A simple definition of the word causality may be: the principle or relationship between cause and effect, the agency of a cause; the action of a cause in producing its effect. Discussing the nature of causality, however, is far more complicated then the definition implies. What is the cause of a stone falling to the ground when it is thrown? “ Is it the muscular movement of the hand, the law of gravity, the nature of the stone, as opposed for example to a feather, the will of the person who throws it, or the potential in each case that God has endowed them with.”
In this paper I will attempt to analyze and compare the views of two infamous Islamic philosophers, Averroes and Alghazali, on the controversial issues on causality. Aristotle came up with an accepted distinction between four levels of causes: material cause, formal cause, efficient cause, and final cause. The material cause is what the object is made up of. The formal cause is what makes the object be what it is. The efficient cause is what acts in order to make something exist. And the final cause is why something is what it is and what the end purpose is for a change produced within. In studying philosophy, the efficient cause is the type of cause that lies at the heart of debate on causality. In the above example the efficient cause would be the act of throwing the stone. Averroes and Alghazali have contrasting views on this aspect of causality. In this paper I will offer a short summary of the lives of these two men, discuss their contrasting views on causality, and express my own opinion as well. Read more…
Most people don’t seem to put much thought into what they think. Hmmm…. Sounds strange, but it’s true. You never really have an opinion on something until you sit down and think about it. You might have some notions of an opinion, but not a working theory. It seems that the best way to think about things is to either talk about them with someone else, read about them in someone else’s writing, or write about it yourself. I like to discuss things with people, but I never seem to be able to work out an entire “thought” without sitting down and writing about it. I’ve never had an excessive amount of patience for reading other peoples’ philosophical writings. For the most part, I like to figure out what they’re trying to say, but the act of reading usually puts me to sleep. There seems to be something about reading philosophy that hits me like a pound of turkey dinner. Damn triptophane.
Because of this inability to read through actual philosophy books, I never seem to get much more out of a philosophy class than the overall idea and a pile of books that I haven’t read. Actually, I think this gives me a kind of pure perspective. The theories I come up with are usually pretty original. Interesting things come from working in a vacuum. I am usually hailed for my original thoughts, but graded down because I write things at the last second and get a somewhat indecipherable product. It all makes sense to me when I write it, so I just keep going. Hopefully, the things I write here will make a little more sense, as I probably won’t be able to resist the temptation to mess around with them at every possible oppurtunity. I can’t seem to just let this homepage sit. Read more…
The Book of Daniel is a spectacular post-modern novel that goes beyond and above most books I have read. Its dense philosophic message aligned with its rich experimental and original narrative, embodies Doctorow?s exceptional magnitude as a writer. In his rewriting of historical events with an insightful subjective approach, he touches upon central issues in the state of modern American culture and the postmodern age.
The Book of Daniel is a work of metafiction that interweaves the narrator’s imagination with factual events within the context established by the real political and social conditions in post-war America in the 1950s . The background for this work of fiction is the famous and controversial case of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg who in an age of McCarthyism were tried, convicted and executed for conspiracy to commit espionage against America. With this as the fixated point of reference, The Book of Daniel becomes a complex mixture of both subjectivity and objectivity, using the historical accounts of the Rosenberg case as its framework and fictitious imagination as its substance, its life. Read more…
Michel Foucault, a master-mind behind the social philosophy, is considered to be one of the most deceptive philosophers of all time. His main focus on social philosophy is its affect on the economical power. Foucault’s ideas about bio-power have changed the way society views the world. Bio-power is the idea of power over life which means that the source of power emerged from all levels of society. In earlier times rulers and different forms of government have controlled all aspects of its citizens and gave them no leeways on how to lead their own lives. Then in the beginning of the nineteenth century things changed and people fought back against the controlling governments and gave themselves power. This means that the society started to have more control and direction over their own lives instead of being controlled by a ruler or by some form of a government.
Bio-power is a new form of power that gives us a place in social structure. It unconsciously tries to control the whole population. Bio-power makes us mark ourselves according to what normalization is. It forces us to use self-surveillance in order to see how others see you as. Read more…
I. Western Philosophy
Western philosophy first came about when a philosopher named Thales, who was born in approximately 585 B.C., became the first man to think outside the box and sway away from using myths and gods as the answer for all intellectual questions. Known as the first Greek philosopher, Thales initiated a way of understanding the world that was based on reason and nature (Sullivan). Once he revealed this whole new way of philosophizing, Western philosophy was born. There are many different subjects that Western philosophy covers, including logic, natural philosophy, ethics, poietics, and metaphysics. Philosophy can be described as the certain knowledge of things through their ultimate causes seen in the light of the principles of reason (Sullivan).
Western philosophy consists of expanding the mind and exercising the intellect. It differs from other types of philosophy because it is the only type that analyzes things to such a certain extreme. For example, under Western philosophy, the very question of what is beauty? is brought up under the subject of poietics. While a normal human being living today would not really think twice about what is beautiful, Western philosophers such as St. Thomas Aquinas suggest that the beautiful can be reduced to the good, nevertheless it differs from it in concept. It is a special kind of good that which pleases on being apprehended and he continues to go on and discuss the concept of both good and beauty (Sullivan). Read more…
