The document discusses Aristotle's works and ideas. It covers:
- Aristotle's collected works are divided into logic, physics, and metaphysics. Metaphysics includes teleology, epistemology, cosmology, ontology, and ethics.
- Aristotle viewed the universe as a series of concentric spheres with Earth at the center and the prime mover initiating their spinning motion.
- Teilhard de Chardin replaced Aristotle's concept of a fiery sphere with the noosphere, representing the global collective human consciousness emerging through evolution and convergence of human cultures.
Goals:
Define categorical proposition and identify its parts;
Discuss the matter and form of a proposition;
Learn the distinctions among the four types of categorical propositions; and
Learn how to reduce a proposition to its logical form.
Logic, Categorical Propositions.
All of the used themes from above presentation was from Microsoft, likewise I do not own the said themes.
Based from the book : "Logic Made Simple for Filipinos" by Florentino Timbreza here is the summary made into powerpoint of Lesson 12: The Categorical Syllogism.
It Includes:
Introduction to categorical syllogism
General Axioms of the Syllogism
Eight Syllogistic Rules
Figures and Moods of the Categorical Syllogism
Examples in these slides are our own, there were no examples derived from the book.
Existentialism From SartreIn our text, Sartre, in effect, provi.docxnealwaters20034
Existentialism: From Sartre
In our text, Sartre, in effect, provides three ways to understand Existentialism:
“Existentialism is nothing else than an attempt to draw all the consequences of a coherent atheistic position.”
· Atheism is Sartre’s starting point.
“There is no human nature. . . . Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself. Such is the first principle of existentialism.” Again, Sartre says about this claim, that it is a “given that . . . there is no human nature for me to depend on.”
· Atheism generates the claims that no human nature exists.
“Existential philosophy is above all a philosophy that asserts that existence precedes essence.”
· This third claims is probably the most well-known, and the most fundamental to Existentialism. Thus, let’s add a few points:
For Sartre, both “essence” and “existence” mean what they have always meant in philosophy: by essence, Sartre refers to the qualities that enable one to “define” a given X: “the ensemble of . . . the properties which enable it [the given X] to be defined.” By “existence” Sartre means that which is actually present in the world: existence is “presence . . . in front of me.”
So, what is so unique about Sartre’s formula: the uniqueness derives from Sartre’s way of relating these two traditional concepts: traditionally the formula was: “Essence precedes existence.” Hence, this formula radically converts the traditional formula, the result of which, transforms the traditional, philosophic view of the world.
To explicate his claim, Sartre introduces the manufacturing of a paper cutter: the maker of the tool knows in advance what he or she plans to make; he or she is aware of “what” a paper cutter is; he or she knows the “essence” of a paper cutter, thus, the “essence” of the paper cutter precedes its “existence.” Hence, the one who designs the object is the one who knows best the essence or nature of the thing being made.
Now, let’s relate this to the first two formulas above: the traditional religious view of the world posits God as the designer of the human being and, because there is a designer, the thing being designed must possess an “essence,” one that precedes its “existence.” Thus, note the following three points:
· “What is meant here by saying that existence precedes essence? It means that, first, man exists and only afterwards, defines himself.”
· “Man . . . is indefinable.” Thus, the definition of the person “remains forever open.”
· “There is no human nature.” Hence, the claim that no human nature exists follows from the rejection of God’s existence: “There is no human nature, since there is no God to conceive it.”
So, let’s now ask: What, then, is the human being? Sartre: “At first, he is nothing.” And, later? Later, the person is “nothing else but what he makes himself.” Hence, human beings invent themselves without the benefit of any pre-given design. And, here, we encounter a key notion in Sartre: freedom. Yet, this freedom is not the sort associated wit.
Goals:
Define categorical proposition and identify its parts;
Discuss the matter and form of a proposition;
Learn the distinctions among the four types of categorical propositions; and
Learn how to reduce a proposition to its logical form.
Logic, Categorical Propositions.
All of the used themes from above presentation was from Microsoft, likewise I do not own the said themes.
Based from the book : "Logic Made Simple for Filipinos" by Florentino Timbreza here is the summary made into powerpoint of Lesson 12: The Categorical Syllogism.
It Includes:
Introduction to categorical syllogism
General Axioms of the Syllogism
Eight Syllogistic Rules
Figures and Moods of the Categorical Syllogism
Examples in these slides are our own, there were no examples derived from the book.
Existentialism From SartreIn our text, Sartre, in effect, provi.docxnealwaters20034
Existentialism: From Sartre
In our text, Sartre, in effect, provides three ways to understand Existentialism:
“Existentialism is nothing else than an attempt to draw all the consequences of a coherent atheistic position.”
· Atheism is Sartre’s starting point.
“There is no human nature. . . . Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself. Such is the first principle of existentialism.” Again, Sartre says about this claim, that it is a “given that . . . there is no human nature for me to depend on.”
· Atheism generates the claims that no human nature exists.
“Existential philosophy is above all a philosophy that asserts that existence precedes essence.”
· This third claims is probably the most well-known, and the most fundamental to Existentialism. Thus, let’s add a few points:
For Sartre, both “essence” and “existence” mean what they have always meant in philosophy: by essence, Sartre refers to the qualities that enable one to “define” a given X: “the ensemble of . . . the properties which enable it [the given X] to be defined.” By “existence” Sartre means that which is actually present in the world: existence is “presence . . . in front of me.”
So, what is so unique about Sartre’s formula: the uniqueness derives from Sartre’s way of relating these two traditional concepts: traditionally the formula was: “Essence precedes existence.” Hence, this formula radically converts the traditional formula, the result of which, transforms the traditional, philosophic view of the world.
To explicate his claim, Sartre introduces the manufacturing of a paper cutter: the maker of the tool knows in advance what he or she plans to make; he or she is aware of “what” a paper cutter is; he or she knows the “essence” of a paper cutter, thus, the “essence” of the paper cutter precedes its “existence.” Hence, the one who designs the object is the one who knows best the essence or nature of the thing being made.
Now, let’s relate this to the first two formulas above: the traditional religious view of the world posits God as the designer of the human being and, because there is a designer, the thing being designed must possess an “essence,” one that precedes its “existence.” Thus, note the following three points:
· “What is meant here by saying that existence precedes essence? It means that, first, man exists and only afterwards, defines himself.”
· “Man . . . is indefinable.” Thus, the definition of the person “remains forever open.”
· “There is no human nature.” Hence, the claim that no human nature exists follows from the rejection of God’s existence: “There is no human nature, since there is no God to conceive it.”
So, let’s now ask: What, then, is the human being? Sartre: “At first, he is nothing.” And, later? Later, the person is “nothing else but what he makes himself.” Hence, human beings invent themselves without the benefit of any pre-given design. And, here, we encounter a key notion in Sartre: freedom. Yet, this freedom is not the sort associated wit.
Existentialism From SartreIn our text, Sartre, in effect, provi.docxelbanglis
Existentialism: From Sartre
In our text, Sartre, in effect, provides three ways to understand Existentialism:
“Existentialism is nothing else than an attempt to draw all the consequences of a coherent atheistic position.”
· Atheism is Sartre’s starting point.
“There is no human nature. . . . Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself. Such is the first principle of existentialism.” Again, Sartre says about this claim, that it is a “given that . . . there is no human nature for me to depend on.”
· Atheism generates the claims that no human nature exists.
“Existential philosophy is above all a philosophy that asserts that existence precedes essence.”
· This third claims is probably the most well-known, and the most fundamental to Existentialism. Thus, let’s add a few points:
For Sartre, both “essence” and “existence” mean what they have always meant in philosophy: by essence, Sartre refers to the qualities that enable one to “define” a given X: “the ensemble of . . . the properties which enable it [the given X] to be defined.” By “existence” Sartre means that which is actually present in the world: existence is “presence . . . in front of me.”
So, what is so unique about Sartre’s formula: the uniqueness derives from Sartre’s way of relating these two traditional concepts: traditionally the formula was: “Essence precedes existence.” Hence, this formula radically converts the traditional formula, the result of which, transforms the traditional, philosophic view of the world.
To explicate his claim, Sartre introduces the manufacturing of a paper cutter: the maker of the tool knows in advance what he or she plans to make; he or she is aware of “what” a paper cutter is; he or she knows the “essence” of a paper cutter, thus, the “essence” of the paper cutter precedes its “existence.” Hence, the one who designs the object is the one who knows best the essence or nature of the thing being made.
Now, let’s relate this to the first two formulas above: the traditional religious view of the world posits God as the designer of the human being and, because there is a designer, the thing being designed must possess an “essence,” one that precedes its “existence.” Thus, note the following three points:
· “What is meant here by saying that existence precedes essence? It means that, first, man exists and only afterwards, defines himself.”
· “Man . . . is indefinable.” Thus, the definition of the person “remains forever open.”
· “There is no human nature.” Hence, the claim that no human nature exists follows from the rejection of God’s existence: “There is no human nature, since there is no God to conceive it.”
So, let’s now ask: What, then, is the human being? Sartre: “At first, he is nothing.” And, later? Later, the person is “nothing else but what he makes himself.” Hence, human beings invent themselves without the benefit of any pre-given design. And, here, we encounter a key notion in Sartre: freedom. Yet, this freedom is not the sort associated wit ...
Correspondence and Representation are important 'meta' concepts - yet their incommensurability aspects are revealing 'great and mighty' things which man 'knew not' of.
Incommensurability - correspondence and seeking of truthKeith Scharding
Ethics and the search for truth; bridging the conceptual gap between evolutionary thought and creation theories - presentation of the 'new metaphysics'; quantum computing and nanotechnology plus 'cosmic insights. The correspondence principle and the question of incommensurability with traditional viewpoints are referenced.
Can you describe defition of fuction according to rationalism,empiri.pdfAmansupan
Can you describe defition of fuction according to rationalism,empiricism and pragmatism ? and
what are their differences ??
Solution
SOME YEARS AGO, being with a camping party in the mountains, I returned from
a solitary ramble to find every one engaged in a ferocious metaphysical dispute. The corpus of
the dispute was a squirrel – a live squirrel supposed to be clinging to one side of a tree-trunk;
while over against the tree’s opposite side a human being was imagined to stand. This human
witness tries to get sight of the squirrel by moving rapidly round the tree, but no matter how fast
he goes, the squirrel moves as fast in the opposite direction, and always keeps the tree between
himself and the man, so that never a glimpse of him is caught. The resultant metaphysical
problem now is this: Does the man go round the squirrel or not? He goes round the tree, sure
enough, and the squirrel is on the tree; but does he go round the squirrel? In the unlimited leisure
of the wilderness, discussion had been worn threadbare. Every one had taken sides, and was
obstinate; and the numbers on both sides were even. Each side, when I appeared therefore
appealed to me to make it a majority. Mindful of the scholastic adage that whenever you meet a
contradiction you must make a distinction, I immediately sought and found one, as follows:
“Which party is right,” I said, “depends on what you practically mean by ‘going round’ the
squirrel. If you mean passing from the north of him to the east, then to the south, then to the
west, and then to the north of him again, obviously the man does go round him, for he occupies
these successive positions. But if on the contrary you mean being first in front of him, then on
the right of him, then behind him, then on his left, and finally in front again, it is quite as obvious
that the man fails to go round him, for by the compensating movements the squirrel makes, he
keeps his belly turned towards the man all the time, and his back turned away. Make the
distinction, and there is no occasion for any farther dispute. You are both right and both wrong
according as you conceive the verb ‘to go round’ in one practical fashion or the other.”
Although one or two of the hotter disputants called my speech a shuffling evasion, saying they
wanted no quibbling or scholastic hair-splitting, but meant just plain honest English ‘round’, the
majority seemed to think that the distinction had assuaged the dispute. I tell this trivial anecdote
because it is a peculiarly simple example of what I wish now to speak of as the pragmatic
method. The pragmatic method is primarily a method of settling metaphysical disputes that
otherwise might be interminable. Is the world one or many? – fated or free? – material or
spiritual? – here are notions either of which may or may not hold good of the world; and disputes
over such notions are unending. The pragmatic method in such cases is to try to interpret each
notion by tracing its respective practical con.
I am Dr. John Fruncillo and I will be your professor for this on-.docxsusanschei
I am Dr. John Fruncillo and I will be your professor for this on-line course. Let's look at a brief overveiw of Philosophy's Fundamental Questions: The history of western philosophy spans over 2500 years and begins with the questions raised by the Presocratic philosophers. Among the fundamental questions formulated by the Presocratics are: 1) what is the foundation of reality-what is being? The problems of Metaphysics and Ontology 2) what is the nature of the soul?, 3) What can we know, the study of knowledge-epistemology 4) what is the good, what is the life of virtue, 4) what is beauty? Philosophy has been and still is, a search for the conditions for the possibility of experience and reality. In order to tackle this seemigly absract endveour, philosophy must be both historical and critical in its methods. We need to understand what the authors of the past have said so that we can gain a better understanding of where we are today. How did we go from anceint Greece to modern technological society? How do we justify any knowledge claims? What is the difference between opinion and knowledge or appearance and reality? What is the difference between good and evil? Each thinker will approach these questions in a different way depending on the historical context in which they lived. So, for example, Aristotle takes for granted the reality of physical motion (Kinesis) and attempts to explain how things change from one physical state to the next, birth, growth, death while the fundamental ground of reality for Aquinas is God's creative act of bringing all things into being ex-nihilo (out of nothing). As we will see, there is a tremendous ontological gulf between the Greek understanding of nature and time and the Christian understanding in the middle ages.Please don't become worried if my example seems too technical. I'm am only using the Greeks and Christians to illustrate a basic principle underlying the history of philosophy: that the ultimate conditions for what is taken as 'real' change with each historical time-frame. I’d like to describe the fundamental questions of philosophy in relationship to the basic fields of philosophy:a) Epistemology: the theory of knowledge, the standards for justifying knowledge claims, what is truth? What are the limits and sources of our knowledge? From theGrrek words- ‘Epistme’ and ‘logos’ = discourse about knowledge b) Metaphysics: fundamental questions about the nature of reality, is the universe finite or infinite? What is the foundation of reality? Is reality made up of one kind of substance or many? Composed of matter or spirit? Meta/physis = after physics, beyond the sensible world. Is the universe finite or infinite, does God exist, do we have a soul? c) Ethics: what is good? What is evil/wrong? What standards can we use to justify our asserting that certain actions are wrong and others are right? What rational arguments can we give to support a moral argument? These three fields of philosophy do not exhaus.
Similar to Elements Of Epistemology ~ Chapter 2 (17)
I MADE THIS LAST YEAR IN PP 2007 AND PP 2010 AND SAVED IT IN PP 2010 AS WMV....AND THIS IS MY FOURTH ATTEMPT TO UPLOAD IT IN SS.... EVERY-TIME I GOT "OOPS....".....HOPE IT WILL BE SUCCESSFUL THIS TIME AT LEAST.....
Model Attribute Check Company Auto PropertyCeline George
In Odoo, the multi-company feature allows you to manage multiple companies within a single Odoo database instance. Each company can have its own configurations while still sharing common resources such as products, customers, and suppliers.
Students, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptxEduSkills OECD
Andreas Schleicher presents at the OECD webinar ‘Digital devices in schools: detrimental distraction or secret to success?’ on 27 May 2024. The presentation was based on findings from PISA 2022 results and the webinar helped launch the PISA in Focus ‘Managing screen time: How to protect and equip students against distraction’ https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/managing-screen-time_7c225af4-en and the OECD Education Policy Perspective ‘Students, digital devices and success’ can be found here - https://oe.cd/il/5yV
This is a presentation by Dada Robert in a Your Skill Boost masterclass organised by the Excellence Foundation for South Sudan (EFSS) on Saturday, the 25th and Sunday, the 26th of May 2024.
He discussed the concept of quality improvement, emphasizing its applicability to various aspects of life, including personal, project, and program improvements. He defined quality as doing the right thing at the right time in the right way to achieve the best possible results and discussed the concept of the "gap" between what we know and what we do, and how this gap represents the areas we need to improve. He explained the scientific approach to quality improvement, which involves systematic performance analysis, testing and learning, and implementing change ideas. He also highlighted the importance of client focus and a team approach to quality improvement.
Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology:
Ethnobotany in herbal drug evaluation,
Impact of Ethnobotany in traditional medicine,
New development in herbals,
Bio-prospecting tools for drug discovery,
Role of Ethnopharmacology in drug evaluation,
Reverse Pharmacology.
How to Create Map Views in the Odoo 17 ERPCeline George
The map views are useful for providing a geographical representation of data. They allow users to visualize and analyze the data in a more intuitive manner.
We all have good and bad thoughts from time to time and situation to situation. We are bombarded daily with spiraling thoughts(both negative and positive) creating all-consuming feel , making us difficult to manage with associated suffering. Good thoughts are like our Mob Signal (Positive thought) amidst noise(negative thought) in the atmosphere. Negative thoughts like noise outweigh positive thoughts. These thoughts often create unwanted confusion, trouble, stress and frustration in our mind as well as chaos in our physical world. Negative thoughts are also known as “distorted thinking”.
Home assignment II on Spectroscopy 2024 Answers.pdf
Elements Of Epistemology ~ Chapter 2
1. Elements of Epistemology Chapter IICorpus Aristotelicum Aristotle's school buildingin Macedonia Corpus Aristotelicum The collected works of Aristotle (384-322),Corpus Aristotelicum, are divided into logic, physics, and metaphysics. The metaphysics consists of teleology, epistemology, cosmology, ontology, and ethics. Aristotle thought that every entity in the universe moves toward a goal, teleos, inherent in its nature. The principle subjects of teleology thus are development and change. Materialists understood these as mutually interconnected causal chains of events. The idealists think that these chains of events have been initiated and guided by a spiritual, supernatural being. From these deliberations, philosophy developed along two parallel lines. One is realistic and secular, the other is idealistic and religious. The realistic tradition maintains that the concept of supernatural original cause is redundant, unnecessary to understand our world and the meaning of our existence. The idealistic tradition maintains that in order to understand the world and the meaning of our existence, the concept of God is necessary. The next question then is, does God exist? This used to be the central question of epistemology, the Greek episteme meaning 'to know.' Aristotle's Diagrams Aristotle viewed the Universe as a series of concentric spheres. Geosphere (Earth at the center of the Universe) Hydrosphere (Earth's oceans) Atmosphere (Air surrounding the Earth) Pyrosphere (Sphere generating lightning) Stellarsphere (Stars above the Earth) with the prime mover (the first cause) initiating their spinning motion. Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955) replaced the Aristotle's pyrosphere with his concept ofnoosphere. He reasoned that while evolution diversified the living forms, humankind reversed this divergent process into a convergent one. While many species are on the verge of extinction, the diverse human cultures are converging toward the omega point. Teilhard de Chardin predicted that after reaching the omega point, humankind will cover the Earth's surface with collective human consciousness, the noosphere (from Greek noos, mind), superimposed on the already-existingbiosphere. He elaborated these concepts in a series of manuscripts (published after his death in books The Phenomenon of Man (1955), The Divine Milieu (1957),The Future of Man (1959), and Hymn of the Universe (1964)). When these manuscripts were discovered in his study, Professor's Chardin was fired from his teaching post and left for China. Pierre de Chardin did not live long enough to witness the emergence of the Internet, which some believe hold the promise to become his noosphere. Aristotle's Logic An example of Aristotle's writing on this subject follows. An affirmation is the statement of a fact with regard to a subject, and this subject is either a noun or that which has no name; the subject and predicate in an affirmation must each denote a single thing. I have already explained' what is meant by a noun and by that which has no name; for I stated that the expression 'not-man' was not a noun, in the proper sense of the word, but an indefinite noun, denoting as it does in a certain sense a single thing. Similarly the expression 'does not enjoy health' is not a verb proper, but an indefinite verb. Every affirmation, then, and every denial, will consist of a noun and a verb, either definite or indefinite. There can be no affirmation or denial without a verb; for the expressions 'is', 'will be', 'was', 'is coming to be', and the like are verbs according to our definition, since besides their specific meaning they convey the notion of time. Thus the primary affirmation and denial are 'as follows: 'man is', 'man is not'. Next to these, there are the propositions: 'not-man is', 'not-man is not'. Again we have the propositions: 'every man is, 'every man is not', 'all that is not-man is', 'all that is not-man is not'. The same classification holds good with regard to such periods of time as lie outside the present. When the verb 'is' is used as a third element in the sentence, there can be positive and negative propositions of two sorts. Thus in the sentence 'man is just' the verb 'is' is used as a third element, call it verb or noun, which you will. Four propositions, therefore, instead of two can be formed with these materials. Two of the four, as regards their affirmation and denial, correspond in their logical sequence with the propositions which deal with a condition of privation; the other two do not correspond with these. I mean that the verb 'is' is added either to the term 'just' or to the term 'not-just', and two negative propositions are formed in the same way. Thus we have the four propositions. Reference to the subjoined table will make matters clear: A. Affirmation B. DenialMan is just Man is not just / X / . Denial C. Affirmation Not every man is not-just Every man is not-just Yet here it is not possible, in the same way as in the former case, that the propositions joined in the table by a diagonal line should both be true; though under certain circumstances this is the case. We have thus set out two pairs of opposite propositions; there are moreover two other pairs, if a term be conjoined with 'not-man', the latter forming a kind of subject. Thus: A.
B.
Not-man is just Not-man is no / X D. / C.
Not-man is not not-just Not-man is not-just This is an exhaustive enumeration of all the pairs of opposite propositions that can possibly be framed. Trinity 21.9.09