“Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person”

According to Frankfurt in order to be considered a person an individual must possess the ability to form “second-order desires”. Naturally humans want to have or not to have certain desires or motives throughout the course of their lives. Man in reference to both men and women are the only ones capable of reflective self evaluation that is witnessed in the formation of second-order desires. According to Frankfurt, having second-order volition’s is what is more important in determining a true person. Also Frankfurt states that it is necessary to note that it is will and not reason which helps us to shape out the proper concept of a person. These characteristics all work in conjunction as one builds upon the other. A person may want something or someone but if they dont have the volition or free will inside them to attain it then according to Frankfurt we cannot consider them a person at all. 

The more simplistic order of desires is of course “first-order desires”, followed by the complex “second-order desires”. A first order desire is simple and plain for example an individual’s ability to wear red. A second order desire for this same individual would be to want to wear red without necessarily ever achieving this said desire. In regards to free will individuals have the ability to choose. Life itself revolves around the choices we make on a daily basis. Some individuals choose to indulge in vices while others choose to learn and master a craft. According to Frankfurt, a person has the ability to want or not want something based on their free will. A person exercises their free will when they secure the conformity of their will to their second order volition’s. A person enjoys free will when they enjoy their desires. According to Frankfurt, a person’s will is considered free only if they are free to have the will they want. Basically a person can make any of their first order desires his will or to make some other first order desire their will instead.

David Hume: The Obviousness of the Truth of Determinism

According to Hume the world we live in is a world based on determinism which in simple terms is all about cause and effect. For every action there is a reaction and I agree with him. I believe that every action one makes was caused by someone else or directly affects another individual. I enjoyed reading when Hume touches on the similarity of the actions of men of all ages in all nations. He states that the same motives always produce the same actions and he lists ambition, avarice, self-love, vanity and several others as the source of all the actions which have been observed among mankind. He writes that mankind is so much the same that history doesn’t really teach us anything new, it just reinforces the idea that we are all similar from the Ancient Greeks and Romans to present day man.

However, Hume does state that although a uniformity exists among humans it does not apply to all men every single time in the same circumstances. Nowhere in nature is there a uniformity as such that regardless of who or what is involved there will be a similar result based on an action.

The example Hume gives towards the end of the work where he discusses the visit of a wealthy friend to his home is somewhat confusing. I am not sure what to make of this or the examples that directly follow this one. From what I read I grasp that experience is one of the best teachers. Experience will help us recognize patterns in the behaviors of humans.

Film Screening: Memento (Day 2)

I strongly disagree with Leonard’s statement that we all need mirrors to remind us who are. Unfortunately, in his case he was suffering a rare condition in which he needed the aid of the tattoos, photographs and notes to serve as his “mirror”. However, a mirror only shows the physical. It has no ability to reflect a person’s true self. Humans can’t just look at one another and correctly assess the type of individual they are observing and mirrors cant either. Hume states “identity is just a habit we have” and this proves correct because our actions, thoughts and habits are a far more accurate means of identifying an individual.

Leonard has become a fool in my opinion because he has no true way of remembering the things he has already lived and can only rely on the tools he uses to aid his memory. I honestly believe I could live the rest of my life without a mirror. I don’t need a reflection of my physical to remind me of the man I am. I would rather think back on my actions, thoughts and habits as a proper means of judging myself. Other people are also unreliable because they can easily lie to their own convenience as Teddy and Natalie frequently did to Leonard. Leonard never remembered anything by looking at himself in the mirror, he could only use these to read his tattoos. Yes, mirrors come in handy when one is trying to view themselves but what exactly do mirrors say? Mirrors don’t say anything worth significant value because they just reflect the outer layer of who we are as humans which in reality just indicates our preferences depending on our own personal style. They don’t say anything of our character or values, even Bernie Madoff wore custom tailored high end suits and he conned numerous people. Would you have been able to identify him as a crook if you ever met with him?

Film Screening: Memento

I do believe Leonard is correct when he makes the claim that “memory can change the shape of a room” because I truly believe each individual has the ability to tailor memories without even realizing it. For instance if I wanted to retell an event I experienced to a friend but I remembered it a certain way, I would then procede to tell this occurrence on the basis of how I remembered it not necessarily how it actually happened nor with the intention of lying. However, this is not to say that every incident would be this way, I just firmly believe that each individual has a certain way of remembering events that specifically relate to them. As we saw in Memento, Leonard was able to remember his wife but yet could not seem to remember who Dodd was. The memory of his wife was very convenient as she was someone he truly loved yet because Dodd was an insignificant person in his life I believe he couldn’t push himself to remember him.

In regards to the comparison of our memories to his notes I would say his notes are better because he continuously gets to improve them. Leonard is in a state where he constantly relives his days and is able to take something he learned from one day to the next via his notes. However, it is important for him to jot those notes down before he falls asleep and forgets everything that occurred on that day.

I think Hume would see Leonard’s condition different than any one of our’s because Leonard doesn’t really have an identity. He really doesn’t know much about who he is now yet somehow remembers who was before which is really interesting to note. Leonard cannot control how he behaves without the use of those pictures thus he doesn’t have true habits. His actions are based on those photographs and not from emotions or memory.

Kant, “The Categorical Imperative” (4-6)

The difference between the Golden Rule and categorical imperative is quite simple. The Golden Rule states that individuals should treat each other accordingly, as they too desire to be treated. For example, according to the Golden Rule I could lie to everyone if I truly desired being lied to. Or perhaps I could go around punching others only if that was exactly what I expected and wanted others to do to me. Whereas the categorical imperative is an action that isn’t based on any specific condition other than the fact that it is an end in itself. Meaning that someone who is behaving with the categorical imperative in mind will respect others not because they desire respect from just one individual in particular, however they truly wish respect was a standard of humanity throughout the world.

“Who’s to judge?”

My favorite objection that Pojman makes against moral relativism is that of subjectivism. Here he used the example of what Ernest Hemingway wrote in regards to how he felt after watching a bull fight. Here is where hypocrisy is raised and a thought I have had all along. Who is to determine whether an individual or society as a whole truly believe in the morality of their own actions. We also see an example where Ghandi and Hitler are compared in regards to their morality. Pojman proposes that Hitler could have the same moral standing as Ghandi as long as he believed he was living by his chosen principles. In essence subjectivism is my favorite objection to moral relativism because Pojman shows us how easily an action can be defined morally sound depending on one’s own perception.

One cannot support both cultural diversity and moral absolutism, it would have to be one or the other. I for one strongly support moral absolutism because it is only correct that there is at least a minimum morality standard that applies to all humans. As humans we all breathe, we all need energy, we all need sleep and many more other valuable operations to function. How is that we cannot universal rules to which we all have to adhere to? I dont think its correct that cultural diversity defines what is moral and what isn’t because as mentioned in the passage how do we know the culture is genuinely believing this or not being hypocrites.

“Fallacy Database”

1) Begging the Question

Children enjoy watching cartoons because of the great animations. But we shouldn’t allow children to eat dinner after 6pm.

 

2) Ad Hominem

Mike is constantly talking negatively about Brooklyn. Did you know he only eats vegetables?

 

3) Equivocation

Jenny is a tough girl. Tough girls are always sensitive, so I know deep down Jenny’s just a sensitive being.

 

4) Slippery Slope

If you don’t work extra hard in training camp, then you probably won’t be ready to make the final roster and you’ll get cut leading you to not playing this season. If you miss this entire season then you’ll be wasting a year of eligibility and an opportunity to showcase your skills at this level.

 

5) Straw Man

Andy: I don’t think its a good idea for you to ask your girlfriend’s best friend out on a date Joe. I saw this same thing happen on an episode of Dr. Phil. Once they both find out what’s going on your girlfriend will kick you to the curb.

Joe: Why not? I just want to stir up some friendly competition. Women love spontaneous behavior, don’t you watch Dr. Phil?

 

 

 

6) Tu Quoque

Eating breakfast is very important, its the first meal of the day and allows you to fuel your body early on. I never eat breakfast though, I’m usually asleep until midday and at that point I want to enjoy a good lunch.

 

 

 

 

 

7) Non-sequitur

I’m not ever paying for anything in this lifetime. It’s easy to see that the best things in life are free. If you can love someone for free, than you can walk into a store and grab anything you like for free, as long as you show valid proof of love.

 

8) False Dichotomy

You can either walk to Brooklyn for some cheesecake or your grounded for a month. Its your choice and even if you walk to Brooklyn you’re still going to be grounded.

 

 

 

 

9) Argument from ignorance

I’ve never seen an alien nor have I ever met or heard of someone that has encountered an alien. Aliens are completely unreal.

 

10) Red Herring

Women are the most beautiful beings on Earth. From their mannerisms to their physical appearance. But you shouldn’t judge them on their favorite color. Don’t believe me, check out all the popular magazines, they have a yearly list of beautiful people and they’re usually mostly women.

11. Exaggeration

Why would you spill soda on me? Now I’m going to go into this interview smelling like soda, I’m not going to get this job, I’m going to go hungry, be homeless and die in some random NYC park.

12. Lying

Donald Trump is the richest man in New York. He is a proven businessman that has created employment in this city. He should be the prime candidate for the presidential election, I think he would do well as president.

 

 

“Informal Logic”

1. All dogs are loyal.

2. Spongebob is a dog.

3. Therefore, Spongebob is loyal.

 

1. Not every bird can fly.

2. The ostrich is a type of bird.

3. Hence, the ostrich is one type of birds that can’t fly.

 

1. If I water the plants, then the plants will grow.

2. I will water the plants.

3.  Therefore, the plants will grow.

 

1. Either Avatar is a great movie, or red is purple.

2. Red is never purple.

3. So Avatar is a great movie.