Aristotle Vs Plato Essays - Philosophy, Religion, Ontology

Aristotle Vs Plato Aristotle refutes Plato's Theory of Ideas on three basic grounds: that the existence of Ideas contradicts itself by denying the possibility of negations; that his illustrations of Ideas are merely empty metaphors; and that the theory uses impermanent abstractions to create examples of perception. Though the theory is meant to establish concrete standards for the knowledge of reality, Aristotle considers it fraught with inconsistencies and believes that the concept of reality depends upon all forms' correlation to other elements. Ideas, Plato believes, are permanent, self-contained absolutes, which answered to each item of exact knowledge attained through human thought. Also, Ideas are in Plato's view concrete standards by which all human endeavor can be judged, for the hierarchy of all ideas leads to the highest absolute - that of Good. In addition, the theory claims that states of being are contingent upon the mingling of various Forms of existence, that knowledge is objective and t hus clearly more real, and that only the processes of nature were valid entities. However, Aristotle attacks this theory on the grounds that Plato's arguments are inconclusive either his assertions are not al all cogent. Aristotle says, or his arguments lead to contradictory conclusions. For example, Aristotle claims that Plato's arguments lead one to conclude that entities (such as anything man-made) and negations of concrete ideas could exist - such as non-good in opposition to good. This contradicts Plato's own belief that only natural objects could serve as standards of knowledge. Also, Aristotle refutes Plato's belief that Ideas are perfect entities unto themselves, independent of subjective human experience. Ideas, Aristotle claims, are not abstractions on a proverbial pedestal but mere duplicates of things witnessed in ordinary daily life. The Ideas of things, he says, are not inherent to the objects in particular but created separately and placed apart from the objects thems elves. Thus, Aristotle says, Plato's idea that Ideas are perfect entities, intangible to subjective human experience, is meaningless, for all standards are based somewhere in ordinary human activity and perception. Thirdly, Aristotle assails Plato's efforts to find something common to several similar objects at once, a perfect exemplar of the quality those things share. Beauty is a perfect example; Plato considered Beauty both a notion and an ideal, isolated by abstractions and fixed permanently while its representatives fade away. Aristotle claims that abstractions like Beauty cannot be cast as absolutes, independent of temporal human experience; the Idea of Beauty changes with time and individual perceptions and cannot (as Plato felt) exist forever as a concrete standard. Plato and Aristotle reach some agreement, though, on the topic of reality. Plato believes that all reality was derived from his Ideas (which themselves dealt with concrete hierarchy of rational ideas. St. Anselm, though, makes the most dogmatic and logically tortuous case for God's existence, relying not upon explanations of goodness, truth, or rational order of ideas but upon an absurd argument. He claims that everyone has some sense of God, and he claims that for one to deny God's existence is an invalid and contradictory assertion; therefore, God exists. Also, Anselm believes that those capable of understanding God cannot believe that he does not exist as if the enormity of the idea was so clear than only a fool could not perceive it. His arguments seem the weakest of the four viewpoints here, for they are riddled with dogma and assume that God is a constant using faith alone. Anselm considers faith paramount to logic or other forms of thought and asks no questions as to what powers the universe or what goodness is - he basically follows the Christian party line too closely to be valid. In general, St. Augustine combines Plato's idea of a moral hierarchy with his own rational observation s of truth and goodness being embodied in their highest form by God. While Plato wavers on God's superiority, Aristotle views man as god's pawn, and Anselm uses tortuous dogmatic logic, Augustine's arguments seem to make the most sense from not only a Christian point of view but from a moral and rational one as well. The philosophies of Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustine, and St. Anselm on the existence of God all vary on the issue

Censorship and the Communications Decency Act essays

Censorship and the Communications Decency Act essays Censorship and the Communications Decency Act Censorship: suppression of words, images, or ideas that are offensive. Offensive: giving painful or unpleasant situations. These two words can easily be looked up and defined when having to use them in a paper, but trying to describe what should be censored and what is offensive is a daunting task. There have always been huge debates over censorship that aims at the First amendment and whether it is constitutional for a group of people to decide what is right for the people. Even before World War I, there were attacks on what was considered offensive material. Anthony Comstock, head of the Society for the Suppression of Vice, passed the first censorship law in 1873. The law forbade the mailing of anything, in his opinion, lewd, obscene or indecent. (Zelezny, 453) The controversy over censorship raged feverishly after WWI and until the Tariff Act of 1930, many literary classics were not allowed into the United States because of the obscenity contained in them. Over a 15-year period, which began in 1957, the Supreme Court made relaxed restrictions on obscene material. Supreme Court decisions struck down many obscenity statues, states responded by enacting laws prohibiting the sale of obscene materials to minors, and the Supreme Court upheld them. In 1973 and 1987, the Court decided that local governments could ban works if they were without serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value and were seen by local standards to appeal to prurient interest. The case of Miller v. California (1973), 413 U.S. at 24-25, tried to define and categorize what obscene and offensive meant. The courts invented what was known as the Miller Test. This test contained three parts, which constituted a guideline to isolate hard core pornography and if each one of these parts was proven in court, the material could be l...