Hey guys (and ladies)

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Philosophy 101
  3. » Hey guys (and ladies)

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Jgizzy
 
Reply Mon 26 Apr, 2010 02:01 am
Hey everyone, I am taking a political philosophy class which is a class that fulfills a requirement for my AA degree. I took this class because I've always been interested in politics and my Pol Sci class I took a couple years back was lame due to a senile ranting instructor so I thought I'd take another.

I have been doing great in this class, but for my final exam I was given 10 minutes to come up with a working thesis to base a 5-7 page paper so I am in desperate need to guidance. 'This paper is meant to be a reflective paper' (as opposed to reportive/informational) that 'presents my point of view supported by sound arguments.' I need to know if my thesis is 'sound' and if it is, how shall I start the outline of the paper? I am left really shaking in my boots -- writers block mated with starting anxiety and a hint of 'I dunno wtf I'm doing'.

My Thesis:
I will argue that capitalism is a flawed path for the prosperity of the common people. I will demonstrate how capitalism, opposite its proposed intent, is a force that leads to corruption, oppressive rule, and an immoral society. Contained in this paper, I will describe the methods of the capitalist elite and illustrate reasons why capitalist-induced corruption is so dangerous to our commonwealth.

I feel that this thesis is set up for an informational paper rather than a philosophical paper. If anybody has any advice or ideas -- that is really what I need right about now!

Thanks everyone
-Jesse
 
Jebediah
 
Reply Mon 26 Apr, 2010 08:49 am
@Jgizzy,
I think the philosophical point that your thesis argues for is that the "prosperity of the common people" is the number one priority. Other people would argue that it isn't important that the common people be prosperous, just that they have the opportunity to work for it.

And the "immoral society" part surely has some philosophy.
 
VideCorSpoon
 
Reply Mon 26 Apr, 2010 08:57 am
@Jgizzy,
Jgizzy;156662 wrote:

My Thesis:
I will argue that capitalism is a flawed path for the prosperity of the common people. I will demonstrate how capitalism, opposite its proposed intent, is a force that leads to corruption, oppressive rule, and an immoral society. Contained in this paper, I will describe the methods of the capitalist elite and illustrate reasons why capitalist-induced corruption is so dangerous to our commonwealth.
Benefits of the Profit Motive and Karl Marx (and Engels) The Immorality of Capitalism and literally apply their solutions to a standard economic model. And if you wanted to examine the greyer areas of capitalism, you should definitely read John Kenneth Galbraith's The Affluent Society, which examines the rising wealth of the private sector yet the increasing disparity of the public sector. Very interesting stuff. But this is just a small little off hand suggestion, and this is not to say that your original topic is not completely undoable, just a little bit more difficult to fit into 5-7 pages. Especially considering what time of year this is (exam time), you don't want to get too overwhelmed for something like this.

But tell me your thoughts or if there is anything else you are considering, or even if you want to remain with your original topic.
 
Fido
 
Reply Mon 26 Apr, 2010 09:56 am
@Jgizzy,
Jgizzy;156662 wrote:
Hey everyone, I am taking a political philosophy class which is a class that fulfills a requirement for my AA degree. I took this class because I've always been interested in politics and my Pol Sci class I took a couple years back was lame due to a senile ranting instructor so I thought I'd take another.

I have been doing great in this class, but for my final exam I was given 10 minutes to come up with a working thesis to base a 5-7 page paper so I am in desperate need to guidance. 'This paper is meant to be a reflective paper' (as opposed to reportive/informational) that 'presents my point of view supported by sound arguments.' I need to know if my thesis is 'sound' and if it is, how shall I start the outline of the paper? I am left really shaking in my boots -- writers block mated with starting anxiety and a hint of 'I dunno wtf I'm doing'.

My Thesis:
I will argue that capitalism is a flawed path for the prosperity of the common people. I will demonstrate how capitalism, opposite its proposed intent, is a force that leads to corruption, oppressive rule, and an immoral society. Contained in this paper, I will describe the methods of the capitalist elite and illustrate reasons why capitalist-induced corruption is so dangerous to our commonwealth.

I feel that this thesis is set up for an informational paper rather than a philosophical paper. If anybody has any advice or ideas -- that is really what I need right about now!

Thanks everyone
-Jesse

My advice is: Don't do it...You cannot do it justice, so you should not try...I might suggest another approach, but you may not have time to do that justice either...
Since the time of Plato people have tried to translate their moral forms, which is to say their ideas of virtue into social forms like law and government... One man of action put his stamp on such behavior forever with a label... The men studying ideas in the universties of France Napoleon called Ideologues...People who talk do not do, just as those who do dont often think... In any event, since the time of the idealist philosophers the world has suffered the tyranny of the idea, as fascism was, and communism was... Even capitalism is the triumph of an idea over common sense... Which brings up another subject...It is the way people accept ideas whole, without criticism, or thought, as a substitute for thought...Ideas should always be compared to reality to make sure reality is keeping up to the idea... Ultimately, the social forms we make out of our ideas should be judged by how well they work for human beings... The idea that we only need to kill a few million more to have success is screwy, but it has been the norm... Like destroying a villiage to save it...If we were not so inclined to accept ideas on faith much of human misery would be a small matter...
 
Marat phil
 
Reply Mon 26 Apr, 2010 10:02 am
@Jgizzy,
"I will argue that capitalism is a flawed path for the prosperity of the common people. I will demonstrate how capitalism, opposite its proposed intent, is a force that leads to corruption, oppressive rule, and an immoral society. Contained in this paper, I will describe the methods of the capitalist elite and illustrate reasons why capitalist-induced corruption is so dangerous to our commonwealth".

Be not afraid to criticise capitalism? Ha ha ! Courageous you became after Cold War.

---------- Post added 04-26-2010 at 11:12 AM ----------

[SIZE="4"]The socialism has ruined Russia. You wish to ruin America? Forward! We will come and we will grasp your falling country.[/SIZE] :bigsmile:
 
VideCorSpoon
 
Reply Mon 26 Apr, 2010 12:48 pm
@Marat phil,
Marat;156738 wrote:
"I will argue that capitalism is a flawed path for the prosperity of the common people. I will demonstrate how capitalism, opposite its proposed intent, is a force that leads to corruption, oppressive rule, and an immoral society. Contained in this paper, I will describe the methods of the capitalist elite and illustrate reasons why capitalist-induced corruption is so dangerous to our commonwealth".

Be not afraid to criticise capitalism? Ha ha ! Courageous you became after Cold War.

---------- Post added 04-26-2010 at 11:12 AM ----------

The socialism has ruined Russia. You wish to ruin America? Forward! We will come and we will grasp your falling country. :bigsmile:


Eviscerate the Proletariat!!!!
 
Fido
 
Reply Mon 26 Apr, 2010 01:02 pm
@Jgizzy,
The cure for capitalism as an ideology is not communism as an ideology... People have to understand social forms before they can ever form a society that is just and enduring... Whether human beings can use ideas to think instead of using ideas in place of thought is another question, perhaps the central question...
 
Marat phil
 
Reply Mon 26 Apr, 2010 01:05 pm
@Jgizzy,
Real socialism its honest social sistem (for inside structure). But your "left liberalism" its funny dream. Double standarts. Main Nation of world labour division might be socialists only one way. This way - expense expluatation of third world nations

Sorry my english (bad translate technology)

---------- Post added 04-26-2010 at 02:09 PM ----------

One moment

Socialism is not communism. Communism its Marx's dream. Its new (hipotetic) Formation of social History.

---------- Post added 04-26-2010 at 02:22 PM ----------

The Christianity has destroyed Rome. Rome has betrayed the culture. You too betray the culture. You can't return innocence of paganism. But to destroy the Western civilisation - can. It is the Left Liberalism. It is permissiveness. Postmodernism. It is atheism.

You risk. Russia returns belief. The West loses it. On the eve of the Second Coming...
 
Jgizzy
 
Reply Tue 27 Apr, 2010 12:24 am
@Jgizzy,
Thanks for that post, VideCor!
No I wasn't intending on proposing an alternative economic or governmental system. I just wanted to point out the flaws that surfaced from capitalism -- to shed a light on them and acknowledge their existence. From that, somehow, I would hope that the acceptance and understanding of the 'cons' of our system would better prepare us to start thinking of ways to adjust or re-think certain assumptions or traditions. I don't mean to be contra-capitalist, I just want to try and point out the dangers that are inherent and present in our system. Possibly look into ideas (that are aligned with reality as I believe it to be) that could help provide a better balance of economy, government, and influential powers of the elite "bourgeoisie".

But, to be clear, in no way am I trying to use Marxism/Communism as a solution or to even compare it to capitalism on a side-by-side basis. I wish to have the freedom of writing this paper in the abstract sense, but I don't know if the wording of my thesis would allow me to stretch it to that point where I can be primarily abstract. Or could I, you think??


Fido;156736 wrote:
Even capitalism is the triumph of an idea over common sense... Which brings up another subject...It is the way people accept ideas whole, without criticism, or thought, as a substitute for thought...Ideas should always be compared to reality to make sure reality is keeping up to the idea... Ultimately, the social forms we make out of our ideas should be judged by how well they work for human beings...

This is right up my alley in my thinking. You worded it well: A triumph of an idea over common reality. And how I see things play out in current times, people are using ideals to be the driving factor in policy making even when they are so misaligned with current reality. I feel that these types of actions present great strains for our economy and society, and is often originally pushed for the benefit of a few.

Fido, I totally agree with your second post as well and that is kind of what I think I want to do with this paper: to expose and study some flaws (notions, realities, ect.) in capitalism (American capitalism) to help catalyze the thinking minds of others on how we might start to formulate some ways of improving capitalism.


Marat, I'm not too sure how to digest your post. I am not a communist though. Or at least I don't think I am lol


So, with everyone's insights, I am hoping to sneakily stray away from my thesis along a modified but parallel 'ghost thesis' (my own term) that would allow me to argue and extrapolate in a more abstract way (as Spoon said above). I just don't know if I can pull it off, because I cannot change my thesis -- it's official. Anyone got ideas? lol


BTW, thank you for the replies, this is great. I will use a lot of these perspectives and ideas in my paper.
 
Fido
 
Reply Tue 27 Apr, 2010 05:07 am
@Jgizzy,
Jgizzy;156995 wrote:
Thanks for that post, VideCor!
No I wasn't intending on proposing an alternative economic or governmental system. I just wanted to point out the flaws that surfaced from capitalism -- to shed a light on them and acknowledge their existence. From that, somehow, I would hope that the acceptance and understanding of the 'cons' of our system would better prepare us to start thinking of ways to adjust or re-think certain assumptions or traditions. I don't mean to be contra-capitalist, I just want to try and point out the dangers that are inherent and present in our system. Possibly look into ideas (that are aligned with reality as I believe it to be) that could help provide a better balance of economy, government, and influential powers of the elite "bourgeoisie".

But, to be clear, in no way am I trying to use Marxism/Communism as a solution or to even compare it to capitalism on a side-by-side basis. I wish to have the freedom of writing this paper in the abstract sense, but I don't know if the wording of my thesis would allow me to stretch it to that point where I can be primarily abstract. Or could I, you think??



This is right up my alley in my thinking. You worded it well: A triumph of an idea over common reality. And how I see things play out in current times, people are using ideals to be the driving factor in policy making even when they are so misaligned with current reality. I feel that these types of actions present great strains for our economy and society, and is often originally pushed for the benefit of a few.

Fido, I totally agree with your second post as well and that is kind of what I think I want to do with this paper: to expose and study some flaws (notions, realities, ect.) in capitalism (American capitalism) to help catalyze the thinking minds of others on how we might start to formulate some ways of improving capitalism.


Marat, I'm not too sure how to digest your post. I am not a communist though. Or at least I don't think I am lol


So, with everyone's insights, I am hoping to sneakily stray away from my thesis along a modified but parallel 'ghost thesis' (my own term) that would allow me to argue and extrapolate in a more abstract way (as Spoon said above). I just don't know if I can pull it off, because I cannot change my thesis -- it's official. Anyone got ideas? lol


BTW, thank you for the replies, this is great. I will use a lot of these perspectives and ideas in my paper.

Then let me tell you what I know in a nut shell for free so you make the best use of it... Every form, and it is a common word, and one used in the declaration of inedpendence, is also a form of relationship...

It is out of our moral forms that we build our social forms... When Aristotle says at the beginning of Politics that good is the object of governments because good is the object of all human activity, that is what he is saying, that a moral form, Good, having no matterial being whatever is what social forms are built to achieve... As in the case of Communism Equity, and justice are the moral forms to be produced; and with capitalism, free enterprise, freedom, individual freedom, and freedom from want...

If this is true then you should measure Capitalism not against some unrelated abstraction, but against the moral forms that it was built to achieve...Ho Chi Minh once made a statement to the effect that the were fighting for a western philosophy, materialism; while we were fighting for spiritual values such as Freedom...Do you think that we are more free or less free because enterprise is free; because I see we need more law, more prisons and police, more spies and surveilance to ensure the freedom of business, and at the same time less democratic control in all our affairs...

You must understand that this whole land, and whole people have been victimized by capitalism, and some of the greatest victims of capital are still its biggest supporters, and it is because, like all idealists, they do not blame the idea when the idea fails, but they blame the people for not living up to the idea... Do they expect people to work for nothing???...Do they expect the children of slaves to take slave wages only because work is worthy...How can work be worthy if not worth a living wage???

As in old England, the church is an essential part of the constitution, which in England was always unofficial...The Lords, the Church, and the king stood together over the people... Today, the capitalists as the financiers and bankers, the churches, and the government stand over us, supporting each other, arms locked... Look at it...The economy is supposed to support the government and people and instead it is the people who are supporting the government and economy...How many times in recent years has the government had to save the economy, and have it on life support??? It is because they, the capitalists and the banks take too much out of the people, more value out of this land than labor can create, or nature can replace...

All capitalism has is the belief, again, the faith in the moral/spiritual form to keep it working... And instead of people blaming the economy, they blame the government and the people, because they are so against the idea of socialism even while they live with the socialism of poverty that they will never know the socialism of plenty...

We suffer in our age the tyranny of the idea, as in Russia, and in Nazi Germany... And it is killing us trying to follow failed free enterprise down the rat hole of bankruptcy, moral and financial bankruptcy... Good luck...It is all you have left...
 
VideCorSpoon
 
Reply Tue 27 Apr, 2010 08:23 am
@Fido,
Jgizzy;156995 wrote:
Thanks for that post, VideCor!
No I wasn't intending on proposing an alternative economic or governmental system. I just wanted to point out the flaws that surfaced from capitalism -- to shed a light on them and acknowledge their existence. From that, somehow, I would hope that the acceptance and understanding of the 'cons' of our system would better prepare us to start thinking of ways to adjust or re-think certain assumptions or traditions. I don't mean to be contra-capitalist, I just want to try and point out the dangers that are inherent and present in our system. Possibly look into ideas (that are aligned with reality as I believe it to be) that could help provide a better balance of economy, government, and influential powers of the elite "bourgeoisie".

But, to be clear, in no way am I trying to use Marxism/Communism as a solution or to even compare it to capitalism on a side-by-side basis. I wish to have the freedom of writing this paper in the abstract sense, but I don't know if the wording of my thesis would allow me to stretch it to that point where I can be primarily abstract. Or could I, you think??


I can see what you are saying. I would just point out that it would be a lot safer for your thesis to include a counter-system in juxtaposition for the interest of completeness. For example, suppose I was writing a paper about Gottfried Leibniz. If I were to write the paper in such a way that I completely stayed within the frame of Leibniz (his work, notions, etc) and deconstructed it, what I would be left with is a disassembled philosopher. So you bring in other rationalists like Spinoza and Descartes to compare and contrast his specific viewpoint, providing multiple points of reference and tie into a mch larger framework and relevancy. One could hardly talk about the principle of pre-established harmony without talking about Malebranche's preceding theory, otherwise, it would be incomplete.

I think you have the same idea though, since what you want to do is expose the cons of the capitalistic system, preparing us to think of better ways. The questions is in what better ways? If you leave this an open ended thesis, your teacher will have a big issue with that. A thesis generally proves a point, so unless this is a basic critique paper, you would have to be more thorough.

As to sounding contra-capitalist, I don't think you gave any inclination as to that. I brought communism up because it is the perfect antithesis to your general point. It would honestly be hard as heck not to use it as a counter point to exemplify your own points. For example, if you were to say "one such flaw in the capitalistic system is the inevitable disparity between the upper and lower classes," you could talk about how communism warned against abuse of such classes, and further provide examples within the American, etc. system which show first hand those abuses. But then as with your antithesis, the disparity between the classes is relative since the upper classes in the capitalistic system is much like the benefits enjoyed by the communist party. Side note, being communist is not compulsory (at least not now), but in china for example, you must be a member of the communist party to receive higher education (college, etc.). The question is, in which system is disparity commensurate with the inherent ill-effects? That kind of stuff.

But then again, what I am suggesting could be use for a substantially longer paper. I would suppose that based on your goals, your teacher wants a critique paper (which is odd because it's usually critique/contrast). But just as a word of warning, as far as academia goes, in a subject like this without an antithesis, you would have to have one helluva good replacement point in place of capitalism. I would just say it would be easier to scale communism and capitalism. Which is a hint at the major problem here, which is as I read in your post, you would like to remain in the abstract without comparison of capitalism to communism for example. Capitalism is very abstract in itself, and its finer points are sometimes only understood in juxtaposition to another system like communism.

Your thesis is great in the respect that it shows a somewhat clear goal. However, in my opinion, there are gaps (which I subsequently filled in because those gaps were there). Here is your thesis as it stands;
Quote:
I will argue that capitalism is a flawed path for the prosperity of the common people. I will demonstrate how capitalism, opposite its proposed intent, is a force that leads to corruption, oppressive rule, and an immoral society. Contained in this paper, I will describe the methods of the capitalist elite and illustrate reasons why capitalist-induced corruption is so dangerous to our commonwealth.

Your opening thesis statement (i.e. the first line) is problematic for you in a few ways. You said you wished to remain in the abstract, yet you set your thesis with the intent to show a different "path for the prosperity of the common people
Quote:
I will argue that the fundamental conceptions of capitalism are problematic. To do so, I will demonstrate how capitalism in its fundamental notions are potentially corrupt in practice, oppressive in its execution under various modes of government, and negatively susceptible to our common conception of morality. Throughout the course of this paper, I will illustrate how capitalistic methodology can at times become a negative attribute of a given society. By examining the aforesaid attributes, I will explore alternative approaches to alleviate the growing issues with our current capitalistic model.

Remember, when you form your thesis, make sure it is as objective as possible, remaining as neutral as possible except for the point you want to make. Note: On particular reason for this is that you want headway in case you need a course correction. But anyway, this is the whole spiel about biting off more than you can chew, and in the case of your original thesis, explicitly saying X while implicitly stating Y, can be very misleading and problematic for you and your final grade.

And this is a word of advice from a former student to a current student (not that you do this but as a general caveat), for the love of god do not channel the ghost of comrade Lenin when you talk about capitalism or communism, instructors and subsequently anybody familiar with the subject will pick up on it. Stay as objective as possible without falling prey to particular styles of rhetoric.
 
Fido
 
Reply Tue 27 Apr, 2010 09:59 am
@Jgizzy,
Video;
Some of the Protestant notions behind capitalism are simply empty and irrational...They should have questioned wealth as a tangible expression of God's love when they realized that the wealthy, as soon as they were wealthy, moved away from relgion...It seems to be an old Jewish idea that is behind Capitalism, and It is obvious that Protestantism was a return in many senses to Judaism...Have you ever read: The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, By Max Weber??? If it were possible to strip the religious support from Capitalism the thing would fall, having no justification...The whole idea that out of Greed as a vice, a virtue can be produced is foolish on its face...Such stupidity demands a faith in God for support...
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 03:02 pm
@Fido,
I try to Imagine the Pope without his Holy Robes and Symbolic Hat

---------- Post added 04-28-2010 at 02:04 PM ----------

Pepijn Sweep;157630 wrote:
I try to Imagine the Pope without his Holy Robes and Symbolic Hat

Joined Facebook page Barack Obama !
:bigsmile:
 
HexHammer
 
Reply Mon 3 May, 2010 04:10 am
@Jgizzy,
Jgizzy;156662 wrote:
I will argue that capitalism is a flawed path for the prosperity of the common people. I will demonstrate how capitalism, opposite its proposed intent, is a force that leads to corruption, oppressive rule, and an immoral society. Contained in this paper, I will describe the methods of the capitalist elite and illustrate reasons why capitalist-induced corruption is so dangerous to our commonwealth.
I have read thesis which was flawed, I have read thesis which I didn't agree with ...but your thesis just baffles me!

It doesn't display ANY knowledge of historical knowledge of different kinds of economical models, goverment nor the slightest understanding of what capitalism is.

Your thesis is glaringly stripped of even the simplest of psycology. You should read up on group think, instincts, genetic memory ..etc, then you will learn it's not so much the system, as it is the genetic memory that will act as the bad guy.

It's not Imo the capitalism in itself that is bad, but only when it reaches certain structures as too much competition, and companies gain too much power and wealth.

Some companies has 200 billion $, with that you can buy immens power to support your will.
 
onetwopi
 
Reply Tue 4 May, 2010 10:55 pm
@HexHammer,
HexHammer;159501 wrote:

It's not Imo the capitalism in itself that is bad ...

Some companies has 200 billion $, with that you can buy immens power to support your will.


So, based on your last statement, it IS capitalism that is bad. How else does a company have a $200 billion balance sheet?
 
HexHammer
 
Reply Wed 5 May, 2010 12:25 am
@onetwopi,
onetwopi;160218 wrote:
So, based on your last statement, it IS capitalism that is bad. How else does a company have a $200 billion balance sheet?
1) it's scaringly that you judge all based on the few, what kind of moral and justice is that? If you have children, and one does wrong, will you then punish all collectivly? ..isn't that kinda sick?

2) do you really think all buisnesses has 200 billion $ floating around?

3) capitalism is such a strong concept, that it allows us to donate money to other countries, keeping a strong infrastructure, what other model allow such thing?
 
Fido
 
Reply Wed 5 May, 2010 02:38 am
@HexHammer,
HexHammer;160233 wrote:
1) it's scaringly that you judge all based on the few, what kind of moral and justice is that? If you have children, and one does wrong, will you then punish all collectivly? ..isn't that kinda sick?

2) do you really think all buisnesses has 200 billion $ floating around?

3) capitalism is such a strong concept, that it allows us to donate money to other countries, keeping a strong infrastructure, what other model allow such thing?

No one is a capitalist who does not want to exploit their common man... 1...The only way they can "make" money is to take it out of what others produce, and so what if they are taken in their turn??? They justify injusitce and so justify injustice when they suffer injustice...

2...This point is immaterial...consider what would happen if they all had such monies on their profit line...They point to the good they do in society, but if one disregards the war, the waste, and the police state they create, then the high profits taken out of a country are ruin... They cannot have those profits except out of nature, or the working class, and as their profits increase the money decreases so there are no consummers except for those people who are consumers of loans... And that is where we are, where the whole wealth of the nation is being liquidated to pay loans with usurous interests...Nothing can be done without Credit??? How can a whole society survive it??? The money has to come from some where and labor and nature do not begin to supply all that is taken...

3... Most of the money we donate is loaned at high rates to the rich for projects their country may or may not need and is paid by the people...A huge amount is in the form of military aid and police training which only bucks up those we want in power who will exploit their own society to be a part of the capitalist class...
Where do you think infrastructure is not failing??? In this state it is...The rich build factories but do not pay taxes...The governments think they can get it out of the people, but the people flee...In the end every city is blighted with brown zones no one wants that pay nothing in taxes; and the businesses move to the south, or to some other country; and why??? Because the workers want theirs??? Because they are made certain promises that are denied when it is time to keep them... The biggest investor in capitalism has always been organized labor, but every one of those pensions has been cut right to ribbons... They do not care who they steal from, what baloons they inflate, what ponzies are found, because there are more to be found...You cannot export your capital and keep a strong market at home... As Engals said: The search for market cannot kep pace with increased ability to produce...What is happening here, and everywhere is the rich becoming sole owners of the society, with only a class of slaves beneath them...The model does not work...The economy which should support the population is instead support by the people...
 
VideCorSpoon
 
Reply Wed 5 May, 2010 08:04 am
@Fido,
Remember guys, since this is oriented in the philosophy 101 section, the objective of this thread has to remain less opinionated and more geared towards helping jgizzy work out his thesis. captialism/communism is a sub-point of a suggestion I gave to jgizzy. jgizzy could use help with the thesis in many other ways.
 
HexHammer
 
Reply Wed 5 May, 2010 08:14 am
@VideCorSpoon,
VideCorSpoon;160360 wrote:
Remember guys, since this is oriented in the philosophy 101 section, the objective of this thread has to remain less opinionated and more geared towards helping jgizzy work out his thesis. captialism/communism is a sub-point of a suggestion I gave to jgizzy. jgizzy could use help with the thesis in many other ways.
Yes, indeed, but what if the subject was .."GW Bush doesn't exist"? ..should one help him in his disproval, or help him understand that it is nonsens?
 
VideCorSpoon
 
Reply Wed 5 May, 2010 09:51 am
@HexHammer,
HexHammer;160364 wrote:
Yes, indeed, but what if the subject was .."GW Bush doesn't exist"? ..should one help him in his disproval, or help him understand that it is nonsens?


Then I suppose we would have to break out the existential and universal quantifiers, indulge ourselves in a little predicate logic, and cross our fingers and hopefully determine whether or not it is conditionally valid that Pa --> ∃x (Px & Mx) if the universe were all people, past and present, a was bill Clinton, m were all the males of the population, and p is the class of all presidents of the twentieth century. In which case, I suppose we could move this to the logic section.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Philosophy 101
  3. » Hey guys (and ladies)
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/24/2024 at 09:19:01