What Is The Significance Of Human Mortality, According To Heidegger E

What Is The Significance Of Human Mortality, According To Heidegger? Martin Heidegger (1889 1976) was, and still is considered to be, along with the likes of Soren Kierkegaard, Edmund Husserl and Jean-Paul Sartre, one of the principal exponents of 20th century Existentialism. An extraordinarily original thinker, a critic of technological society and the leading Ontologist of his time, Heideggers philosophy became a primary influence upon the thoughts of the younger generations of continental European cultural personalities of his time. The son of a Catholic sexton, Heidegger displayed an early interest in religion and philosophy; at school he began an intensive study of the late 19th century Catholic philosopher Franz Brentano and, as we shall see, Brentanos descriptive psychology, as presented in his On the Manifold Meaning of Being According to Aristotle, played a major role in Heideggers philosophy. Upon leaving school, he was enrolled at the University of Freiburg and, whilst there, he studied both Catholic theology and Christian philosophy. Heideggers early study of Brentano encouraged him to look more closely at the Greek philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle and the Gnostics. He was particularly influenced, however by several 19th and 20th century writers and philosophers such as Soren Kierkegaard (often referred to as the father of Existentialism), Friedrich Nietzsche, Wilhelm Dilthey (noted for directing the attention of his contemporary philosophers to human and historical sciences), and by the founder of Phenomenology, Edmund Husserl. Husserls Phenomenology can be seen as a response to the intrusion of psychology into the essential studies of man; he felt that the study of man should, instead be conducted on a purely philosophical level. His way of thinking determined, to a large extent, the background of Heideggers later work. Indeed, Heideggers comments upon existential themes such as anxiety, distress and care were not meant as psychological or anthropological comments or propositions. Instead, they were specifically proposed as philosophical (or, more accurately, ontological) statements and phenomenological observations. Remembering the influence of Brentano and Aristotle, we will see that Heideggers principle philosophical concern was the disclosure of the various ways of Being and particularly, Human Being. In 1927, Heidegger astonished the German philosophical domain with the publication of his magnum opus Sein und Zeit , a work that, although almost unreadable, was immediately felt to be of primary importance. Perhaps partly due to its intriguingly difficult style, the book was acclaimed as a very deep and important work not only in German speaking countries but also in Latin countries, where Phenomenology had already been popularised. It strongly influenced Jean-Paul Sartre (although, as with Husserl, Sartres phenomenological ontology concentrated more upon consciousness than Heidegger believed was necessary). Despite his protestations, Heidegger was classed, on the strength of Being and Time as the leading atheistic Existentialist. However, the book received a colder reception in England and its influence was negligible for several decades. In order to understand the above titled question, we must first attempt to understand some of the fundamental points that define Heideggers difficult philosophy. To begin with, it may useful for us to consider Heideggers reasons for writing Being and Time and, to consider some of the philosophical problems that the book addresses. Heidegger believed that traditional philosophy was inherently problematic due to a particular way of understanding the nature of reality. This particular way, prevalent ever-since the dawn of western history due to the likes of Herecleitus and Aristotle, is an ontology which states that what is ultimately real is that which lies underneath properties (or entities) and remains continuously present throughout change. As pointed out by Charles B. Guigon in The Cambridge Companion to Heidegger, this naturalistic philosophy is sometimes referred to as Substance Ontology. Substance Ontology reaches its problematic peak with the Cartesian Cogito, as Guigon states, Ever since Descartes, this substance ontology has bred a covey of either/ors that generate the so-called problems of philosophy: either there is a mind or everything is just matter; either our ideas do represent objects or nothing exists outside the mindeither something in me remains constant throughout change or there is no personal identity; either values have objective existence or everything is permitted. Heidegger believed that the constant move and countermove arguments resulting from this naturalistic ontology were counter-productive and hence, could

5 More Misplaced Modifiers

5 More Misplaced Modifiers 5 More Misplaced Modifiers 5 More Misplaced Modifiers By Mark Nichol The syntax of the English language is fairly flexible, but one rigid rule is that a word or phrase that modifies a word or a phrase should be positioned so that its interrelationship with the target component is clear. These five sentences illustrate the importance of this rule. 1. â€Å"People watched a television broadcast reporting on North Korea’s nuclear test at a railway station in Seoul, South Korea, on Tuesday.† The sentence structure suggests that the nuclear test was conducted at a South Korean railway station. Rearrange the phrasing so that the modifying phrase about the location of the observation is adjacent to the description of the observation: â€Å"People at a railway station in Seoul, South Korea, watched a television broadcast reporting on North Korea’s nuclear test on Tuesday.† 2. â€Å"She adopted the term biracial after hearing it in discussions about being a person of mixed-race origin while an undergrad at Wellesley College. This sentence gives the reader the impression that discussions were about temporary ethnic designation about being a person of mixed-race origin only during one’s college years. But it was the subject’s self-designation, not her ethnicity, that changed during her college years, as this revision indicates: â€Å"While she was an undergrad at Wellesley College, she adopted the term biracial after hearing it in discussions about being a person of mixed-race origin.† 3. â€Å"According to historical records, he emancipated the slaves he owned in his will.† The modifying phrase â€Å"in his will,† as appended to â€Å"the slaves he owned,† implies that the slaves he freed were those located in his will, which implies that other slaves not contained therein were not necessarily freed. To eliminate ambiguity, insert the modifying phrase as a parenthetical following the introductory phrase: â€Å"According to historical records, in his will, he emancipated the slaves he owned.† 4. â€Å"It’s about a guy whose presidency is going up in flames named George W. Bush.† This syntax creates the impression that the flames are named George W. Bush. The phrase â€Å"named George W. Bush† does modify â€Å"guy whose presidency is going up in flames,† but for the sake of clarity, insert the phrase after guy and before the rest of the phrase, which itself modifies guy: â€Å"It’s about a guy named George W. Bush whose presidency is going up in flames.† 5. â€Å"That cycle can only be corrected when we come to value the vital role of private preserves.† Incorrect location of only in a sentence is the most common type of misplacement of a modifier. Comprehension of a sentence’s meaning is rarely compromised by this error, but only should be put where it belongs. In this case, it modifies corrected, not can, so it should follow corrected: â€Å"That cycle can be corrected only when we come to value the vital role of private preserves.† Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Grammar category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:Passed vs PastBetween vs. In BetweenRunning Errands and Doing Chores

In Case Of and In the Event Of

In Case Of and In the Event Of In Case Of and In the Event Of In Case Of and In the Event Of By Maeve Maddox A reader asks if there’s a difference between these two phrases: Is there any difference between in case of and in the event of? Some seem to think these two phrases are synonymous; others contend that in case of is used when youre preparing for something, e.g. Take an umbrella in case it rains, while   in the event of when anticipating an unplanned occurrence, like In the event of fire, use the emergency exit.  What is your take on this? The OED defines the conjunction â€Å"in case† as â€Å"in the event that; if it should happen that.† On the Ngram Viewer, â€Å"in case of† is far more common than â€Å"in the event of† from 1800 to 1917, but then begins to plummet. In 2000, â€Å"in case of† is only slightly ahead of â€Å"in the event of† in the English database. A Google search also indicates that â€Å"in case of† is more common: in case of (290,000,000 results)   in the event of (95,400,000 results)   As for â€Å"anticipating an unplanned occurrence,† like a fire, a Google search indicates that the phrases occur about equally: in the event of emergency: 28,400,000 results   in case of emergency: 29,600,000 results   in case of fire: 22,700,000 results   in the event of fire: 19,600,000 results It seems clear that the two phrases are synonymous. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Expressions category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:7 Types of Narrative ConflictProbable vs. PossibleTypes of Plots

The Ocean in Crisis Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

The Ocean in Crisis - Research Paper Example In some places like arid desert where fresh water is not readily available, ocean water serves as a lifeline for societies who can decrease its salt content to a safe level. Humanity’s dependence on the oceans is not a recent development, but has existed for thousands of years, ever since man first realized that he could master the resources that the ocean has to offer. Humans are not beyond that basic dependence on regulation and equilibrium in how they interact with the vast oceans of earth. Unfortunately, much of this equilibrium between the health of oceans and the health of civilizations has disappeared in the last century, with the rise of grave threats to the world’s seas. Problems such as acidification, climate change, pollution, and overfishing have resulted in the need for civilizations to rethink how they exploit the oceans to support necessary institutions. Of course, the existence of these threats is not always clear, so the purpose of this paper is to eluc idate some of the inevitable dangers humans pose to the oceans and how those dangers can be reversed. Acidification Acidification is a process of decreasing the pH level of some substance—in this case, earth’s oceans. The process of acidification is occurring at a faster rate because of higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Because levels of carbon dioxide in the earth’s atmosphere remain relatively stable, the excess carbon dioxide is taken up by the oceans (Raven and Falkowski). Dissolved carbon dioxide produces acids such as carbonic acid and bicarbonate. A lower pH has the effect of making ocean waters more acidic, which means most importantly that oceanic calcifying organisms such as corals, crustaceans, echinoderms, mollusks, foraminifera, and others will be vulnerable to the negative effects of a more acidic ocean. Fundamental disruptions to the ecosystems of these organisms that lie at the bottom of the ocean’s food chain will have pr ofound, and most likely irreversible, influences life in the ocean (Nienhuis, Palmer and Harley 10). Keith Sherwood and Craig Idso argue against those who claim ocean acidification poses a significant problem to earth’s largest ecosystem based on a review by Hendriks et al., published in 2010. According to the report, warnings that ocean acidification poses a significant long-term threat to marine biodiversity are based on theoretical models that do not account for numerous biological phenomena and are not supported by empirical observation. According to Sherwood and Idso, biological processes are capable of homeostasis against significant changes in pH levels within the range predicted during the 21st century. However, the essential contradiction here is that the conclusion being offered by Sherwood and Idso is based on the same theoretical models that they claim are not supported by empirical observation earlier; that is, â€Å"the range predicted during the 21st centuryâ €  is a prediction based on a theoretical model of how acid levels in the bulk waters of the oceans will change. A major problem Sherwood and Idso do not address is whether predictions about acid level increases are actually reliable when by their own admission, Sherwood and Idso do not think so. Perhaps acid levels will rise much more than predicted, which would call into the question their conclusion that homeostasis can make up the difference. Climate Change Climate change and ocean acidificati

"United States of Secrets" Or "Long distance Essay

"United States of Secrets" Or "Long distance revolutionary" - Essay Example The public views Mumia Abu-Jamal as a political prisoner as well as a victim of the unethical and unjust American judicial system. The African-American community affirms their long-held belief of Mumia’s innocence in his case associated with the murder of a police officer through the film. Therefore, the film received positive reception from the public, as they believe that the protagonist was a revolutionary who stood for the rights of individuals in the American society. He is thus considered a role model for the society as citizens see him as an incarcerated journalist who represents an international symbol of the product of injustice and nature of capital punishment. The documentary delivers a compelling case of innocence of the murder crime that Abu-Jamal is accused of. Therefore, the story represents the struggles that typify individuals, especially the African-American community, on issues apparent in the judicial system such as lack of substantial evidence to incarcera te a person, evidence tampering, and the withhold of exculpatory facts. I believe that the film Long Distance Revolutionary is an influential political documentary and indictment of the hypocrisy and injustice apparent in the American society. The documentary focuses on controversial issues of injustice and institutional racism that is apparent in numerous institutions such as the judicial system. The documentary focuses on a former Philadelphia Association of Black Journalists’ president and National Public Radio Reporter, who is widely recognized for his unwavering ability to compose publications such as books and articles within the confines of a prison. However, despite his international reputation, many people do not have the understanding about Mumia’s personality, his struggles, and his evolving worldviews. Therefore, the documentary offers an

Right And Wrongs Of Animal Rights And Experimentation Philosophy Essay

Right And Wrongs Of Animal Rights And Experimentation Philosophy Essay Animal experimentation is a controversial issue that has been debated for thrity-five years. In early 1970, a group of students of Oxford academics shared their opinions about animal rights by writing an article for the Sunday Times. One member of the group, Richard Ryder, wrote three articles in the Daily Telegraph stating his views concerning the wrongness of animal rights and scientific experimentation. After doing so, Ryder wrote a pamphlet titled Animals, Men and Morals: An Inquiry to the Maltreatment of Non-Humans, and in response to Ryders pamphlet, an Australian philosopher, Peter Singer, put forth his beliefs about animal rights. After Singer responded, he published a piece called Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for our Treatment of Animals in 1975. This portion of work noted the beginning of the Animal Rights Movement, also known as Animal Liberation Movement. Many animal-rights activists, professionals, and philosophers argue that testing is morally wrong, while scientists , who test new products on our furry, little friends, argue that there is nothing wrong with it. This paper will explain the outlooks of those who are against animal experimentation and believe animals deserve the same rights as humans, those who are moderate, feeling that a middle ground should be established, and one who conducts the experiments and is for animal experimentation. Animal Rights uses each chapter to explain a persons beliefs concerning animal rights. The introduction begins by mentioning Peter Singer and explaining his arguments for animal rights. In Animal Liberation, Singer states People hold animals in a state of tyranny. This tyranny has caused and today is still causing an amount of pain and suffering that can only be compared with that which resulted from the centuries of tyranny by white humans over black humans (7). He argues that animals should be treated with the same rights as humans. He asks for humans to really question animal treatment and to give animals the same consideration as any other species, including humans (7). Four basic principles were outlined as a result of the animal rights movement beginning in 1975. First: Pain is bad, no matter whose pain it might beà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦This does not mean that pain is the only thing that is bad, or that inflicting pain is always wrong. Sometimes it may be necessary to inflict pain and suffering on oneself or othersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.But this is justified because it will lead to less suffering in the long run; the pain is still in itself a bad thing. Second: Humans are not the only beings capable of feeling pain or sufferingà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.Of course, the nature of the beings will affect how much pain they suffer in any given situation. Third: When we consider how serious it is to take a life, we should look, not at race, sex, or species to which that being belongs, but at characteristics of the one being killed, for example, its own desire about continuing to live, or the kind of life it is capable of leading. Forth: We are responsible not only for what we do but also for what we could have preventedà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦. We should consider the consequences both of what we do and of what we decide not to do (7, 8.). However, some animal-rights activists and organizations believe that Singers views were not enough. He opposed most experimentation if it was not for the benef it of science, when the argument should have been all experimentation. An individual introduced after Singer in Animal Rights, Steven M. Wise, is an author and a law professor who generally shares the beliefs of Singer, but he is one that agrees that the controversy that all animal experimentation is unacceptable. Wise argues that animals deserve legal rights just as the human race does, because, although many dont believe him, he thinks that animals are just as dependent as humans. Many humans believe that because animals are, most of the time, dependent on humans to take care of them, they dont deserve the basic legal rights, but Wise counters this argument by stating, Human babies, for example, do not act autonomously, yet they have rights (64.). He also counters the particular argument that animals lack the ability to think rationally, make decisions, and understand emotions such as the human brain and therefore dont deserve rights, with the growing evidence that some animals, particularly nonhuman primates, have extraordinary mental capabilities (6 4.) He continues to fight for and teach others about animal rights and experimentation. Contradicting the proposals of Singer and Wise, is the philosophy that animals lack souls and the ability to reason, justifying the use of animals for experimentation (122.) Animal Experimentation is used mainly in the Cosmetics Industry but also in the Drug, Food Additives, Supplements, Household Products, Pesticides, and Industrial Chemical Industries, and is still conducted in the United Kingdom and possibly in Universities, medical schools, pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, and military defense establishments. Animal experimentation has been proven in many cases to improve medicine and science, and this is the viewpoint in which Professor Carl Cohen bases his beliefs that animal experimentation is necessary. Cohen argues that experiments on animals are necessary in order to safeguard and improve human health and well-being (128.) In saying this, he implies that without experimentation on animals, vaccines for malaria and polio would have never been invented. He feels th at none of the above industries could have advanced today without animals to experiment on. Frank Gannon is an individual who has quite a different opinion than Singer, Wise, and Cohen. Animal testing can be both beneficial and non-beneficial, and Gannon feels that a middle ground must be reached. Gannon published a journal article in EMBO Reports stating, The debate over whether and how scientists should use animal models has been inflammatory, and the opposing viewpoints are difficult to reconcile (519.) Animal-rights protesters argue that the use of animals for experimentation should be completely abolished. According to Gannon, Many scientists insist that some experiments require the use of animals and want to minimize regulation, arguing that it would impede their research, but most scientists try to limit experiments on animals. Gannon believes that society must find the middle ground-avoiding the cruel and unnecessary abuse of animals in research while accepting and allowing their use if it benefits society. He feels that in order for our society to flourish and beco me more medically advanced, its necessary to test on animals as long as its not flagrant abuse. New products have to be tested in order to be proven effective. William Hamblin, author of another online journal article, takes Gannons belief to the next step. Hamblin mainly supports animal experimentation by stating Animal testing is used in several areas of research. The three main areas are pure research, drug testing, and the testing of cosmetics, and many good things have come from experiments in these areas. Animal testing has played a very important role in medical advancement. Hes for it, because less than ten percent of house pets are used for experimentation. He speaks against the ethical argument pointing out that even though humans know animals experience pain, non-human subject suffer less due to their incapability to remember and anticipate pain. Hamblin supports animal testing, because so many advancements as an outcome outweigh all of the rodents that die, because most of the animals used in testing today are, in fact, lab rats and mice. An interesting viewpoint pertaining to animal experimentation, using Hamblins beliefs as a basis, comes from Tipu Aziz, a neurosurgeon in Oxford who is pro-animal testing and speaks publicly about using animals to test cosmetics products. Aziz disagrees with the host of writers in Animal Rights. Aziz said, People talk about cosmetics being the ultimate evil, but beautifying one has been going on since we were cavemen. If its not proven to reduce suffering through animal tests, its not wrong to use them. Aziz uses monkeys in his research in order to research improvements towards Parkinsons disease. Primates are very similar to humans, especially on the intellectual level. He isnt afraid to be a vocal supporter, according to interviewer for The Guardian, Jane Marshall, and would like to inform others that animal testing is necessary for medical and scientific advancement. After all, hes doing it for the benefits of the human race. His justifications for animal experimentation, along wi th those of Gannon and Hamblin, are that this is how we humans advance in industries, especially medical and scientific which are needed for our society to develop. He reasons that its not a fact that animals suffer from testing, and until proven, its acceptable to improve our civilization through testing. Testing helps researchers develop cures for diseases and save human life. The only way to learn about something is to test it, and as long as animals dont suffer, theres nothing wrong with it. After researching and reading various beliefs of professors and philosophers who are for animal rights and against experimentation, journal authors who believe in a compromise, and scientists who see no wrong in experimenting on animals, my argument for animal rights and against experimentation has slightly changed. I still feel that animals should have legal rights, just as humans, and experimentation is unethical, but I agree with Gannon and Hamblin on the fact that society must find the middle ground. As long as the testing that occurs isnt abusive, its important for our society to become more medically and scientifically advanced. The animal-rights activists need to accept within all reality that in the labs, its not proven that scientists are abusing animals. Scientists test new products on rats and mice for the improvement of human life. As long as animals arent being hurt and we are finding cures for diseases, there needs to be a compromise and the controversy should end.

An artwork is foremost a reflection and expression

It has been essentially argued since time immemorial of how an artwork is foremost a reflection and expression of the deeper emotions and values of an artist, which may sometimes be unfortunately suppressed in the artist’s life or unintentionally implied in the artwork. For that matter, any artwork is perhaps considered an artist’s personal drama set in a creative manner of expression. Sophie Treadwell’s play, Machinal, and T.S. Eliot’s poem, The Love Song of J. Alfred   Prufrock, are be fitting examples of modern human drama relatively framed in a dark, lonesome, and tragic milieu of love, death, age, solitude, and despair in the twentieth century. In Eliot’s poem, the narrator or speaker in his poem is a contemporary man who feels secluded brought by the fear of aging, and who is indecisive to act upon his crisis on love for a woman. The speaker Prufrock is rather an epitome of despair, frustration, and helplessness of the modern man toward a personal crisis. Prufrock positions himself as a symbol of disillusionment and dismay for failing to overcome his human weaknesses. What makes the poem or the speaker tragic is that his insecurity on a lot of things is holding his happiness in life and love. He remains to be brooding, dark, lonesome and awaits death in no time. Eliot has always been a difficult read, and this quality of writing has put him in the level of other literary masters. For a non-Eliot reader, the poem may initially seem confusing to understand. However, the speaker Prufrock has been endowed by Eliot the style of repeating particular phrases and going back to his main sentiment while the poem develops into a whole new set of ideas. This style is reassuring the reader that he can understand the deeper emotions of the speaker as he slowly reads through it. On one hand, this repetition may also show the speaker’s inability to communicate well with the society, and he needs to repeat words such as vision and revision to be clearly understood. Eliot possesses an ironic manner of writing that is very well implied on how Prufrock talks about his love for a woman but is coward enough to open up his feelings and of how he even contradictorily speaks of time as he would sense the urgency to capture life and love in his hands before old age and death take him away, but would also set it aside and reveal that there is still time to catch up on things. The first two similar characteristics or qualities of Treadwell’s play with Eliot’s poem are the twentieth century setting and powerful themes of death and despair, even though the former’s work is based on a sensational real murder case and the latter is more of a personal struggle brought about by aging. Machinal is also similar with Prufrock’s written image of pessimism and depression for things that they are incapable of having, but both end in different resolutions. Machinal’s main character, Helen, is unhappily married to a vicious man and yet happily having an extra-marital affair with a younger man. But, Helen being incapable of loving the younger man in the most proper ways as dictated by society’s conventions, murders her husband and releases herself from the wretched married life. In the case of Prufrock, he remains attached to his fears of opening up to his love and to the society. Machinal is as powerful and intense as Prufrock in its presentation of despair over love. Machinal is desperately consumed with two kinds of love as previously stated. What makes Helen a tragic hero like Prufrock is their disparate heroism takes them not into the world of admiration, but into a world of utmost dismay and desperation – theirs is a tragic presentation of surrender to an inescapable human obstacle of frustrating emotions. Treadwell is capable of repetitive rhythm like a strange poem – a quite tricky concept like Eliot – yet incorporated the theatrical lingo of any expressionistic writing during the twentieth century. To say expressionistic is to only define the attributes of human emotions, not necessarily placing it into an approach of realism. But, moreover, Machinal is an engaging, dark display of human wickedness doomed like Prufrock’s love song. Works Cited Treadwell, Sophie. Machinal (Royal National Theatre). London: Nick Hern Books, 1995. â€Å"T. S. Eliot: The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock.†