With the model of sense perception of sense perception, which I shall call the “Reid-Darwin-Pragmatic model,” we assume as a starting point the existence of the individual in a natural, social world. Instead of saying with Descartes that there is a chasm between the perceiver (the subject) and the object, physical world which must be bridged if we’re to avoid the skeptical trap.
I believe that science educators have a duty to defend the scientific method and good science from irrational attacks. I also feel an obligation toward those students in the audience who are still undecided — students whose minds haven’t already been snapped shut by anti-evolution pseudo-science. Even so, there are still several excellent reasons for both scientists and science educators to not debate the anti-evolutionist
The more admirable type of philosopher is one who attempts to live and teach in accordance with the Socratic principle that “the unexamined life is not worth living.”
What can the “philosophical spirit” mean to the non-philosophical world, a world that cares little about clarification, analysis and the pursuit of truth? Should the “philosophical person” take the role of a missionary and work to win converts among the un-philosophical?
Philosophical development: All persons start as nature’s primitives; many have the potential to become much more, to develop their intellectual, creative and spiritual faculties. But this growth and development does not come easily. Effort and sacrifice are required. Most people are not willing to pay the price.
The politician who gets my vote is the one who makes female equality one major part of his or her platform. After all, an investment in global economic opportunities for women, plus reproductive health care (including sex education, contraception, emergency contraceptive pills and early abortions) would provide one of the greatest benefits to humanity in the history of civilization.
My point relates to the morality and legality of our military ‘evolution.’ The moral and legal problems that arose with use of technology as a deadly weapon were recognized internationally around the time of World War I when gas warfare was outlawed. Strangely enough the use of deadly machine guns and early tank attacks were considered fair play in the game of war. Even more strangely, as we progressed to the war technology of World War II, the massive bombing of civilian centers (cities) was considered a morally acceptable way of doing war.
Scientists have been working around the clock for decades to conquer AIDS, a tragic disease spread by a deadly virus that has already killed tens of millions of people. Like most crises, AIDS has brought out the best and the worst in human nature. Thousands of professional and voluntary care-givers have generously come forth to care for the sick. . . But AIDS has also aroused mean-spirited responses due to the fact that the disease first struck already stigmatized populations: gay men, IV drug users and prostitutes.
Astronomer, Fred Hoyle, commented that, because of what appears to be a “monstrous series of accidents,” our universe is exquisitely fine-tuned for the evolution of life. In fact, says Hoyle, our universe looks just like a “put-up job,” as though somebody had been “monkeying” with the laws of physics.”[
Having sex with the same sex is usually a choice. Having a homosexual orientation is not. The homosexual orientation is not a lifestyle or preference. Nor is it a temporary condition, any more than a heterosexual orientation is a free choice or a temporary condition.