Descartes Free Will Essay

In Meditations on First Philosophy Descartes attempts to explain the cause of errors in human beings. Descartes says that error occurs â€Å"since the will extends further than the intellect† (Descartes p. 39). That’s because our intellect is something that is finite; it is limited to the perception of only certain things. Whereas our will, ability to choose is not limited; it is has an infinite capacity. Therefore we sometimes attempt to will things which we do not have a complete understanding of. Descartes’ argument, as I will briefly describe, is quite sound, if you agree to all his conditions (being that the intellect is limited and the will infinite). I am not, as of yet, sure if I necessarily agree to the later of his two conditions. I will strive to evaluate different discernments of what will is, and if it is truly free. Then apply it to his argument. But first let me explain Descartes’ argument on the causation of errors. Descartes’ discussion begins in saying that â€Å"errors depend on the simultaneous concurrence of two causes: the faculty of knowing that is in me and the faculty of choosing† (Descartes p. 38). I will first tackle the faculty of knowing, or intellect. Descartes says that it merely perceives and understands ideas, which can later have judgment passed on them (see Descartes p. 38). The intellect is limited and finite because it can occur in different degrees. While some people have a simple understanding of a language others have a mastery of its grammar and syntax. But no one can have a mastery of all the mysteries of the universe. Then there is the faculty of choosing, as Descartes calls it, or rather the will. Descartes says that he â€Å"experience[s] that it is limited by no boundaries whatever† (Descartes p. 38). It is seen as infinite because unlike the intellect is does to adhere to different grades. It exists merely as a matter of being able to do or not to do something; to affirm or deny something proposed by one’s intellect (see Descartes p. 38). In some cases one’s will is unable to make such a decision, Descartes says, not because of a fault in the will but rather because the intellect is lacking complete knowledge of the situation (see Descartes p. 39). It is here that one should be indifferent to passing judgment. If in such a instance indifference is not the outcome an error is most likely to occur. Descartes says that this error will occur only when both work together because alone they cannot produce error. That’s because intellect, in and of itself, only perceives ideas which one knows and error would only occur if one tried to perceive ideas he did not know, which is impossible. The other, the will, in that it acts of itself, is only a utility of choice which alone cannot error. Therefore error and sin occur when both intellect and will work with each other. It is the disproportion between the limit of the will and the intellect that causes blunders. The will, as I’ve stated, is a limitless aspect of ourselves and therefore can pass judgment on any proposition brought forth. But the intellect can only clearly perceive and understand very few propositions. As Descartes says it is where I â€Å"extend it (the will) to things I do not understand† (Descartes p. 39) that error is caused. That’s because one is, instead of acting indifferent, passing judgment on things that are not clear in the intellect. A person can easily then turn away from the good and truth given to our intellect by God and partake in sin and deceit (see Descartes p. 39). The finally area that Descartes adds is that in some instances a person can pass judgment on things that aren’t understood and not produce an error. In those cases the person has still acted in an incorrect manor, but it is just be chance that the correct choice, or judgment was made (see Descartes p. 40). It is here that I have concluded Descartes’ argument and will now attempt to seek answers to my own questions: If the will is in fact as free as Descartes speaks? If it is actually comparable to that of God’s? And if it’s ideal state is the same as that of practical use? The first aspect I would like to navigate through is the constraints placed on the ability to choose. One does not have the opportunity to choose freely in an organized society, community or institute. There seems to always be a restriction to the actual amount of choices one has. If Descartes was correct in his assumption of complete freedom of choice and will every option would be available to someone at any given time, in any given situation. But this is not necessarily the condition. There are a few different examples that one can view to comprehend this facet of my argument. Take for instance, perhaps an extreme but an occurrence none the less, people born of poverty do not have the ability to choose to acquire certain things. It is impossible simply by the fact that they do not have the means to get it. There is no choice of purchasing a fifty dollar object if all one has is twenty dollars. I feel though that perhaps Descartes was speaking of another free will, a non-materialistic aspect. Another example one can then try to explain is how in many middle eastern nations individuals are born into a society where one religion is forced upon them. They must live to follow this religion or risk outcast by the community or even death. In such a decision one does not have the opportunity to choose to not follow the religion because, although it may seem available, most choices against the norm bring with them an extreme consequences. Is there really a free will if one knows a consequence to be so evil, or heinous that they really have no choice but to go with the other option. On the other hand if Descartes was strictly speaking of free will in the sense of judgment and affirmation another option arises. One should have the ability to, in a sense, will something even if its not available to him. For example if a person has been convicted of a crime and is going to be sent to prison he can will that he doesn’t have to go. Although here is seems that willing something is almost in a way the same as wishing it. But if it does follow that free will is only involved in passing judgment then a person can will whatever they want in their own mind, it doesn’t mean necessarily that they will receive it. But one again this illustration is somewhat similar to my previous two, in that, if in actuality a choice will provide no outcome is the choice even there and if not it’s a limited faculty. The definition of limitless qualities that Descartes affiliates with the will is something that is questionable as well. Descartes, in a sense, contradicts himself when he says that he can see man’s image and likeness to God in the ability to choose because both are infinite (see Descartes p. 38). But then says that â€Å"the faculty of willing is incomparably greater in God than it is in me† because of the power and knowledge God uses with it (ibid). So I ponder then if the ability to will cannot truly stand on its on, because by Descartes definition it passes certain judgment on something else, and that something in God is greater, how can one be equal to God. How can His infinite ability be greater than man’s infinite ability. By definition there are no degrees of infinite, there is only finite or infinite, limited or limitless. In such a practical aspect I must appeal to my reason and then say that we cannot have an equal will to that of God’s. I say this because God’s willing can partake on any area of knowledge and have a boundless consequence over many things. Where as man’s cannot. As I said, that was my practical deduction of our will in comparison to God’s. I was sure to state practical because I do feel there is a great difference between one’s free will in a practical sense and an ideal sense. Actually in the practical sense I will be so bold as to say one’s will is not free at all. All the examples I have given are practical uses of the will. And all of these examples seem limited for a number of reasons. As I already pointed out, I felt that the comparison between man’s will and God will not be equal because in practice will cannot stand unaccompanied. That is why the will is not free or infinite in a realistic way because it never stands by itself. It relies on other faculties that, as Descartes even says, are limited which in turn make it limited. Therefore when people are faced with choices, like in my examples, not all the options are available because of a lack of knowledge or perhaps a constraint placed on someone from his society. If the will was able to stand alone I would agree that it is an infinite faculty but it doesn’t. Hence I must also reason that the will Descartes speaks of is not the will that can be used in practice but rather it is an ideal will. In this ideal state people would be able to will anything they wanted, although they would most likely not receive it. In an ideal state I would have been able to will that I did not have to do this paper and not receive and F on it, but I very well know that would not have been possible. But the acting of willing alone would be free and infinite. I now must apply what I have learned to Descartes’ original argument of error. Since I have concluded that the ability to choose, or will that Descartes speaks of is ideal, this causation of error would also be ideal. Descartes said that when one should be acting indifferent to things and does not is when errors or correct choices by luck occur (see Descartes p. 39). Ideally this would be true, but in actuality many things lead to errors, and prevention of errors as well. Of course I do agree that in many cases mistakes are made because of people make judgments on things they have lack of knowledge of. But errors and sin can also occur when people have no other choice. For instance if a person is held at gun point and told to do something he may very well be passing a false judgment on something he has total knowledge of and in turn acting in error. From the other side of the argument Descartes says that to prevent himself from ever erring he must follow his feeling of indifference and stick with it instead of attempting to affirm or deny something (see Descartes p. 41). But I must also add to this argument that society does place constraints on things to prevent people from committing errors. Therefore it is not entirely internal. So I will conclude with saying that I have no choice but to say, from my reasoning, that in Meditation on First Philosophy Descartes speaks of a very ideal situation which would, in that state, hold true. But in the practical world one’s perception cannot be so narrow because there are many facets that contribute to what we can do and why we can do them. Works Cited Descartes, Rene. (1993). Meditations on First Philosophy . translated by Donald A. Cress. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Corp.

Did Alexander II deserve the title Tsar Liberator? Essay

A liberator is defined as someone who releases people from captivity or bondage. For Alexander II to deserve the title of Tsar Liberator he would have to have released the Russian people from bondage. In 1861 Alexander II passed the Ukase of the emancipation of the serfs, which saw the freeing of 40 million serfs. Whilst in theory this was a good idea in practice things didn’t work out as planned as there was no structure to how the process was carried out. The change came about for the wrong reasons instead of emancipating the serfs for the growth of industry in Russia, Alexander did it out of fear that if he didn’t abolish it from above it would be destroyed from below; he was simply trying to protect his autocracy. The emancipation was flawed, serfs were given plots of land that were 20% smaller than what they needed just to feed their family, they were expected to earn their own money selling the produce they had grown but they had no idea how to and were given no help. Serfs were also expected to pay for the plots of land they had been given over the course of 49 years; the average life expectancy was around 40 years so the debt was passed down through the family. As the population of Russia increased the size of land the serfs were given became smaller and smaller and so people were finding it increasingly difficult to be able to grow enough food to feed their family and have enough produce left over to sell in order to make loan repayments. Whilst Alexander II did in theory liberate the serfs they were still bound through the repayment of debt, so he would be unworthy of the title tsar liberator as he never truly released them. In 1864 Alexander II introduced a more modern western style legal system. This included the introduction of judges that could not be swayed by bribery, juries and courts. For the first time Russians were offered the chance of a fair trial, and a considerable freedom of expression. It was thought that due to this reform the court room became the only place in Russia that real freedom of speech prevailed. However any political cases were removed from courts and the Tsar’s secret police could still arrest people at will. This was a big step forward for Russia and does contribute to Alexander II deserving the title Tsar Liberator, but the reform was limited because not all cases could be taken to court, and the Tsar was still using his secret police to arrest whoever he liked. Next local government reforms that saw the introduction of Zemstavs and the Dumas that held local power over public health, prisons, roads, agriculture and education. This provided new opportunities for local political participation. But there were still imitations as the Tsar’s word was still law and he could overrule the Zemstavs any time he wanted, the Zemstav was not a equal representation of the public as it was made up of mainly gentry so peasants were not able to have their say, and the Zemstav was often short of money making them open to bribes from influential people. This reform would not earn Alexander II the title of Tsar Liberator, because although it was a good idea and a step towards liberating the public and letting them have their say, the system put in place was corrupt and was not an accurate representation of the population, therefore it did not liberate very many people and the Tsar still had an over ruling power in order to protect his autocracy. Alexander reformed the army in order to modernize and strengthen it. He reduced the length of conscription from 25 years to 6 years and introduced universal military service for all males over 20. This meant that people were becoming more skilled and disciplined and would have time to use these new found skills in the world outside of the army. By drastically cutting the length of conscription Alexander made being a part of the army less of a life sentence, thus releasing the Russian people. This action would make him worthy of the title Tsar Liberator as it left the Russian people free to experience life outside of the army. Censorship was relaxed and education policies became more liberal, meaning that university students were now able to learn about life outside of Russia and leave Russia in order to study. This liberated Russian scholars as they were able to learn about other places and about their governments and philosophy, but it caused an increase in student radicalism, and political instability. This in some cases lead to riots. This was liberating in the sense that it Russian became aware of a life outside of Russia, where allowed to talk about what was happening elsewhere and were able to leave Russia to study elsewhere. This would make Alexander II worthy of the title Tsar Liberator. Alexander II did not deserve the title of ‘Tsar Liberator’ because whilst some of his reforms could be seen as liberating the Russian public he was simply finding a new way to have a hold over them for example through debt. To truly be ‘Tsar Liberator’ Alexander would have had to give the public more of a say in how the county was ran, doing this would have destroyed his autocracy, which is something he was not willing to do.

Assignment on Management of Negotiations and Employee Relations Essay

Assignment on Management of Negotiations and Employee Relations - Essay Example Most of the furniture being sold by this company comes from Latin American countries such as Mexico, Central America, South America and the Caribbean. The company is one of the leading suppliers of exotic furniture in the country but it is currently experiencing some problems in terms of supplies. The selection process is almost through and I have been included in the company’s short list of applicants. During the second round of interviews, the human resource manager opened the topic of salary. The company made an offer which, although it is acceptable, it is not really what I have expected. I feel that with my qualifications, I deserve a better pay from the company. Since to my knowledge the company is interested in me and that the company has no rigid â€Å"first offer is the last offer policy†, I embarked into the negotiation process with the end goal of getting better salary and work conditions. When the human resource manager informs me of the company’s offer, I will ask for a little time to consider their offer then I will write a counter offer letter. My negotiation plan will be based on the mix model of negotiation which is creating and claiming value. To implement this negotiation model, I will need to know all the policies of the company regarding the hiring of new employees, the salary ranges and the benefits that they have to offer as well as the present financial status of the company. There is really no point of trying to negotiate something that the company cannot afford thus it is very important to learn more about the company’s financial status when negotiating for salaries. Counter offers are better set in writing so that the other party will know for certain what the stand of the other is. In my counter offer letter, I will express my great interest in working for the firm and how I could be a good asset to the company. I will let the human resource manager know that

Modern Buddhism Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Modern Buddhism - Research Paper Example Certain fragments of Buddhism became a part of the mainstream, turned into a politically correct element of Hellenic Polytheism of the postmodern age. It’s a wonder, but many forms of the modified Western Buddhism have become the norm: they are re-exported to Asia and, to some extent, change cultures in Buddhist countries. Global Buddhism was the result of western penetration in Asia and western understanding of Asia. Buddhism gradually transformed into a global intellectual and spiritual resource, open to universal use. This paper is focused on the history of Buddhism, its transformation and western variant, spiritual and political leaders. Buddhism is practiced by 6-8% of the world population, which is much inferior to Christianity (about 33%), Islam (about 18%) and Hinduism (approximately 13%). Buddhism is mostly Asian religion: 99 % of Buddhists live in Asia, in the eastern part of it. General periodization of the history of Buddhism includes 4 stages: 1) canonical Buddhis m (from its origin in the 6th millennium BC to the reign of Ashoka Maurya (3 BC)); 2) traditional or historical Buddhism (from Ashoka to the mid / late 19th century); 3) modern or revival Buddhism (from the late 19th century); and, finally, 4) global Buddhism. ... They are well distinguished if contrasted to a dynamic segment. This contrast can be seen on the example of separation of western Buddhist communities into originally born Buddhists and converts. Tension between ethnic groups and neophytes is so obvious that many suggest existence of two branches of Western Buddhism - traditional, passive Buddhism of ethnic diasporas and dynamic, active Western Buddhism of neophytes. Buddhism in Europe was popularized by the Hungarian Tibetologist Alexander Csoma de Koros (1784-1842) and French Indologist Eugene Burnouf (1801-1852). Choma de Koros was just a lone researcher. Burnouf managed to create one of the most powerful Buddhist schools in the world. Burnouf studied Mahayana, translated and published Saddharma Pundarika Sutra in 1852. His main work is Introduction to the History of Indian Buddhism (1844). It contains translations of Sanskrit texts, as well as the first characteristics of Maha-Prajna-Paramita and Lankavatara sutras. He considered that the main benefit of Buddhism study is its contrast with Christianity thanks to which we can better understand the latter. Modern Buddhism became popular and widespread in America thanks to the Beat Generation and the Hippies who happily practiced this peaceful religion. The very combination of words â€Å"Buddhistic fundamentalism† seems irrelevant: compared with the Abrahamic religions, Buddhism has no concept of dogma, orthodoxy and heresy. Buddhism has no ontological dualism of righteousness and sin and, therefore, there is no sharp division into believers and disbelievers, chosen ones and infidels; there is no division of the world into dar-al Islam and Dar al Harb (territory of peace and territory of war). Buddhism does not claim a monopoly on truth. That’s why

Protesting inequality - Harassment and protest in India Essay

Protesting inequality - Harassment and protest in India - Essay Example In India, women are married young, become young mothers at a young age that then burdens them with stringent financial and domestic responsibilities. A great number of women in India are malnourished as traditionally they should be the last to eat and last to receive medical attention. In relation to education 76%, men in India are educated while only 54% of women are educated; they receive little or no schooling and suffer from unfair and biased divorce and inheritance laws. To generate change the Indian people use the anti-reservation protests, in these protests, they push for integration of women into all the sectors mostly education, and also push for a revision of the existing policies. Other tactic people use to improve the conditions for women is the use of social media. In these, the people understand that the media possesses immense power in regard to influencing masses. In these, they ensure that the media covers all the women issues in India bringing them open to the publi c. In India, Television is one of the pervasive and powerful media that women use to ensure that their message is communicated to the public. Faithful patriots: religion and nationalism Islam is the official religion in Pakistan; the country has the second largest Muslim population after Indonesia. The 2007 census found that 96% of Pakistanis total population was Muslim with 20% being Shia and 76% Sunni. Historically, Islam arrived in Pakistan back in 711CE, after Umayyad dynasty sent a Muslim Arab army against the ruler of Sindh.

Marine engineering Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Marine engineering - Essay Example This actuator C is the one that controls the forming operation labeled as (1) in the diagram. In order to return the actuator C to its normal position, solenoid C- is operated through a Normally Opened Contact (R1). However, on its way back through the cylinder, actuator C comes into close proximity of sensor TC- which leads to operation of actuator labeled D under the effect of solenoid D+. The actuator D is used to control forming operation (2). Another normally opened contact (R2) is then used to return actuator D back to its normal position under the effect of solenoid D-. Later on, when the sensor TD- has been activated, actuator B is returned to its original position by the effect of solenoid B-. Meanwhile, sensor TB- is activated by the actuator B which leads to operation of actuator A, which returns to normal position, through effect of solenoid A-. This effectively summarizes the working of the

Statement Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 2

Statement - Essay Example However, even after trying to think really hard, I could not remember anything. As I tried to move on to the next questions, I realized that in order to complete the following questions, I have to clearly understand the meaning of nominal interest rate. I started to get nervous and worried. The more I tried thinking about the importance of the definition of nominal interest rate to the rest of the questions, the more I felt nervous and confused. I lost my mind, did not think straight, and made a terrible decision ever, which was using my cellphone to search the definition on the internet. Immediately I got out the classroom I realized that I just made a terrible mistake and felt that I had the responsibility to acknowledge the mistake. I went directly to TA’s office told her the truth as well as at May 10th meeting. I have been feeling so regretful and disturbed by what I did. Although the TA did not catch me, the grade I got from cheating is dishonest and I do not deserve it. I even brought shame to my family, as they were both very shocked and astonished about my action. I feel that my bad behavior deserves to be punished. However, I have been studying in NEU for three years and already had a strong personal connection with NEU and the city of Boston. Truly, this is the only place I want to stay and study. I can even remember the day I got admission letter from NEU and without any hesitation, I chose NEU over Ohio State. I always dream about wearing the trencher graduate cap from NEU proudly. I promise that I will not violate any other academic conduct in the future. To ensure that I will not cheat in the exam again, I will enroll in next year’s tutoring program. Additionally, I will get some private tutors so that I will be fully prepared for the exam. This will help me avoid more pan ic or confusion in the exam room. I promise that after this experience, I will never let the school, my parents, or myself down. I hope NEU can