True Knowledge - Descartes vs Plato free essay sample

Many philosophers have tried to figure out what exactly true knowledge is. For years they have been asking questions and looking deep into the mind to better understand the methods needed to get to true knowledge. If we go back to some of the earliest philosophers we meet Plato in Greece. Plato tried to take on the question himself in a fictional conversation he wrote up between Socrates and Meno, and in which we see some insight to what he believes it is. In the conversation Socrates asks the question of what virtue really is. Meno tries to answer by giving a very specific answer as to what virtue was within Greek society of that day, but Socrates then replies that although one who follows what Meno said is considered to be a virtuous person, it still does not define virtue itself. After a while of conversation Meno gets frustrated and gives up, as they could not come to a true definition of virtue. We will write a custom essay sample on True Knowledge Descartes vs Plato or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Socrates (Plato) then explains that in order to really know something you have to be able to reason and withhold the Socratic conversation (kind of like a devil’s advocate conversation) in which they discuss the concept at question and bounce back and forth until there is a real answer. Socrates then goes on to say that inside every person’s soul and mind is knowledge they carry with them from their past lives. They know everything already and when they learn it is merely a recollection. True knowledge is really already in our minds but just has to be brought out. Socrates then demonstrates this with a slave and some mathematical equations, but also tries to show the difference between true belief and true knowledge as at one point the slave boy believed he was write, but wasn’t. Plato comes to say that even though one may have true belief in something he still may not truly know that that something is true. Later on a French philosopher, Renà © Descartes, comes along and tries to answer the question of true knowledge on his own. He derives that a lot of what people think is true knowledge, can be doubted, and that it isn’t really true knowledge. If one person comes along and says â€Å"I know there is a god† but another man comes along and says† no, I know there is no god!† how can they both know? Only one of these men can have true knowledge. Descartes wr ites that in order for something to really be true knowledge it must have three elements to it. First, he says, is that it must be true. Then although it is  true, one must also believe it. Then the last, and probably most important thing that makes something true knowledge, according to Descartes, is that it must be something that cannot be doubted by anyone, because if there is any doubt, than it is possible it can be false, and therefore not true knowledge. Descartes also about the method known as hyperbolical/metaphysical doubt which he uses (but it is really just a fancy way of saying he was a skeptic). He comes to the conclusion that one of the things that he really can’t doubt is that his mind exists, because if he doubts, then doubt obviously has to come from somewhere, and that is the existing mind. Unlike the mind however, we can’t always be so sure of the body existing, as it is proven to us via our senses. He then writes that sometimes even though we may believe something because our senses all point to it, it doesn’t mean it is true because our senses can be doubted, as they do some times mislead us. Descartes also brings up the perception of reality in dreams. Sometimes we can be fooled by our senses and think we have true knowledge of something but it may only be a dream we are fooled to believing. If something can even be doubted in the most obscure and smallest way, then to Descartes it cannot be accepted as true knowledge. Both Philosophers seemed to have different perspectives of what true knowledge really is and what methods are necessary to get to it. Even though the opinions differ, they also share some similarities and Descartes must’ve definitely taken a thing or two away from Plato’s writings which came before him. Both philosophers, although using different methods to get at it, discuss how true knowledge must be undisputed for the most part. If someone can come and either doubts you, or reasons against something you said was true knowledge, then it can’t be true knowledge. Both methods involve conversations in which the person believing he has true knowledge would truly come to see that it wasn’t in fact true knowledge. Both Plato and Descartes also believed that true knowledge was in the mind, Plato in that it’s all there from previous lives; and Descartes in that it must come from your mind, and not your sense, because your mind cannot be doubted. When it c omes to differences Plato, unlike Descartes, likes to talk things out in reason and doesn’t shut people down, rather let them notice that they are wrong by asking questions. Descartes isn’t like that; he is much more of a skeptic and just doubts everything and everyone. Descartes also likes to  discuss issues of objective concepts such as nature and the self as opposed to concepts that are subjective like issues of the society around him that Plato liked to discuss in his writings. When I first signed up for philosophy class I was dreading coming to it, I thought it would be a bunch of random stupid ideas that I would have to read from people that have been dead for years. After reading both philosophers’ writings my idea on philosophy had changed completely. The writings of Plato and Descartes alone had taught me a lot about knowledge and the process of learning. Although I believe that a lot of things they had wrote aren’t so true, such as Plato’s theory of recollection, and Descartes’ skeptic doubts of our senses and god, I still think a lot of what they discussed is valid and applicable to life and reasoning still today. Plato’s Socratic dialogues give light to a lot of the ways people have good constructive arguments even today. It also teaches people to not just believe things we are told but to apply logic and use our minds that were given to us. If we doubt and search for answers, we are more likely to understand things better for ourselves. When ideas come from our own minds they are more concrete as opposed to when we just take others’ words and just accept them. The mind is such a powerful tool it would be a real shame to waste it.

Social policy as an academic subject is both descriptive and analytical Essays

Social policy as an academic subject is both descriptive and analytical Essays Social policy as an academic subject is both descriptive and analytical Essay Social policy as an academic subject is both descriptive and analytical Essay Payne, Sarah. , Sullivan, Michael. ( 2004 ) Introducing Social Policy, England: Pearson Education Limited Alcock. Pete. ( 2008 ) The Subject of Social Policy , p. 3 in Alcock, Pete. , May, Margaret and Rowlingson, Karen ( explosive detection systems ) , The Students Companion to Social Policy, 3rd erectile dysfunction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Baldock, John. , ( 2007 ) Welfare, Ideology, and Social Theory in Baldock, John. , Manning, Nick. , Vickerstaff, Sarah. , ( explosive detection systems ) Social Policy 3rd erectile dysfunction, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Becker Saul. ( 2008 ) Methods and Approaches in Social Policy Research in Alcock, Peter, May. Margaret and Rowlingson, Karen. , ( explosive detection systems ) The Students Companion to Social Policy 3rd erectile dysfunction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Blakemore, Kenneth ( 2003 ) Social Policy an Introduction 2nd erectile dysfunction, Berkshire: Open University Press Bochel, Hugh ( 2005 ) Introducing Social Policy in Bochel, Hugh. , Bochel, Catherine. , Page, Robert and Sykes, Rob. , Social Policy: Issues and Developments, Essex: Pearson Education Limited. Carlson, Judith ( 2004 ) Theoretical Principles and Concepts in Alcock, Cliff. , Payne, Sarah. , Sullivan, Michael. , Introducing Social Policy, Essex: Pearson Education Limited Considine, Mair A ; eacute ; ad. , Dukelow, Fiona. , ( 2009 ) Irish Social Policy, A Critical Introduction Dublin: Gill A ; Macmillan Ltd Fitzpatrick, Tony ( 2001 ) Welfare Theory: An Introduction, Campling, Jo ( adviser editor ) London: Palgrave George, Vic. , Wilding, Paul. , ( 1994 ) Welfare and Ideology Essex: Prentice Hall Europe Hartnoll, Richard ( 2004 ) Drugs and drug dependance: linking research, policy and pattern, background paper for Pompidou Group s Strategic Conference on linking research, policy and pattern, Strasbourg. Germany: Koelblin-Fortuna-Druck Lavalette, Michael. , Pratt, Alan. , ( explosive detection systems ) ( 1998 ) Social Policy A Conceptual and Theoretical Introduction, London: Sage Publications Inc Spicker, Paul ( 2008 ) Social Policy Themes and Approaches 2nd erectile dysfunction, Bristol: The Policy Press Titmuss, Richard. ( 1974 ) The International Perspective , in Abel-Smith, Brian and Titmuss, Kay ( explosive detection systems ) , Social Policy an Introduction, London: Unwin Hyman Ltd

Water Privatization in Argentina Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Water Privatization in Argentina - Essay Example Owing to the presence of outstanding externalities, there is the need for the proper elimination of sanitation residuals that taint the sector. Water privatisation seeks to participation of the private sector with regard to provision of sanitary and water services to residents of the said region. The concept of water privatisation has remained controversial the world over, with the proponents presenting the efficiency and quality services delivered. Privatisation in the water industry often entails three aspects namely outsourcing, design, building and operation, and asset sale. This way, private companies can be contracted to provide various water and sanitary services in accordance to the stipulations agreed on. The companies are often required to design, build and operate a comprehensive system for the dispensation of water services to residents. The process also involves the release of government-owned assets or companies to the private sector for running and maintenance. This pa per seeks to highlight water privatisation in Argentina with regard to history and aspects relating to effects in the society. Privatisation was widespread throughout Latin America in the 1990s including Chile, Brazil, Bolivia, and Argentina to name but a few. During the early 1990’s privatization of services and liberalization of exchange and trade systems was regarded as an easy solution to the problems of deteriorating infrastructure and unbalanced public finances. These changes contributed to economic stability and increased growth as part of a program of direct foreign investment that began in 1995 until the late 1990’s when political instability and social tensions affected economic performance. Argentina forms a prime example of privatisation in the water sector that received backing from the International Monetary fund and the World Bank (Huey, 2010). The period between 1991 and 1999 saw the successful privatisation of water and sanitary services in Argentina t o covering 60% of the population in 28% of the countries municipals. Previously, water services had been under the management of public enterprises at the provincial level and as such, the government had no jurisdiction with regard to privatisation (Galiani et al, 2005).Under these circumstances, the country relied on a single company, ObrasSanitarias de la Nacion (OSN), to deliver water and sanitary services. The company held the largest operation in its mandate with regard to infrastructure and clientele. Seeing the need for change in the status quo, the World Bank exerted pressure on the Argentine government to decentralise the services (Olleta, 2007).The privatisation of OSN came about three years later after the initial appointment following restructuring changes that were required. A French company through its subsidiary, sought to purchase the government-run water company and establish a new company by the Aguas Argentinas. This move was aided by the World Bank who has stakes in the consortium as it funded the company in support of the comprehensive privatisation program. The company was charged with task of supplying clean water to the citizens as well as transporting and treating sewage. The company made returns on their investment and was regarded as a success owing to their enormous profits (Public Citizen, 2003). The concession contract was, however revoked in 2006 after 13 years of services to the citizens; with the main reason believed to contribute to the cancellation of the concession was the economic crisis in the years following 2000. The government argued that the company failed to achieve its targets as cited in the contract with regard