabilities and adding does not make on more probable argument – in fact the opposite.…
Imagine a world with laws that prohibit you from living your life because of the color of your skin. In the following articles “From letter to viceroy, lord Irwin” by Mahatma Gandhi and “Speech at the march on Washington” by Josephine Baker, each person argues how the government treats the community, and how Gandhi and Baker chose nonviolence to fight for equality. In order to achieve freedom one must use nonviolence to find a peaceful approach to a situation.…