Knowledge and reality Essay Example for Free

Knowledge and reality Essay The quest for knowledge remains a perplexing problem in the field of philosophy. Even nowadays mankind continue to seek to understand himself and the world around him he is thirst to know were exactly our knowledge comes from. The question of knowledge appears to be a battle between the empirisists who believed that knowledge is acquired through sense experience and the rationalists who believed that knowledge can only be required through reasoning. Although there are a lot of people who abides with these groups in my essay in my essay I will only deal with John locke who in this case argues that knowledge is acquired throughsense experience thereby representing the empirisists group and Rene Descartes who argues that knowledge comes fronm reasoning thereby representing the rationalists. Diffrent scholars have also shown their appreciation to the work which was done by the two groups. Rene Descartes who is the rationalist have claimed that the ultimate starting point for knowledge is is not the senses but reason. According to Cottingham,Descartes argues that knowledge of a particular subject matter is underwritten by intuition or rational insight and deductive reasoning rather than experience of that subject matter(1984). Descartes in this case is of the opinion that the only way one can acquire knowledge is through deductive reasoning ,reasoning that aims at exactitude. In one way or other that exactitude is the one which we can now call knowledge Descartes maintain that without prior categories and principles supplied by reason wen could not organise and interrupt one’s sense experience in any way (Kenny:1986). In this case one would be faced with just one huge ,undifferentiated,kaleidospic whirl of sensation ,signifying nothing(Kenny:1986). Rationalism in its purest form goes so far as to hold that al our rational beliefs and the entirety of human knowledge consists in human principles and innate concepts. According to Russel Descartes believes that men are born with innate ideas or ideas that we are born with (1946:548). He argues that those innate ideas are generated and certified by reason along with anything logically deducable these first principles. Furthermore on innate ideas ,a number of mankind still how can reason supply ay mental category or first principle at all? The question is a bit easy for such people like Descartes who claimed that we are born with several fundamental concepts or categories in our minds ready for use(Stitch:1975). Descartes went own to argue that this gives us innate knowledge . This might be through certain categories of space ,time,cause and effect. In one way or other Descartes argues that people thinks in terms of cause and effect and this helps one’s experience of the world(Stitch:1975). A ccording to Stitch Descartes argues that people think of themselves as seing some things causing other things to happen,but in terms of our raw sense experience ,one sees certain things happen before other thing happen and remember having seen such before and after the sequences at earlier times (1975). One can come up with an example like ,a rock hits the window and then the window breaks. We don’t see the third thing called causation but we believe it has happened. The rock hitting the window caused it to break but this is not experienced like the fight of the rock or the shattering of the glass. Descartes argues that experience does not seem to force the concept of causation on us. On this case Descartes bis denying the fact that knowledge comes fron sense experience but reasoning. Descartes also claimed that the foundations of our knowledge are propositions that are self-evidently true. A self-evident proposition has the strange property of being such that ,on merely understanding what it says and without any further checking or special evidence of any kind. One can just intellectually see that it is true(Caruthers:1992). If A is greater than B the B is greater than C and therefore A is greater than C. In this example the claim is that once these statements are understood ,it takes no further sense experience whatsoever to see that they are true . Descartes was athinker who used sceptical doubt as a prelude to constructing a retionalist philosophy. He was convinced that all our beliefs that are founded on the experience of the external senses could be called into doubt ,but that with certain beliefs like ‘I am thinking’,there is n o room for creating and sustaining a reasonable doubt(Pojman:1991:72). Descartes then tried to find enough other first principles with immune to rational doubt that he could provide an indubitable ,rational basis for all other legitimate beliefs. According to Pojman Descartes thought that mathematics gave a paradigm or model of certain knowledge or of attaining such knowledge (1991:73). He argued that mathematical knowledge is based on self evident axioms ,or first principles. In this case those principles are clear and distinctly persued as self-evident and in other words they are indubitable that is to say it is hard to doubt them. They are intrinsically valid on self-certifying . Dscartes argues that once we have such self-evident truths ,then with the rules of reasoning or logic ,theories can be validly deduced from them (Spinoza:1905). Descartes wanted to apply the method of philosophy as he argued that in mathematics ther is no appeal to sense experience . Human reasoning is the sole source of mathematical knowledge (Spinoza:1905). In this case Descartes claimed that by poor reasoning one can achieve knowledge. It was this method of doubt that Descartes used to get at the indubitable starting point which will be unshakable foundation of the edifice of knowledge hence to doubt means to think and think means to be(Pojman:1991). On the other hand we have the empirialists who in this case are being represented by John Locke. Locke is of the view that knowledge is acquired through sense experience. Locke was actually influenced by Descartes writings in which Descartes was arguing that knowledge comes from reasoning and the issue of innate ideas. According to Pojman Locke believes that the senses we maintain ,gives us all our raw data about the world and without this raw material their would be no knowledge at all(Pojman:1991:83). To Locke perception starts a process and from this process come all our beliefs . In its purest form ,Locke and his collegues believes that sense experience alone gave birth to all our knowledge. Locke was influenced by Descartes writings because what Descartes believes was the opposite of what Locke and his collegues believed mostly on the issue of innate ideas hence he decided to put on his suggestion on were exactly our knowledge comes from. Locke argues that innate ideas are suppose to be inborn ideas and they are their in the human mind since birth (Locke:1894). He argues that these ideas are neither created by us nor derived from our experiences. Locke argues that the human mind is a ‘tabula rasa’ meaning to say it is blank and it looks like a white sheet of paper without any content or ideas. According to Pojman there are no inborn ideas in the human mind(Pojman:1991). Ideas denote the content of human mind and consciousness. This then supports the idea that all ideas spring from experiences. According to Spinoza ,Locke argues that all knowledge is formed as and ultimately derived from sensational or inner reflection(1905) To add more the empirisists argue thatideas acquired through sensation and reflection are simple ideas. According Russel Locke argues that the mind has the power to reject ,compare and combine them to then form complex ideas(1946:551) . The simple ideas are the materials of the mind or consciousness. The mind elaborates them in defferent ways and this knowledge is developed(Russel:1946:551)Simple ideaas in this case are thus produced in the mind by the outer things through external experiences and simple ideas posseses valididty. The two theories presents different ideas on were exactly we get knowledge but I think I am convinced with the theory of Descartes which says knowledge is acquired through reason. Although the theory was mainly meant for the mathmaticians I think it is good for me because a men ought to reason so as to find knowledge. To me reasoning shows that someone really is thinking deeper so as to find whatever he wants . The method of doubt which he uses convince me also because I think through doubting you will be able to find knowledge. The Christians might want to say Thomas was wrong but in one way or other Thomas made Christians to know that realy the man they saw was Jesus and Christians were made to believe that really there is resurrection and this was through doubting Thomas. I cant just believe what I have not see without doubting because nowadays people tend to lie so as to get whatever they want in their lives . Therefore the theory of Descartes to me is good one on how we aquire knowledge . ? BIBLIOGRAPHY Carruthers. P.(1992)Human knowledge and human nature,Oxford: Oxford University Press’ Cottingham. J. (1984)Rationalism,London:Palada books. Fieser. P. (1991) Introduction to Philosophy. Oxford:Oxiford University Press Kenny. A. (ed). (1986)Rationalism,Empiricism and Idealism ,Oxiford:Oxiford University Press Locke. J. (1690)An essay on human understanding. (ed)R. Woolhouse. (1997). London:Panguin Books Louis. P. (2007)The theory of knowledge ,classical and temporary readings. Belment CA:Wadsworth Stitch. S. (ed)(1975)Innate ideas ,Berkely CA:Carlifonia University Press Russell. B. (1912)History of Western Philosophy . Oxiford:Oxiford University Press.

Burkina Faso :: History

Burkina Faso Burkina Faso is a small country located in Western Africa, north of Ghana, it's total land area is 274,200 sq km. The terrain is mostly flat to dissected, undulating plains; hills in west and southeast. Some of it's natural resources are manganese, limestone, marbleand small deposits of gold. The irrigated land in Burkina Faso is only a mere 160 sq km. The population is 10,422,828 (July 1995 est.) of which 50% is under the age of 15. Burkina Faso is a country with a rapidly increasing population in relation to the growth of food supply and other human necessities. The countries population is growing rapidly and the country is not able to adequately feed, shelter, and provide the basic human needs. The situation is not improving, it is getting worse with each year. The very near future could be disastrous for the people of Burkina Faso. The possible solutions in overcoming this problem are not plentiful and all have their drawbacks, and moral issues. One option would be to try to increase the death rate, and at the same time lower the birth rate. Another can be to try to raise the environmental limits so that food supply would adequate. Or the other option can be that we do nothing and wait. These are just some options that I think are the most applicable to the case in which Burkina Faso is currently facing. Of all three the most appealing solution to me is number one. That solution might be a little slower then other options but I believe it is the best approach for the country. The first option, to increase death rates and lower the birth rates would be the best choice. This option would be best because of the situation that is in Burkina Faso. The spread of HIV/AIDS has become an important issue in Burkina Faso, where the national statistics estimate that between 4 and 7 percent of the population is seropositive. While these rates are low in comparison to countries of East Africa, they place Burkina Faso second after Cote d'Ivoire among West African countries most affected by the epidemic. Burkina Faso's health problems include a high prevalence of many endemic diseases, poor case management by the health system and a weak infrastructure, with health centres that are geographically or financially inaccessible to most of those they are meant to serve.

Enthalpy of Reaction and Hess’s Law Essay

I. Purpose The purpose of this lab is to verify Hess’s Law through the three reactions of NaOH and HCl, NH4Cl and NaOH, and NH3 and HCl. The sum of the enthalpies of the first two reactions should equal the enthalpy of the third reaction. II. Background Hess’s Law is used to determine the enthalpy of a reaction from adding two or more preceding reactions. To determine the enthalpies of certain chemical reactions, the change in must be measured. This is best done using a calorimeter to prevent heat loss to the surroundings. To calculate the heat change in solution, the q=mct equation must be used. A positive value for â€Å"q† means the solution gains heat, a negative value means the solution loses heat and is exothermic. The reactions used in the lab are exothermic acid-base neutralizations. By calculating â€Å"q†, heat, the enthalpy of reaction can be found by knowing the Molarity of the reactants. The specific heat of the calorimeter can be found by the equation qcal= t x heat capacity. Since a calorimeter is used the heat released from the reaction will be absorbed in the solution, while some heat is transferred to the calorimeter. So the â€Å"q† of the reaction is given by this equation: qrxn= †“ (qsol+qcal). III. Summary of Procedure Part 1: A calorimeter is to be arranged using Styrofoam cups and a hole on top of a cover to take the temperature while also preventing heat loss. 50mls of distilled is to be added to the calorimeter. 75mls must then be heated to 70 degrees Celsius and 50mls of that water is to be added to the calorimeter. The calorimeter has to be covered and then the temperature taken every 20 seconds for 3 minutes. Part 2: 50mls of 2.0M HCl must be put into the calorimeter. A 50mls solution of 2.0M NaOH should then be added to the HCl solution and stirred. The temperature needs to be recorded every 20 seconds for 3 minutes. For the second reaction the same process has to be repeated using 2.0M NH4Cl and 2.0M NaOH. The third reaction requires the same process using 2.0M solutions of NH3 and HCl. IV. Observations * Styrofoam cup becoming hot after mixture * thermometer scraping the Styrofoam cup sides * cover doesn’t completely cover the cup * small amount of time between pouring the chemicals and covering and mixing VI. Results and Questions Calculations please see attached graphs and work. Post Lab Questions 1. What is meant by calorimetry? Calorimetry is the scientific measuring of heat released during chemical and physical changes. It ensures that minimal heat is lost so the heat of reaction can be found accurately. 2. How does graphical analysis improve the accuracy of the data? Once the points are plotted on a graph the line of best fit can be drawn and extrapolated toward the y-axis. Since the first data plots can be inconsistent the best fit line may ignore the first points making the data more accurate by disregarding the inaccurate data. 3. What is the meaning of the negative sign in front of the equation for heat of reaction? The negative sign in front of the brackets indicate that we are in fact solving for the reverse reaction. So the sign must have a negative to indicate the reaction that is the forward, exothermic, reaction. 4. Do the lab results support Hess’s Law? The lab does support Hess’s Law. The percent error is relatively small for this lab and algebraically it is proven that the sum of the enthalpies of the first two reactions is close the measured value of the third reaction. 5. How could the procedure be modified to achieve greater accuracy? To improve the accuracy of the lab a formal capacitor could be used instead of average Styrofoam cups. An airtight seal between the cover and thermometer would also be more accurate by preventing heat loss to the surroundings. 6. Find a table reference that lists standard heat of formation for the species included in your net ionic equations. Use them to calculate delta H for the reaction of the net ionic equations. Do these values support Hess’s Law? See attached calculations. VII. Conclusion This lab successfully verified Hess’s Law by adding enthalpies of reactions to equal the enthalpy of a third reaction. The mix of NaOH with HCl, and NH4 with NaOH proved to give off a heat close to that of NH3 mixed with HCl. The percent error proved to be 3.72%. The sources of error could be the heat lost while the calorimeter was not covered and maybe not enough mixing throughout the duration of the three minutes. The addition of a mixing unit and an airtight seal on the capacitors would provide an improved version of this lab.

Master Morality vs. Slave Morality Neiztche - 867 Words

Master Morality vs. Slave Morality: Neiztche Wikipedia defines morality as â€Å"a system of principles and judgments based on cultural, religious, and philosophical concepts and beliefs, by which humans determine whether given actions are right or wrong.† (Wikipedia Morality) Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, a German philosopher thought up of the idea that there are two moralities; The master and slave morality. These define a person by there actions to there world around them and how they handle certain situations they encounter throughout their natural life. I believe he chose these two because they seem to be strong opposites and there are rational. The first morality Nietzsche writes about is the master morality. Nietzsche defined†¦show more content†¦The slave regards the virtues of beauty, power, strength and wealth as â€Å"evil† in an act of revenge against those who have them in abundance. Slave morality is therefore a reactionary morality because â₠¬Å"good† does not spring creatively from the individual but develops as a negation of the values of the powerful (Wikipedia). The good person would questions his own worth by thinking about the evil in which would be defining the two as good and evil. Opposingly, the bad would consider what was good. So, slave morality is defined by â€Å"good† and â€Å"evil† while master morality is defined by â€Å"good† and â€Å"bad.† Nietzsche remarks on how different the concepts of â€Å"evil† and â€Å"bad† are, in spite of both being considered the opposite of â€Å"good.† He explains this difference by explaining that there are two very different concepts of â€Å"good† at work: The noble man’s â€Å"good† is precisely what the man of ressentiment calls â€Å"evil† (Alderman). One of the main themes Nietzsche wrote about was how the master morality the foundation to the ancient romans, and that this moral ity disappeared as the slave morality of Christianity spread through ancient Rome. Nietzsche was concerned with the state of European culture during his natural life and therefore focused much of his study on the history of master and slave morality within Europe.