Philosophy 100 – Critically Comment/Reply To The 2 Answers Given
Philosophy 100 – Critically Comment/Reply To The 2 Answers Given
Philosophy 100 – Critically Comment/Reply to the 2 answers given
250-350 words each comment/reply.
Instructions attached.
Critical Comment Instructions:
The second part of the Discussion Board Forum requires going back to your peers’ Q&A Discussion posts (Part I). Select one Q&A from the work of two different class peers and write a 250-350 word critical commentary on each one (do not critique your own Q&A posts). If two other students have already posted critiques of a particular Q&A discussion post, you must move on to one that has not been critiqued or has only one other critical comment posted. So, ideally, each Q&A discussion will have two critical comments. It may happen that two students post a second critique to the same Q&A at the same time, resulting in three critical comments, with the later ones being simultaneously posted. This is not really a problem and nothing to worry about. The main idea here is to expand the interactivity and general scope of the discussion. Your critiques are due by end of day each Sunday for the first three weeks of class; since class ends on a Saturday, your Week Four critical comments will be due on the final Saturday of class. It is important to note that a critique or critical commentary may be positive, negative, or a mixture of the two. We tend to use the word, “criticize,” or the expression, “being critical” with a mostly negative connotation, as in finding fault with something or “putting something (or someone) down.” That is not the intention here, although part of what you’re doing in writing a critique may indeed be finding fault. But the faults you are pointing out will have nothing to do with the author himself or herself. You will be looking for errors in reasoning and argumentation, in reporting of relevant facts or information, in overlooking or misconstruing important points relevant to the question posed, and so on. You should also be looking for precision and clarity in thought and written expression and overall comprehensibility of the written response. Essentially, you will be analyzing and evaluating two peer Q&A Discussion posts and weighing in on what you think they did well and where they fell short, in terms of both posing an interesting, insightful, or useful question and providing a thought-provoking or at least satisfactory answer to that question. You may also want to offer a different answer to the question posed, or add points to the answer you are critiquing. You need not cite any sources in your critiques, but of course you are free to do so. Don’t forget to review the document, “Writing a Critique of Another Person’s Argument, which you will find a link to in the Discussion Board instructions for each week.
Critically reply to the 2 answers giving below.
1st Critical Comment
· Discussion: Mill, Utilitarianism , Chapter 2, pp. 4-18.
My first question is:
Why is the term “utilitarianism” often described and misinterpreted negatively with words such as pleasure?
My answer to this question is:
John Stuart Mill initiated Chapter Two of his text, Utilitarianism, by claiming that majority of the people in our society more specifically writers and publishers often connect utilitarianism with pleasure. He believes that this is because of its root word, which is utility. When we think of utility, stuff that pops out in our thoughts are mostly water, gas and electricity. Basically, substances that would lead to satisfy our pleasures in life. Thus, most people believe that utilitarianism is more for selfish pleasures than for determining moral rights and wrong. This is inaccurate. In Chapter Two, Mill’s objective is to define this misinterpreted concept. He sees it more as freedom from pain rather personal pleasures. If pleasure can be connected with happiness in this circumstance then it’d would be acceptable. Utilitarianism is about promoting happiness and abstinence from pain. The main doctrine of this idea is the greatest happiness principle. Different branches and specific definitions come with this belief such as the specifics of pain and pleasure; however, people should refrain from focusing towards the word, pleasure, to incorporate it with Mill’s moral doctrine. According to him, there are two types of pleasures in which are the lower and higher. Lower pleasures are compared to animals or beasts that do not have the free will and conscious mind. They tend to disregard everything for their own self-gratification. Thus, humans also have that pleasure, however, that is not what pleasure means in this doctrine. Higher pleasures include more about pleasures of the intellect more specifically human thoughts and imaginations. This is what people should think of utilitarianism, which is it is more of moral sentiments rather than basic sensations. Mill believes that obtaining a sense of dignity stands at the top of most people’s higher pleasures. This pleasure has such a strong impact on an individual that would gratify one’s every desire for that every moments in which he/she would not let get interrupted for a second.
2nd Critical Comment
Sartre,“ Existentialism Is a Humanism ” (entire), pp. 1-18
My second question is:
Jean Paul Sartre suggests humans are born without any “built-in” guidance or maps for living well, and ultimately every person must discover it for themselves. In doing this they are also making decisions for everyone and defining humanity. If collective decisions define humanity, where is the group decision process heading and what about the individual contributions made by scholars and philosophers? My answer to this question is: Sartre describes how people must take responsibility for their actions as they were the ones who made the choices. I agree with this idea in a very general sense but there are usually exceptions and for me this is no different. How do you convince an enslaved person that they are free to choose who they are and what they want? Looking back through history, this is not a small number of people. There are countless examples of people in poor circumstances beyond their choosing or control. It seems a few decisions by very few people have the most impact on defining humanity. Again there are so many eexamples of individuals defining mass groups. We have images of blood thirsty Germany prior to and during WWII and numerous cult leaders making new religions followed by many. On a more positive end of the scale, the Bible and other religious works have defined what life should be for countless people. With the dawn of the internet and digital communication, information and ideas move through the population at lightning speed. Changes in culture and group opinions change at a much faster rate than anyone could have foreseen. I think some of the changes facing humanity may even transcend historical philosophical works which have attempted to define what human is.
The post Philosophy 100 – Critically Comment/Reply To The 2 Answers Given appeared first on graduatepaperhelp.
"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"
are trademarks or registered trademarks of the George Lucas Educational Foundation in the U.S. and other countries.
We are a leading academic writing company, which has been providing exclusive writing services for years.