Recent orders
Describe a significant social or technological event of the 20th century
Effects of Landing on the Moon
Name:
Institution:
Effects of Landing on the Moon
For centuries, man was fascinated with the idea of walking on the moon. In 1969, Neil Armstrong, an American Astronaut, changed this fantasy to reality by setting the first human footprint on the moon. This pioneering technological feat by the Apollo 11 crew inspired further cosmic explorations and placed America in the annals of history and at the leading position in terms of technological innovations (Moroz, Huntress, & Shevalev, 2003). Landing on the moon propelled the industry response that was hitherto uneven, perhaps justifiably due to the lessons learned from the disappointments of previous missions. Space enthusiasm continues to grow across the globe as nations develop new planetary exploration techniques for economic, national security, and research purposes. Landing on the moon triggered a spirit of confidence in the human capital, opened up new opportunities for future explorations, and enhanced competition in modern society.
Landing on the moon takes credit for inspiring confidence in the human capacity to withstand even the perceived insurmountable challenges. Not only does the missions to the moon and other planets inspire confidence in people but also brings a sense of pride and positive perspective on the capacity to succeed in any mission. Notably, the emotional significance of landing on the moon emerges from the fighting spirit in people and their desire to explore new opportunities in other planets regardless of the challenges involved. On a wider context, modern planetary expeditions seek to find solutions to social, medical, and economic problems, and explain religious myths about the moon and other night sky objects (Steyaerta & Katzb, 2004). The new research findings from space explorations serve as unifying forces and boost the belief in people’s individual and collective strength.
Today, space explorations benefit society by providing new research and financial opportunities. Space entrepreneurs and explorers make profits by facilitating space travel and providing new information for planetary research. Several major airline companies like Virgin Galactic and Rocket Ship Tours create sophisticated crafts that facilitate space travel (Steyaerta & Katzb, 2004). These companies continue to grow in profit and popularity owing to the increase in the number of space enthusiasts. People wish to learn more about the abundant space and mineral resources available in the solar system that offer solutions to Earth problems. The potential for Mars to support human life and its iron rich soil are example of benefits that can be channeled towards helping the population and mineral limitations on earth.
Many nations engage in military, political, medical, and technological competition that stem from the Space Race. This popular rivalry, which resembles the Cold War, pitted the Soviet Union against America in the quest to achieve dominance over space explorations (Moroz, Huntress, & Shevalev, 2003). President Kennedy made a passionate appeal Americans to counter the Soviet’s dominance of space explorations by giving an inspiring speech to the nation to support its astronauts both morally and financially. This historic speech was not in futility because Armstrong set the first human footprint on the moon a decade later. Other nations perceived this as a challenge and trigger to modernize their space activities to surpass the American achievement. Today, nations rival one another on political, economic, social, medical, research and other issues as a result of the previous competition for space explorations dominance.
Landing on the moon opened up new frontiers for future exploration, inspired a belief in the unlimited human capital, and fueled rivalry among societies. People recount the successful mission to the moon and get a feeling of pride and inspiration to prevail over any hurdles in their endeavors. Modern space explorations open up numerous opportunities for further research to find solutions to problems on Earth and facilitate entrepreneurship for private gain. The enduring modern social, political, economic, and technological rivalries among nations are akin to the Space Race and the Cold War that pitted the Soviet Union against America.
References
Moroz, V., Huntress, T., & Shevalev, L. (2003). Planetary Missions of the 20th Century. Cosmic Research. Volume 40, Issue 5, pages 419-445.
Steyaerta, C. & Katzb, J. (2004). Reclaiming the space of entrepreneurship in society: geographical, discursive and social dimensions. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development: An International Journal, Volume 16, Issue 3, 2004, pages 179-196.
Descartes Philosophy on the Significance of the Body to the Mind
Name:
Instructor:
Course:
Date:
Descartes’ Philosophy on the Significance of the Body to the Mind
Mind-body problem is the nature of association between the soul and the consciousness. It is mainly addressed by Rene Descartes who was a great French philosopher and mathematician in the 17th century. In philosophy, mind-body problem studies the relationship between matter and the mind. His views about mind and body results in Cartesian dualism, a believe that sensory organs are the ones which pass inputs to the epiphysis in the brain and then to the immaterial spirit. He also believed that the body is controlled by the mind through the pineal gland which is the principal organ where all thoughts are formed. Due to Cartesian dualism, different styles have emerged most being dualist and monist. Dualism ensures a rigid differentiation exist between the two organs (body-mind). Monism on the other hand measures the uniformity body and mind. Monism exists in three forms that is physicalism, idealism and neutral monism. Physicalism states that the mind is made up of matter arranged organized in a structured format while idealism holds that the existence of matter is an illusion that only exists in our thoughts. In neutral monism, matter and the soul are only unique essence that is identical to none of these two organs.
Descartes further asserts that the spirit and matter are distinct kinds of substance. He categorizes minds as unintended, thinking and feeling substances while bodies as extended substances incapable of feeling or thought. Substance dualism for example holds that mind/soul is made from uncommon type of substance which is not governed by either law of physics. On the other hand, property dualism entails that thou laws of physics are valid universally, therefore not fit in explaining the mind. However, it is difficult to identify how they could causally interact if they are radically different kinds of substance as argued in Princess Elizabeth’s letter.
Mind-body interaction plays a critical role in pretheoretic conception of agency since human soul can be able to determine the movement of animal spirits in the body in order to do voluntary acts being a conscious substance. Mental causation also aids in the formulations of the dualism relationship between matter and spirit/mind. Psychological explanation further defines the intelligibility of mental causation whereby if ones beliefs and desires are causally isolated from his or her bodily behavior, then what goes on his or her mind could not explain what he or she does. As a result, moral responsibility will be noticed if psychological explanation goes through hence leading to a satisfactory solution to the problem of mental causation.
On the other hand, Leibniz being a rationalist philosopher was also committed in his two theses about mind body perception.
Firstly, he argued that the spirit/soul has specific innate ideas. Secondly, he believed as well in the sufficient reason theory whereby everything has a reason for its cons and pro. Due to his principle having huge metaphysical consequences, it led him to state that the existence of the world is explained by the theological principles of God. Leibniz claims of reason therefore had some consequences about the metaphysics and nature that deals with fundamental questions on the existence of casual existence relationship between our thoughts and physical nature. He advanced the theory of pre-established harmony in order to respond to the body-mind nature of association. The theory stated no interaction between substances whereby the mind proceeded and unfolded respective to its own laws. Moreover, the body moved irrespective of the governing principles with such movement being in a perfect harmony state. He believed that there are simple substances called monads which are mind-like beings with forces that man all phenomena. As a result, space and time aid in cradle of the bodily phenomena since simple substances man matter and motion philosophy.
Szasz focuses on in the body-mind differential principles. He views the body and mind as separate concepts representing different types of phenomena. In his argument, both the soul and the mortal body cannot take the same direction, for instance sickness, as the mind is just but a metaphoric creature. Mind and body are therefore not only separated but two distinct object that function independently and responding differently to environmental variables. He further points out that from the ego’s point of view; the mind is part of the body. Mind and body are inseparable and distinguishable by double aspectism. There is a sort of separate mind and body since experimental and cognitive aspects can be differentiated from physical aspects. Physical brain constitutes the mind. The brain forms a critical body part which is a physical attribute of epiphenomenalism. The physical body affects the mind but the mind has no influence on matter/body. For instance, had the body been a TV, the mind would picture when the TV is switched on/off. Hence, this only affects the mind in picturing being a TV and the body. Therefore, any mental event has no influence on the activity of the brain.
Consequently, the body-mind relationship can be seen through physicalism, substance dualism and dual aspect theory. Materialism is the perception that the spirit and the soul have a link with matter and can be reduced to matter. Substance dualism explains mind and body as distinct substances which are unique whereby mind is un-extended and body extended. Using Nagel’s perception, mental properties cannot be reduced to physical properties pertaining dual aspect theory but they are two different ways of looking at the same thing. Dualism and mutualism of the mind has been in existence since the times of Plato and Aristotle. Dualism has been the driving force for the existence of the mind and body problem. Perception of the soul has influence over the body is beneficial since the body can heal whereas the mind expedites recovery. In our everyday activities, the mind frequently displays wonders of thought, memory, logic and creativity. It therefore has power to do great things.
Mind and body affect the human interaction as well. During interaction, both the body and mind have influence over each other because they are both involved in the interaction. According to Descartes, it is the space extension that makes us physical creatures and our ability to think is what constitutes our mental being. His words Cogito Ergo Sum implied to mean “I think, therefore I am” creates a problem since the mind exists a separately from the body with no physical association. Occasionalism explains the relation of mind and body. In many occasions, it seems that God keeps watching over us daily and makes things happen with the mind instructing the body. It solves the problem of how the mind and the body affect one another. Its weakness is the assumption that God watches over us daily.
Explanation of body-mind with reference to circular causation sounds more appropriate and relevant than linear causation. Different correlations have been studied in neuroscience between brain activity and conscious experiences. Consciousness which is a biological process of molecular signaling and interaction of the nerve cells therefore remains a challenge since relating it directly to brain activities is difficult and yet to be proven as a process. However, daily science increasingly gets interested in human perception, action and thinking. It dwells on how the human body interacts with its surroundings and the way in which those particular interactions shape the mind of a human body. This is evident in the Cartesian divide between the immaterial mind and the material existence of human beings (Damasio, 1994). A study of bodily actions provides a bridge across the mind-body relation. This is because they neither react to external stimuli nor indications of mental states which only contain relationships to the features of the action. On the other hand, parallelism shows the non-existence of a relationship between matter and the immortal mind. When one’s mind decides dictate the body rhyme, it becomes a coincidence that the body walks over there. They only appear to. This therefore brings in mind the body-mind correlation concept as described by God in the case of Leibniz in Pre-established Harmony.
Descartes believed that reason is a gift every human being poses and that knowledge cannot be only be attained by books
Name
Course
Professor
Date
Philosophy
Question oneDescartes believed that reason is a gift every human being poses and that knowledge cannot be only be attained by books, but through the application of reasoning. His books presented complex scientific and philosophical ideas in a way that only the least sophisticated readers could understand. Due to his believe that every human being possessed the gift of reason, he believed that every human being would understand his arguments in his books. He at sometimes wrote his books in French and not in Latin so that people with formal education could easily understand him. In his evil demon conjecture, he stated that an evil demon is capable of tricking us to believe that the world we all perceive with all our senses is real. However, even in such instances, there is no one point when a human being is not thinking and due to these thinking, then human beings exist (Cogito ergo sum).Question twoSpinoza believed that there existed no dualism between God and the whole world. There is no need of people going beyond the present experience to seek for a being existing outside it. He said that God moves and often lived in nature. The entire universe is god. Nature or God can be interpreted as its own cause and is often self sufficient. Man in his egoistic ways has tried in all ways to imagine that God is like him and that GOD acts in the interest of man at all times. However, according to him, God does not love or hate. The nature of God is different from us and from our dreams and aspirations or interests. Therefore, human beings should stop equating themselves from God because He is infinite and self sufficient. There is no way man can equate themselves to God because God is above everything. He created everything in the universe himself.Question threeIn his theory to be is to be perceived, Berkeley concludes that all that individuals know about an object is only the perception of it. Individuals rarely think or know an object unless it is perceived by the mind. Since individuals are capable of perceiving other human beings in the way that they speak, he can only believe in their existence and in the whole world being identical to every individual. Thus, the assumption is that the world is analyzed with all the five senses and it often impossible to perceive the world without the five senses. We cannot make sense of an object or situation unless we perceive it. This theory was criticized by many due to the fact that he said we can only know an object by perceiving it. Question fourHe did not believe in innate ideas that an individual is born with. He said that our minds are often in a blank state. Experiences through senses and all our reflections filled this slate. He came up with distinction of simple and complex ideas. Simple ideas are those ideas originating from the senses which cannot be broken down. Complex ideas, on the other hand, are a combination of all simple ideas. From these two ideas, one could know the primary and all the secondary qualities of an object. All objects have specific attributes that may fall in either the primary or the secondary qualities. Primary qualities are found in the object and are objective because they are perceived by almost every individual. Secondary qualities are all attributes that the perceiver brings to the object. These are subjective because everyone brings different qualities to the objects. Thus, his theory of representative realism came from all these ideas. The world represents the entire external world but does not necessarily duplicate it. Instead of experiencing the world first hand, we first experience it indirectly via representations.Question fiveLeibniz explained that the world is made of infinity of many simple substances known as the monads which were characteristic of his rationalistic views. Aggregates are built from these simple things which according to him are elements of all true reality. Simple substances were incapable of being created or destroyed. Thus, Leibniz entails that monads are composites which are classified as a collection of simples. These simples cannot be broken down of their constituent parts due to their smaller magnitude thus they are true atoms of nature. This means that they are the main constituents of our universe due to them lacking parts. Due to this, they are the only true identities. These monads must possess certain qualities or they cease to exist. Due to their unique status, they must possess qualities different from other monads.Question sixHume asks us to consider what impression brings about our conception of the self. Human beings tend to perceive themselves as selves- independent and stable entities existing over time. However, no matter how hard we examine our own personal experiences, we do not observe anything that is beyond our feelings, sensations and also our impressions. It is impossible to observe ourselves in a unified way. There is no particular binding that brings our specific impressions together. We can never be aware of ourselves but only aware of our experiences at a certain time. Thus, the self is only a bundle of perceptions. This may be due to our attribution of our existence to a collection of associated parts. This belief is mainly natural with no known logical explanation.Question seven
Hume made an observation that many people acknowledge a conjunction between two events. However, there is no way to establish a connection. This makes him argue against the concept of cause and effect. People assume that one thing causes another, but there is also the possibility that one event does not cause another. He claims that causation is only a question of association which is unfounded and also a meaningless belief. When we experience two events following each other repeatedly, we tend to associate them with cause and effect and this is only logical. The instinctive belief of causality is rooted in our biological concepts such that it is very difficult to erase. By accepting out limitations, we can deal with this situation by functioning without abandoning all our beliefs about cause and effect.Question eightKant achieves the Copernican revolution by turning all his focus of philosophy from metaphysical speculation of the reality nature to critically examining the nature of the thinking and the perceiving mind. He acknowledges that reality is a joint that creates external reality and the human mind. We can only acquire knowledge by regarding the latter. To solve the problem presented by Hume, he rubbishes the idea that the mind is a blank state. The mind not only receives information but also shapes the acquired information. Knowledge is, therefore, not something that is created externally and then introduced into the mind. Rather, it is created by the mind by filtering various sensations using the faculties of our mind. Thus, individuals only grasp knowledge in its general form informing our experiences.Question nineIf Hume’s arguments are true, then science and knowledge have implications in general. This is because science tends to make us believe that events occur in conjunction. Science makes us tend to believe in causation and effect. This can be detrimental to human beings because even in the events where causation and effect relationship does not exist, people will only believe in their existence because science suggests so. On the other hand, knowledge may inhibit an individual from believing in their perception. An individual with a considerable level of knowledge will tend to believe that they are independent entities. This is not right according to Hume because our personal experiences originate from our senses.Question tenTo exist independently means that one is stable alone without the help of others. Individuals do not have necessarily to depend on any other person’s ideas or perceptions. What other people tend to perceive us or say about us does not bother us. Individuals tend to think of themselves in a certain way and that is how they live for the rest of their lives. What other scholars have written or what other individuals close to us say is not put into much consideration. Every individual can operate on their own with what they perceive as right according to their own ethical beliefs.