Please ensure that each response paragraph is at least 150 words. Be sure to include the references for each paragraph. Assignment 1: Philosophy is asking, answering, and arguing for answers to life's most basic questions. It involves thinking about things in a certain way, offering arguments for one's ideas, and being prepared to change one's mind. I chose the Red Herring fallacy. It's attempting to hide a weakness in an argument by drawing attention away from the real issue. This is a diversionary tactic or an attempt to confuse or fog the issue being debated. Ex: A wife accuses her husband of cheating at cards. He replies "Nothing I do ever pleases you. I spent all last week repainting the bathroom, and then you said you didn't like the color." This fallacy is one that I've seen quite often throughout life. Sometimes during this fallacy people try to use it when being funny to throw you off your game or make you think twice. I've also seen it used when trying to get out of a lie and then you try to confuse the other person so that you don't have to give them a straight answer. http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/rgass/fallacy3211.htm "The Meaning of "Philosophy". http://users.ox.ac.uk/~worc0337/philosophy.html What is Philosophy? http://philosophy.fsu.edu/Programs/Undergraduate-Program/What-is-Philosophy - Assignment 2: If philosophy is NOT opinion, then what is it? In other words, provide a brief definition of philosophy. According to oxforddictionaries.com, "Philosophy is the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline." (2014). Now. choose one of the logical fallacies from the readings. Define the fallacy in your own words. Thomas Aquinas' First proof of God. He basically says that for a complex world, a God/creator is need it. That everything that begins to exist has a cause. Or, if you really can't find a good example, you can give us some of your thoughts about this kind of fallacy and why it might be easy for humans fall for it (or not fall for it). We tend to get confused when dealing with a complex argument based on imagination. Imagination that leads to simply an imagined result; not a fact. Religious people all they have is their faith (if any) to pretty much guide them in their daily lives. To believe on something that you cannot see or touch, but you know it empowers you spiritually it's what I call faith. With that being said, Thomas Aquinas' 5 Arguments for the Existence of God, has influenced many past and present generations regarding the existence of God. Aquinas' work was so influential among other great philosophers, that even the Catholic Church loved it and turned him into a Saint. So, now that Aquinas is a Saint, his work made even more sense among God believers, especially Catholics who were in seek of some sort of proof/validation that God did in fact existed back in that era. Source: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/philosophy Assignment 3: Railroads made possible an exponential upward spiral in the American economy. Workers started building the first railroads in 1828; the Baltimore and Ohio (1). Job growth and national expansion in products, services and politics were on the rise from this amazing new technology. Boundless new areas were opened by the railroad. The more desolate and remote areas of that time would now be settled far easier than before. This is due to the shortened transportation times the railroad provided. Mining of coal for fuel and the mass production of iron were new jobs that railroads, and the invention thereof, were directly responsible for (2). The railroad boosted cities like Chicago, which was once a very small settlement, to strong and economically sound cities (3). Various farm products could now be sent on a reasonable timeline from the northwest to the east. Beef was an industry that reaped significant benefits from the growth of railroads. Before the introduction of railroads cows were still farmed, but the beef products were generally only available to the people located within a reasonable radius to the farm. This was because of spoilage issues. Beef could now be sent from the rural west, where there was plenty of open space for cow farming, to cities all across the U.S. Since goods did not spoil as often, the prices were cheaper. The goods also arrived to their destination much faster. Now, people that might not have had the privilege to try certain foods, or goods, could do so. More beef would now be bought due to the increased availability and quick shipment time. Needless to say, this industry, as well as many others, grew rapidly. The north experienced the biggest economic growth within the U.S. from 1843 to 1857. This massive growth in the north was due to railroads specifically. It was the catalyst, the base line for transportation in order to connect the nation throughout. In 1848 railroads covered a mere 5,000 miles, but by 1860 they flourished to 30,000 miles of coverage. The priority of trading for the northwest had now shifted from south to east. The costs of shipping were now a mere fraction of was they once were. Not only did transportation, goods and the economy experience a rapid and positive upswing, but railroads also provided the cornerstone for the political unification of the republican parties of the northwest and northeast. However, southern states within the U.S. did not experience such a monumental boom from railroads, because they were markedly less advanced (4). Assignment 4: In the 1830s, Dred Scott, a slave, accompanied his owner, Dr. John Emerson, from Missouri to Illinois. Unlike in Missouri where slavery was still allowed, in Illinois slavery had been outlawed. Upon his return to Missouri, Dred Scott sued, claiming that by residing in Illinois at one point, he should now be a free man. (1) This case eventually made it all the way to the Supreme Court and would have important implications well beyond the freedom of Mr. Scott. Thanks to the earlier passing of the Missouri Compromise which in part allowed slavery within the state of Missouri, as well as the repeal of this ruling in 1854 by the Kansas-Nebraska Act, this case would ultimately determine if slaves could be considered citizens and thus have the rights afforded to American citizens, as well as if Congress had the right to prohibit slavery. (2) In March of 1857 (three years after the Kansas-Nebraska Act) a ruling was announced. Speaking on behalf of the majority within the The purpose of highlighting this, according to the author, was to challenge those within the Supreme Court who dissented by citing international law. The ruling reached by the majority in Dredd v. Scott, then (according to this author) did in fact follow international law. (6) The Northerners on the other hand were disgusted by the findings of Dred Scott v. Sandford. This was seen by most in the North as a personal affront to everything that this country stood for. Beyond that, most Northerners argued that this ruling was caused by political corruption and scheming from those within the Supreme Court all the way to the White House. Many accused President Buchanan and Democratic politicians of meddling in this affair. (7) Meanwhile, within the new Western territories, the overall opinion of Dredd Scott v. Sandford was mixed. There was condemnation, indifference and even passionate defense of this ruling observed in the new territories. (8) Perhaps, the most discussed issue in the Western territories was about Oregon and whether or not it would enter the Union as a free or as a slave state. This was an important issue as Oregon housed a large amount of slaves and this issue divided this state just as it had the entire Union.(9) This ruling, designed to end the slavery debate once and for all, ended up creating a further divide between the North and the South and played a large role in the eventual Southern succession and Civil War. Haney's opinion can be seen as a legal support to the Southern belief that slaves were property  |
