he is a post modern he wrote in the first person in page 5 him mention that the person it not a philosopher and he is not a Christian and does not believe in god and its from someones other view and someone has written this to make a point. He tries to reconcile plato and nitchez and he tires to bring them together and now he say that talk is cheap and that everyone is a philosopher and they have made it to easy and also he wants to make chrisanity harder and the reason it is easy because it is based on reason. with doubting everything and he ask what is the purpose of doing philosophy but he thinks they have not doubted everything and that they have not doubted reason and they want to go further and they try to be like decorate but even decorates does not doubt everything for he does not doubt the billable well if you acnt prove that jeusus died for our sins then it did not happen and they want to prove rationality and that if you cant prove there is a god then he does not exists  but some say you need reason to have faith and modern philosophy is suppose to answer everything and silent john what faith is but it is not conceptual form and we can make them from god and Jesus but it still can not give you faith so he asked to question what gives you faith page 7 abraham is the father of faith and he truly has faith and they try to learn from him to get faith. So I would not agree with him because some of the things he says do not make sense and to me i do not like the way he tries to put together two peoples philosophy because it does make sense to do that because not everyones philosophy is the same they may be similar  but it would not work to but them together. And I also do not understand why the author would write about his philosophy on a book about a man who does not believe in what he believes in because the character in the book silent John says admits to us that he himself is not a Christian and he does not believe in it he is not even a philosopher. So it just confuses me on why he would do that. Now the book is really good and its easy to understand but the methods on the authors philosophy are kinda weird and on most of his stuff I would not agree with for the way he explains it  is confusing. Now the one thing I would agree with is the thing he mention about faith and reason now i do believe that you need reason to have faith because to me reason explains our faith. So all in all you should go read the book and see if you agree with him or with me

 

blog1

in the book twilight of the idols and the anti-christ written by Friedrich Nietzsche you get a lot of famous quotes that are still around today like “God is dead”,and the most famous one “what doesn’t kill me makes me stronger”.Now this saying can mean a lot of things what I think the quote means is to never give up but what it really means is that is that you must suffer to bring out you character and through your character you find out who you really are through suffering and struggle and he explains that people should be cheerful for struggle. Friedrich would also say that meaning is bad for you and that you should try and find away to live with out meaning  and he disagrees with western beliefs but he blames their beliefs on Christianity because he believes that they are wrong and he goes on to call himself the anti christ. Then he goes on to talk about the englishmen and that they find happiness in pleasure. But he says that any real human being would not care about happiness all they care about is purpose or the reason why.Now later in his book he talks about the other philosophers and he say that in their book they all say the same thing at one point or another that life is worthless and that they all agree. They believe this because they all agree that the body is bad and they physical world is not real and it is what is keeping us from getting to the truth. Her also say that their philosophy is misunderstood because of Christianity because what it is telling you to do is to ignore your instincts like lying and that there are only two reasons people lie one is that they are afraid or two their pride. it also tells you not to be strong and that you should try to be equal but Friedrich say no go and gain power and strength because it is the most important instinct. lying is also a weakness and that we need to keep away from pleasure because then we start acting like animals. Now I would not agree with a lot if the things he is talking about because for one i am  a christian and what he is saying about all this is not true and he is such a critic and i think he does not know what he is talking about and that he needs to go and read some more philosophy books because he is the only one that does not believe in what everyone else is saying and if people beliefs are wrong do not go blaming someone religion.

blog 2

When reading George berkley you can comparing him to descartes because they both believe in the primary and secondary extension and it is like and you can also compare it to the the movie the island with leonardo De Capiro when he is a detective and he goes on this investigation to find a missing person and through out this whole time he is there he keeps getting vision of his dead wife and she wants him to leave because he is in danger. but his mind is playing a trick on him and what he thinks is not really real which goes that what you see in your mind is not really what you see in the real world. So the movie goes on and at the end the character finds out that he is really the person that was missing and that he was imagining the person and his wife and his senses and mind play tricks on him and this is what George is trying to say that we need to relay on the primary extension more then the secondary because it is better to rely on a sure thing then to our senses so george tries to justify why the primary is better then secondary because the secondary are the senses and they can trick you in to believing something that is not there or is not real. Like for example the tempter of water one hand is cold and the other is regular and they put their hand in the water and to one hand the water is cold and to the other it is warm. So it asked the question is the water warm or cold so it tricks you and you do not really know and you just have to decide on what you think if the water is cold or warm so to me people should base their decision on their primary extension. He also say that with sound if we are not there then there is no sound but to me even if we are not around sound still happens. But i think sound is every where so I would agree with George on somethings but unsure of the other things.

blog 1

in this book they talk a lot about Descartes and the author of the book just goes on about how everything that Descartes said in his book was wrong but he did agree with him on something. The main thing he agrees with him on is that he still wants to try and prove that God and the soul exists he also goes back toward Socrates when he says the should not leave their lives unexamined now I would agree with him because i believed 9in a lot of the things Descartes said. The main point in this story is a dialogue between two men Philonous and Hylas and it was really good   in how the author used the names because both of their names stand for what they believe in. Like Philonous means love in mind which means he believe in the mind and Hylas means matter which say that he believes in everything is matter. Now as they are talking they get into a debate over what is skepticism and what makes someone a skeptic and toward the first part of the book they come up with a definition and they say skepticism is someone who doubts something or everything or an other example is someone who does not believe in the the physical world. So if this definition is true then that would make Descartes a skeptic but really I think he is not because he still believes in the physical world and his book he talks about how he can prove it so that does not make him a skeptic. As they are debating Hylas  turns the tables on Philonous and says that people that do believe in the physical world are the ones who are really skeptic. they both make very good points and I do not know who is the real skeptic. then there was this talk about the veil of ideas which is what you see is not what you are really seeing and that  you think you are seeing it but its all in your mind. and the author is against that. He says that that if that is true then if we see things in are mind then people do not have a sense of what they are really looking at because what you see in your mind might not be the same as it is in the physical world. now i would agree with him on this because in my life i have had times when i thought about how something would look and when i finally saw it it look different from my mind. So further in the book Hylas says that there are two different things people look at when comparing what we think and what is real. Which is common sense or vaguer opinion or philosophy or science and he as something called the secondary and primary qualities in the secondary there are your senses smell touch sound color heat and taste and your primary you have your extensions like figures gravity and motion. Now with saying that i would agree with a lot of the things he is saying because it does make a lot of sense.

blog2

In Descartes book Meditations on First philosophy he is on this journey to find the first philosophy through meditation and he talks in the first person to try and put the reader in his position to make them feel that they are there with him meditating. He does this to try and get his point across about what he thinks about philosophy and how it is in a way like science and how people can use this to prove many things. Like on how to prove someones knowledge for god Descartes in a way goes back on the teachings of Plato and how we already know about God and that we learn about him through our knowledge. But he says that he wants people to try and not rely on their senses because sometimes your senses can be wrong and even in reason you can be wrong but he thinks reason is better than your senses and he asked the question well if all is all good and he made him then why would God create him to make mistake. But he says “the scope of the will is wider than that of the intellect” and what he is trying to say that it is are will that makes the mistake and any mistake in reasoning is made in your choice in not understanding the situation. So he says that reason does not make mistakes only people do. And when you think with proper reason then you are in away thinking like God therefore you could never be wrong and to solve you need to break it down step by step and think about it slowly and that with each step God is telling you the right answer. So that is why he would pick reason over senses because in reality reason does not make mistake and that in reason you can go back and fix your mistake and with your senses he can prove through his reason why you are wrong. So now that he knows that the senses are are bad and he breaks down his wall  of his false beliefs he tries to figure out what he is because he knows he exist but he wants to know what he is and he says that you are a thinking thing that you are your mind. A thing that doubts and tries to think and it to has senses perception even like if the eyes can see something it does not mean anything because your eyes can be thinking it is there but it is only an experience of the mind and things we see and feel things we do not to see anything and we think of everything we see. So i would not agree with him because i feel we need to see touch smell things to know it is there and our mind can be wrong and i would pick senses over reason because in a way senses can prove if something exists.

blog

in the book Meditations on First philosophy Descartes talks about finding the first philosophy in order to study modern philosophy and Descartes believes in modern science and he believes that everything in the universe has all the same purpose and he wants to find this through science this goes against everything that people believed in during this time many people still believed that science was taught by Aristotle but he wanted to prove this was wrong and that everything has the same nature and he says that science is not through observation but rather through math and thing can be proven with numbers. He also wants people to believe in God through a philosophy point of view then a ethnical point because in a ethical point you can not argue you points but in philosophy you can and thats what he wants to be able to prove his points that way people would believe him. and he proves this theory by saying God is already in us and we can know about him through reason which sounds a lot like Plato and that he can demonstrate this with philosophy and a demonstration is a step by step proof that no one can argue. Also through his book he goes into mediations to get rid of all his false beliefs and he says that people senses is what tricks them the most and that the senses deceive you which is why he does not rely on his senses to tell him if something is real. He believes that there is a soul and a mind and he strongly agrees that the mind is were you can find god and that in the mind people are more sure of things that exist and in his meditations he explains that all the things he has believed in is like a structure or like a house and he wants to tear down this building of false beliefs and build a new one of all the new things he has come to know. then he goes on to challenge the authority and talks that kids only believe in things they see and this is why the senses trick us and he does not want to be tricked and he says that from now on everything he looks at he wants to make sure it is real through reason rather then his senses and in the book he talks to you in the first person to try and get yourself in his position and really think about what is going on around you. Descartes convinced himself that he was a mind and not a body then he went on that maybe there was an evil god that made people do bad things but he proved that the evil can not prove that you exist there for a person can over come the evil. So i would agree with Descartes on many of the things because it makes sense and I do believe that we can find go through reason. Also the part about are senses was very interesting and i want to learn more about what he has to say.

blog

In the book written by Aquinas he talks about a lot of things about existing and what makes thing exists and that there are two types of exists. there was necessary exists and continuous exists. and he goes deep into explaining what is the difference between the two and how he relates it to god and his exists and he uses this to try and explain how he no god is real but not really. Aquinas try to justify the exists of god by using his principle of exists. he says that thing that we as humans need and want exists necessary because they are necessary to live and they come from many things. like for example in class the teacher gave an example of an eraser only exists necessary because he would need it to erase things on the bored and it could not exists continuous because it was not made by nature. so then he tries to explain  to explain that god must exists necessary because he was not made from nature and that everything he created necessarily exists. Now many would argue that with him and say that he is wrong and that god started exists so that and that nature came from god so he has to exists continuous. he also debates that humans are exists necessarily because we are created in the image of god  who exists necessary and many would agree not that god exists necessarily but that we do exists necessarily because we are created in the image of god and he created us to exists necessarily because we all have a purpose which makes us necessary and not continuous and I also believe this as well because it makes sense that since we were created in the image of god that we would exists necessarily because in life we all have a purpose and its to end up in the kingdom of heaven so makes necessary but aquinas odes make good points but i just do not agree with him on something because it does not make sense to me and i would not agree with with some of the things he says

 

blog 2

In Confessions of Saint Augustine he makes very good points of view of the world based on religion. Many people would agree with Augustine about how that everything good comes from god and everything we do is for god. Also people would agree with him on his idea of sin saying that loving anything less then god is a sin and loving one thing more than another is also a sin for example like literary more than grammar or mourning someone too much when they die because that shows that you love them more then god. Also that a sin is a punishment in its own and that when you sin you are only hurting yourself and not god and that we shouldn’t love yourself more than you love god. Then others would disagree with him based on what their religion believes and say that he is wrong about everything that is good comes for god because some people would say if that was true nothing evil would happen because god is all good and if he is all good then there can not be any evil. Also religious leaders would disagree with Augustine on what is a sin. They say that sin is an action that is evil and that loving one more than another has nothing to do with sin because god wants us to love each other all the same and that a sin does hurt god because with every sin we are moving further away from god and he wants us to be closer to him. all of this is just a test god buts us through to see if we can become one with him in the kingdom of heaven by giving us choices to make one leading to him and one leading away. But he always gives us chances to come back. So Augustine makes good points of what he believes that will get you closer to god and some people amy follow him based on his beliefs. Then there are others but no one is really wrong with what they believe only if they believe that there is only one god and that he is holy and worship on other god then no matter what god will forgive and welcome you to the kingdom of heaven with open arms. We just have to make the right choices and believe that even when things are going bad if you but your faith in him you will be saved

blog

In the book The confessions of Saint Augustine he talks abut his life. But it is strange that in the book he doesn’t give details of his birth until later. Now this is strange but the first part of the book he talks about god and how he lived to serve him and that it is mainly him finding god. Now Augustine believed in a lot of things that god did and that he believed that everything was mad and every thing people did was from god and that everything good came from god like the example in his book he says the milk from his mothers breast did not come from her but from god. Also the book starts out with Augustine being evil when he is stilling peas and that he was expressing his evil. now this sounds a lot like Aristotle and his theory of that everything we do is for a reason. Then it goes on with example of what a sin in in Augustine mind and Augustine says that a sin is liking something more than something that is a lesser good or in other words liking or loving something more than god. And that loving anything lesser then god is like committing pronunciation, corrupting  your own nature, and loving the wrong things. Augustine also believed that sin was a type of punishment  and that when you sinned you were only hurting yourself and not god. He also believed every disordered mind in its own and makes you less human and when you sin you corrupt your own nature and mind. then he continues his story and gives other examples of sin and why it is bad to sin for example he says that a man at school that loves to read more than he loves grammar is a sinner. And that the man shouldn’t have loved one less then the other. its also like saying if one of your close friends dies and u morn them that is committing a sin a well because you love that friend more then god. Augustine also believed that sex was a sin before marriage was a sin he says that any sex before that is not love but it is lust. Then he gives the difference between lust and love is the love of the flesh of the body is lust and the loving of the soul it true love and that people have sexual pleasure to have children. So many people would agree with augustine and his religious beliefs and some may not. The book is very good and he gives great description of what to do to get closer to god and I would agree with him we all need to try to get closer to god to live a good and happy life and loving ourselves before god is a sin. But overall I enjoyed the book.

aristotle 2

I would like to compare aristotle to a painting called the dinner at Athens where is standing in the middle with another philosopher his name was plato. but in this painting u can tell a lot about aristotle and where he stood in his believes and philosophy during his time as opposed to plato who showed many of the same and different things as aristotle. like in the painting plato is pointing to the sky and aristotle is pointing to the ground this shows that the two men believe in something different and to me it seems that plato believes in the gods and aristotle believes in the earth. also I think the painting shows the different ways of philosophy the two men in how plato believes in wisdom or virtue or forms as he calls it is already being inside of you and that you have to go through experience to find it. as for aristotle he looks for wisdom or virtue a particular cases or also said as the abstract of the forms and that wisdom is in everything around us and that we need to go and pull out the wisdom from the world. I think it is amazing that you can compare two philosophers just from a painting. for me i would agree with aristotle on the way he uses his philosophy and the abstract of the form and I too believe that people need to go out pull out wisdom from everything we find to better understand wisdom and virtue. the thing that the men have the same is that they both think that in order to have wisdom you must have virtue and to have virtue you need wisdom. for this I agree but still to me aristotle gives a better explanation of what wisdom and virtue really are and if you know a little bit about philosophy the painting dinner in athens can show. you just have to understand what is going on and appreciate art and philosophy of plato and Aristotle.