Does Aptor's way of explaining the evolutionary benefits of risk-taking make sense to you?
Just a reminder about the pizza and philosophy party tomorrow evening, 7pm, at MCLA in North Adams! It's FREE and TASTY!
I think that Immigration should be a controlled process, not just for the sake of Americans but for the immigrants as well. Immigration is such a vast and hotly debated issue that leaving it up to individual states would inevitably result in conflict: Texas demanding that California reimburse them for the money the state lost when illegal aliens who got in through the California boarder, started working in Texas, and so on. Thus immigration should be left up to the federal government, specifically the DEA. Giving the DEA official jurisdiction would help focus efforts on one of the major sources of, and problems with illegal immigration, which is too often overlooked in discussions such as ours, the Mexican-American drug trade. Cutting this trade route, while resource and time intensive, would eliminate much of the crime and violence seen near the Mexican boarder, most likely on both sides.
The other major problem besides drugs is of course work. The congressional bill to allow immigrants to work toward citizenship in a sector ofA congressional bill would provide immigrant farm workers a path to citizenship if they continue to work in agriculture. Farm management leaders say the move is vital to their industry. Jeff Tyler explains why.
"They are not equipped to disobey."
Turtle (pictured above), is reportedly "squircle" in shape, and includes a
microphone at the bottom of its slide-out keyboard[.]
Marcos should have translated what the doctor was saying to Mrs. Rivera. She should know what’s going on with her health so she could have a saying in what should be done. Marcos should have at least asked Mrs. Rivera what she thought about having a “hospice” before making a decision of not needing one. Mrs. Rivera clearly needed a hospice, since it seems like the family will not be helping out with her health. I don’t think they’ll put her on a diet or help out with her needs as much as she needs it. I believe Marcos should have both listen to the doctor by getting Mrs. Rivera a hospice and Marcos should have translated everything that the doctor said to her. Mrs. Rivera has a right to know what is going on with her health.
I believe that both murder and suicide are morality wrong and they are both completely different. Suicide is taking your own life and murder is taking the life of someone else. Suicide is your own choice to die. Murder is not a choice for the other person. I don’t think that murder is right in any way; people should not take the lives of others in any circumstance.
Credit, climate, and consumption crises cannot be solved through specialized expertise alone. These problems, like most issues businesses confront in the global marketplace, feature complex interdependencies that require an understanding of how political, financial, environmental, ethical, and social interests influence each other. A philosophical approach connects the dots among competing interests in an effort to create synergy. Linking competing interests requires philosophers to examine areas that modern-day domain experts too often ignore: core beliefs, ethics, and character.See whether you think his argument is convincing. If Bank of America and Bear Stearns had done a little more contemplating, could we have avoided this recession...?
Chris Bope
Intro to Philosophy
Pen Over Sword
1/08/10
In order to answer the question of which is mightier, first it must be established what “might” is. In this instance might means the ability to shape the external world to internal will. When we compare pen and sword we are of course not talking about literal pens and swords, but rather these are neat allegories, the pen standing for reasoning, rhetoric, and ideology, and the sword standing for the use of violence. Overall, in the task of making people act and think the way that an individual wishes them to, the pen has proven to be vastly more effective.
A major use of violent actions in pursuit of social reform today, is the use of suicide bombers by terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. These bombings are fairly good at raising people’s stress levels in nations in which the attacks are occurring, but not very affective at inciting support for Sharia law, or acceptance of Jihad. For many people in countries in which this is not happening, news of suicide bombings and increasing numbers of victims, goes unread and uncared for by a vast majority of people. I have had several conversations on the subject of “how to be a good despot,” and it is accepted by everyone in these conversations that it implies the use of fierce and consistent violence. In order for people to be bent to an individual’s will, they must be constantly in fear of being killed, or seeing people they know killed. Killing must be random often and indiscriminant, which is a lot of work, for what is sure to be a small all powerful class of rulers. And it will be constantly under threat of being overturned.
In comparison, rule by rhetoric and reasoning is much easier and more secure. Some of the most successful non-democratic governments, such as the former Soviet Union, and the misleadingly entitled Democratic republic of Vietnam, exist(ed) and thrive(d) for as long and well as they have (did), because they had many people who had been so convinced by the respective ideologies of socialism and communism, that they were willing to make great personal sacrifices for the betterment of their nation. People will work much harder, and with much more care, if they are doing it because they want to rather than because they have to. Control by the pen is at its best in the form of religion. Religions tell people what to do and how to think about the world, and the major ones, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, each have influence over hundreds of millions, if not billions of people. The pen cannot be wielded with skill by everyone, and so it does not always work, but when it does, it does so to the nth degree.
Words and logic are, in many situations, much easier, and more effective, than violence. Though violence appears to be very motivational, in practice it does not work as well as expected. While the full power of rhetoric cannot be grasped by everyone, it is very useful, in fact even more useful because of this.
haha I win!!!!!!!! well, it's 16 words over, and could use a little work, but good enough for a draft I think.
