Descartes s Meditations On The Existence Of God - 929 Words

Descartes sets out in his meditations to prove that something exists beyond any doubt. He determines that the only way to prove anything outside of his mind is to prove the existence of his idea of God. The ideas that come from his process are interesting, but he doesn’t prove the existence of God is undeniable. Several arguments Descartes uses to claim God exists, don’t hold up to what he has proved up to that point in his meditations. The first being his use of the causal principle on which the rest of his argument seems to rely. Descartes begins the meditations in an effort to wipe out previous knowledge and rebuild it only on knowledge he can know without a doubt. Going through all he believes and deciding if he should still believe is too arduous a task so he goes through several steps and determines that everything can be doubted, even the science and mathematics we know. First he says we can’t trust what we know from our senses because they can deceive us, for example feeling a hat on your head after you remove it. He then says there is no way for him to believe any event because he could be dreaming. Sometimes when he dreams he thinks he’s awake so he knows his mind can’t tell the difference. Descartes remembers his idea of God and realizes God can do anything, including deceive him about what he thinks is real. He decides a perfect God wouldn’t deceive, so he imagines an evil genius creating us and deceiving us at all times. Now, he can put all previous knowledgeShow MoreRel atedThomas Aquinas vs. Descarates Essays673 Words   |  3 PagesAQUINA’S V. DESCARATES Meditation III Several hundred years ago, two great philosophers Thomas Aquinas’s and Rene Descartes used the method of ontological argument for the existence of God and used intuition and reason alone to get to each other’s theory. Rene Descartes wrote out several mediations, but the one we’re going to touch base on is meditation III that he wrote in the 1600’s; While Thomas Aquinas’s wrote his five proofs of God in 1270 that specifies God’s existence in each proof; the oneRead MoreDescartes Belief in God Essay1503 Words   |  7 PagesDescartes and God In his groundbreaking work, Meditations on First Philosophy, the French philosopher Rene Descartes lays the groundwork for many philosophical principles by attempting to â€Å"establish a bold and lasting knowledge† (171)1. The foundations for knowledge Descartes established would go on to influence a plethora of other philosophers and philosophical works. Descartes argues in his meditations first from the point of view of complete skepticism, using skepticism as a tool in order toRead MoreEssay about Descartes First Meditation924 Words   |  4 PagesDescartes#8217; first meditation, his main objective is to present three skeptical arguments to bring doubt upon what he considers his basic beliefs. Descartes believes this to be an intricate part of his complete epistemological argument. Descartes skeptical arguments are not intended to be a denial of his basic beliefs. On the contrary, he uses these arguments to help prove one of his main theses, which is the existence of God. One of the main premises that Descartes uses in his proof forRead MoreThe On First Philosophy By Rene Descartes1699 Words   |  7 PagesIn his work Meditations on First Philosophy, published in 1641, Renà © Descartes sets out to establish a set of indubitable truths for the sciences. He begins by discarding all of his beliefs, then works to rebuild his beliefs based on careful thought. Descartes clearly states this goal, saying in the First Meditation, â€Å"I will work my way up†¦ I will accomplish this by putting aside everything that admits of the least doubt† (I, 17). He is able to establish his own existence, but struggles to move beyondRead MoreDescartes Meditations On First Philosophy1080 Words   |  5 PagesThroughout Rene Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy, God is not mentioned until the third meditation. Descartes point of view on God simply claims his existence through the act of being. According to his claim, God must, essentially, exist as well as being an outcome of His own creation. Descartes was greatly interested in the idea that God’s being promoted an external force that controlled all beings that supported his presence. Descartes declarations, presented in his Meditations on First PhilosophyRead MoreDescartes’ Cogito Argument Successfully Shows the Evil Demon Argument is Unsound888 Words   |  4 PagesDoes Descartes’ Cogito argument successfully show that the Evil Demon Argument is unsound? In this essay I will attempt to show that the philosopher, Renà ¨ Descartes’ Cogito Argument successfully proves the Evil Demon Argument to be unsound. By an analysis of the structure of the arguments and what they prove, I will show the evil demon argument to be unsound. An argument is unsound when the premises as false and the argument is invalid. This analysis of both structure and content will eventuateRead MoreThe Meditations On First Philosophy1486 Words   |  6 PagesThe Meditations on First Philosophy gives us with an assumed evidence for the existence of God those progresses from the existence of an idea of an unlimited existence in the human mind—an idea of God—to the being of God himself. Insofar as we have an idea of an unlimited existence, an idea with â€Å"infinite independent reality†, we can reasonably ask when it arrived to us. The only thinkable reason of this impression, prerogatives Descartes, is an countless existence, explicitly, God. The manifestationRead MoreThe Meditations By Rene Descartes1384 Words   |  6 PagesRenà © Descartes main goal in the Meditations is to establish that one exists and that a perfect God exists. However, he first argues that the idea that everything perceived around one could be false because the senses are sometimes deceiving. In the first Meditation, Descartes introduces skepticism and brings forth a method of doubt in which he evaluates his beliefs, and questions whether they are true or false and why they should be doubted. He presents various hypothesis that prove there is reasonRead MoreAnalysis Of Rene Descartes Theory Of God Essay1514 Words   |  7 Pagesbelief of God in conceptual value has been imbued in the heart of the human race as a core valve in man’s history. From antiquity to contemporary modernism, there has always been a diversified integration composed of believers and non-believers of God. The assemblage of those who have â€Å"pledged their al legiance† to God foster a like-minded relation to one religious group or another. On the other hand, â€Å"rationalist - freethinkers† as I would like to call them, postulate the perception of God to be inexplicableRead MoreWilliam Robertson Smith, A Scottish Orientalist, Old Testament1692 Words   |  7 PagesThe god can no more exist without his people than the nation without its god. This quote means that the amount of belief that people have on God reflects on how much hope God has for a nation. This quote ties into various discussions that have been going on for a long time, and that is whether or not God exists. A well known philosopher who shares his view on this argument would be Rene Descartes who says, I think therefore I am. This assertion has come to be known as the cogito. Descartes struggled

Analysis Of Kurt Vonnegut Jrs Harrison Bergeron - 1112 Words

John. C. Maxwell, a writer, and a priest, once said â€Å"There are two kinds of pride, ‘good pride’ represents our dignity and self-respect. ‘Bad’ pride is the deadly sin of superiority that reeks of conceit and arrogance† (Quotefancy). Just as there are two sides to pride there are two sides to every human trait, each trait has an advantage and a disadvantage. Being stubborn could mean working towards goals until they have been achieved, or it could mean closing one’s mind so much so they miss out on opportunities they are not looking for. John Maxwell’s paradox of traits is shown through the idea of equality in Kurt Vonnegut Jr’s â€Å"Harrison Bergeron†. In this story the society is led to believe everyone is equal because of handicaps, but†¦show more content†¦Ã¢â‚¬ËœMy God-’ said George, ‘that must be Harrison!’ The realization was blasted from his mind instantly by the sound of an automob ile collision in his head† (Vonnegut 3). George’s epiphany helped him recognize the sound of his sons footsteps. When Harrison was still home George heard this noise all the time. Almost as soon as he made this realization his handicap goes off, producing a terrible, loud noise, causing him to forget his train of thought. The author uses the words â€Å"blasted† and â€Å"instantly† to help the readers understand the severity of the handicaps. He only has the epiphany that it is, in fact, his son on the TV because he was born with a very high IQ, in contrast to George’s wife who does not have a high intelligence and did not realize it was Harrison until George said so. Unfortunately, because of George’s elevated IQ, he has to have the radio handicap, which goes off and causes him to forget that he realized it was his son in the first place. The society deems these handicaps as important, because it stops people from having their own opinion w hich could lead to retaliation or an uprising. The epiphany that quickly faded from George’s mind demonstrates Vonnegut’s idea that one’s mental attributes will both benefit and fail them. To emphasize his message that both failures and benefits will result from one’s physical attributes Kurt Vonnegut Jr uses imagery throughout his short story â€Å"Harrison Bergeron. In the society that George and Hazel live in, there are

Medical Law Children and Mental Healthâ€Free Samples for Students

Question: Discuss About The Medical Law Children And Mental Health? Answer: Introduction The Convention for the Protection of Human rights and Fundamental Freedoms has attained a new name and this is the European Convention of Human Rights, i.e., ECHR. This Convention is an international treaty which offers protection to the fundamental freedoms, as well as, human rights in Europe[1]. This Convention was drafted back in the year of 1950, by the Council of Europe, which was newly formed at that time, and the same came into force from the date of September 3rd, 1953. The member states of the Council of Europe are a part to this treaty, and eve the new members are required to ratify the same, as soon as possible[2]. ECtHR, or the European Court of Human Rights, had been formed under this convention for the purpose of providing a stage, whereby a claim can be made by a party, which feels that their rights, provided under this convention, have been contravened. However, only a state party can take such a case before the ECtHR. And the verdicts given by the ECtHR is binding upon the respective states and have to be necessarily executed by them. The execution of these judgments is ensured by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe[3]. This convention consists of three different parts, as amended by Protocol 11. Section I, containing articles 2-18, contains the rights and freedoms; Section II, containing articles 19-51, set up the Court, along with the rules of operation; and Section III contains the different concluding provisions. One of the articles contained in Section I, provides the right of liberty and security to the individuals. The young individuals and the children also have the right to not be deprived of their liberty without a proper legal authorization and review[4]. In the following parts, this very protection given to the individuals below the age of 18 years, through Article 5, with a particular reference to the methods of authorization and review, has been critically analyzed. Article 5 of the ECHR contains the rights, which an individual has, with regards to the liberty and security[5]. As per this article, each and every individual has the right to have and enjoy their liberty and security. An individual cannot be deprived of their liberty, unless the same is for the specified cases and is as per the procedure which has been prescribed by the law[6]. The specified cases include: An individual being legally detained after being convicted by a competent court; An individual being detained or arrest in a lawful manner, due to the failure in complying with the legal order of a court of law, or with the reasons of securing the obligations which have been prescribed through the law; An individual being detained or arrest in a lawful manner, which has been effected for the reasons of bringing such an individual before the competent legal authority due to a reasonable suspicion of having being indulged in an offence, or in such cases where it becomes reasonably important to prevent such individual from fleeing after committing a crime, or from carrying out a crime; A minor being detained due to a legal order for the reasons of educational supervision or such minors legal detention with the objective of bringing him before a competent legal authority; A individual being lawfully detained so that the individual could be prevented from spreading an infectious disease, or a person who is of unsound mind, or is an alcoholic or drug addict, or is a vagrant; An individual being detained or arrested in a lawful manner so as to stop him from undertaking an unauthorized entry in a country or of such an individual against whom, some or the other action is being taken, with a view of extradition or deportation[7]. When any of such cases take place, the individual who has been arrested, has to be informed immediately regarding the reasons for the arrest which have been made, and the charges which have been laid down against him, and this has to be done in a language, which the arrested individual can understand[8]. In accordance with the provisions of Article 1(c), the detained or arrested individual has to be brought immediately before an officer who has been authorized by the law, or before a judge, to exercise their judicial power[9]. Moreover, such an individual is entitled to a fair trial, which has to be conducted within a reasonable period of time, or the individual has to be released pending the trial. This release, though, can be done with certain conditions, for instance, to guarantee that the individual would appear before the court for the trial[10]. Each and every individual, who has been deprived of their liberty, due to being detained or arrested, has to be entitled to take the proceedings through which the legality of his arrest and detention has to be decided by the court in a speedy manner. In case the detention or arrest is not held as lawful, the individual has to be released pursuant to release order given by the court of law. In addition to this, such an individual, who has been a victim of detention or arrest, which results in contravention of this Articles provisions, has the right of being compensated for such behavior[11]. Analysis Article 5 contains the word minor, which means an individual below the age of 18. In the case of Regina v Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council, Ex parte Tammadge[12], a noteworthy discussion was provided with regards to the scope of Article 5(1) (d), which relates to the detention of minors. In this particular case, the appellant was a 15 year old boy, who was not under the control of his parents, as per the claims. It was alleged that this boy was preoccupied with sex and could become aroused sexually whenever he was aggressive or angry. Another claim was made as per which he was a threat to the other children and even to himself. In the later parts of 1998, he was charged with assault on young residents and staff in his placement and of indecent assault. This kid was also involved in two separate incidents of arson. As per section 25 of the Children Act, 1989, a secure accommodation order was imposed on the child on June 30th, 2000. In order to authorize the continued detention of th is kid, the Council applied for this order, in a secure accommodation unit located in Staffordshire[13]. An appeal was made against this particular order. On behalf of this boy, an argument was made that section 25 of the Children Act, 1989[14] was not compatible with the Human Rights Act, 1998, by making reliance over the Article 5 of ECHR. The issue which was raised before the court was did the order which was made regarding the secure accommodation, could be treated as a deprivation of liberty. Further, if such was to be treated as deprivation than under which category of Article 5(1) it would fall[15]. The application was dismissed by the court and it held that the order made regarding the secure accommodation order was indeed a deprivation of the liberty of the kid. Moreover, this deprivation was as per Article 5 (1)(d) of ECHR. While giving this verdict, the decision given in the case of Koniarska v United Kingdom[16] was followed. It was held that Article 5 (1)(d) of ECHR was related to the detention of minors, and did not relate to the detention of individual who were below the official age of leaving school. Hence, just because the boy had cross the official age of leaving school, a detention as per the specific order could not be deemed as for the purpose of educational supervision[17]. The words educational supervisions, in the context of detention of minors, do not have to be equated with the classroom teaching notion, in a rigid manner. With a specific reference to the context of an adolescent in a local authority care, a number of aspects are embraced by the educational supervision regarding the exercise of parental rights by the local authority for the protection and benefit of the youth. The decision given in Regina v Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council, Ex parte Tammadge provides a clarity regarding this aspect. The age of minor being below 18, was further affirmed in the case of X v Switzerland[18]. In this case also, a child of less than 15 years of age was involved, who had a history of offences in his portfolio, including that of theft and traffic. Here also, the applicable article of ECHR was held to be Article 5 (1)(d) of ECHR. The juvenile in this case had been accused of a range of different offences and he was placed in a closed institution for observation and even a psycho-medical expert report was drawn up[19]. However, a decision different from that of Regina v Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council was given in this case. This is because of the slight change in circumstances, which changed the entire verdict. Unlike the case of Regina v Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council, in X v Switzerland, the detention was held to be legal in this case. This was because the procedure which has been prescribed by the law was properly followed in this case. A proper investigation was undertaken in this case by the office of public prosecutor for the juvenile cases. This affirms that due to the applicability of Article 5 of the ECHR, the rights of the children are protected. As was seen in this case, the juvenile was presented with a proper investigation, which provided legality to the actions undertaken by the court, in form of the order made. Article 5 (1)(d) of ECHR does not only provide the provisions enabling a minors detention, it also contains specific, though not exhaustive, examples of such situations where the minors can be detained for the purposes of brining them before a competent legal authority or for their educational supervision. In the case of Mubilanzila Mayeka and Kaniki Mitunga v Belgium[20], a number of articles of the ECHR were contravened, and amongst this were the articles 5(1) and 5(4)[21]. Article 5(1) of the ECHR was held to have been contravened as per the court as the child had been detained as per the law, where no provisions were present which were specific to the minors, for a centre which was meant for the adults, and so, it was extremely unsuitable for the vulnerable situation in which the child was. And the court was of the view that the liberty of the child has not been protected in an adequate manner. Article 5(4) of the ECHR was also violated in this case. This was because the child was deported, without given any consideration to the fact that an application had been lodged by her for release, and even more so, the same had already been granted. Due to these reasons, the application had been rendered ineffective[22]. Article 5(1)(d) of the ECHRs first limb gives authority of detaining a child based on an administrative or court order, so that the attendance of the child can be secured at an educational establishment. And as has already been mentioned and established through Regina v Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council, the wordings educational supervision, cannot be rigidly equated with the notion of classroom teaching. A range of aspects of parental rights, regarding the exercise of authority, for the protection and benefit of the individual involved, has to be supervised under this[23]. In Bouamar v Belguim[24], the plaintiff was a 17 year old kid, who was also a Moroccan citizen and was placed temporarily in borstal nine times, just because there had been a scarcity in finding an institution or a person, who would take him in. overall, the minor had been deprived of his freedom for a period of 119 days. The court held that the state was required to set up proper infrastructure for carrying out its function. This was due to the fact that the minor had opted for a system as per which the juvenile offenders had to be monitored. And the detention which the minor had to undergo was irregular in nature and thus breached both Article 5(1) and 5(4)[25]. In the matter P. and S. v. Poland[26], mother and daughter were the applicants in the case. At the age of 14, in 2008, the daughter became pregnant due to being raped. The absence of a comprehensive legal framework was complained by the applicant, which could guarantee the daughter with a timely, as well as, an unhindered access to abortion as per the conditions placed through the relevant laws, and regarding the information pertaining to the case being disclosed to the public. A complaint was also made pertaining to the daughter being removed from the custody of her mother, and being placed in a juvenile shelter, and later on in a hospital, as being illegal an unlawful. They claimed that the circumstances which took placed amounted to a degraded and inhumane treatment. It was held by the court that there had been a contravention of three articles, i.e., 3, 5 and 8. Article 5 was contravened as the detention of the child had been unlawful and was done only to prevent the abortion[27] . The case of Ichin and Others v. Ukraine[28] revolves around two boys, who were of the ages of 13 and 14, and were held for 30 days in a juvenile holding facility as they had robbed some kitchen appliances and food from the canteen of the school. This took place even when the boys had made a confession about the committed theft and also had returned the stolen goods partly, and were below the age of criminal responsibility. The court held that the detention of the boys failed to provide the needed educational supervision and so, the Article 5(1) of the ECHR was contravened in this case[29]. They further stated that the juvenile holding facility was not suitable for the boys and there was an absence of intent to present them before the competent legal authority[30]. A juvenile holding facility, in itself cannot be constituted as educational supervision in the view of court, when there is an absolute lack of educational activities. In case a system of education supervisions is opted by a State, which involves a deprivation of the liberty, it becomes obligatory in such state, to put in place, proper institutional facilities, which can meet both the educational and security demands of the system, so that the requirements placed under Article 5(1)(d) can be satisfied[31]. In the matter of Amie and Others v. Bulgaria[32], due to the lack of realistic prospect of the expulsion of Amie, the deportation could not be justified for the entire period of his detention. This was in addition to the failure on part of the domestic authorities in conducting the proceedings with proper and required diligence. The Court could not find that the domestic proceedings, which took place in Bulgaria, were compliant with the conditions stated in Article 5(4). This was due to the time which was taken by the national courts, in making a determination, regarding the legal challenges to the detention order, as these were not compliant with the requirements of the provisions of the decision being taken in a speedy manner. In addition to this, the failure of the courts in getting a release order directly was also in contravention to Article 5(4) as this provision presents the remedies, through which the decision making body has the ability of releasing the detainee[33]. In the legal matter of D.G. v. Ireland[34], a minor was detained in the St. Patricks Institution and he made an application that Articles of ECHR, i.e. Article 3, 5, 8 and 14 had been breached due to this detention[35]. It was held by the courts that the detention of the applicant, who was a minor, was not done for the educational supervisions, as has been described for the purposes of Article 5(1)(d). And hence, this article was held to have been breached. For this particular violation, as per Article 5(5) of the ECHR, the minor was awarded non-pecuniary damages to the amount of 5,000, along with 16,138.96, as being the cost and expenses incurred by him[36]. Article 5(1)(d) of the ECHRs second limb administers the legal detention of a minor so that he can be presented before the competent legal authority. The travaux prparatoires provided that this particular provision was brought with the intention of covering the detention of a minor before the administrative of civil proceedings are initiated, while Article 5 (1)(c) provided the provisions with regards to detention of an individual with regards to criminal proceedings. Though, the detention of a minor, who has been accused of a crime when the psychiatric report is prepared, which is required for taking a final decision regarding the mental condition of such a minor, is considered as a detention for the purpose of bringing the minor, as per sub-paragraph (d), before a competent authority[37]. An example of this could easily be seen in the case of X v Switzerland, mentioned earlier. Conclusion The conclusion is very clear in this study. European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, or the newly named ECHR provides various protections to the individuals with regards to their rights. A specific article of ECHR, i.e., Article 5, protects the individuals from being deprived of their liberty without having a legal backing and proper review. This is with a particular reference to the children and young people, who have been protected through this Article, time and again, and this is evident from the number of case laws highlighted above. This article ensures that the minors, if detained, have been given the proper treatment and that the reasons for the detention are as prescribed under it. Any violation of this article, not only results in a negative order being passed against the party violating this article, but also provides the damages to the affected minor. Hence, it can be clearly and aptly concluded that Article 5 does protect the children below the age of 18 References Amie and Others v. Bulgaria 58149/08 Bouamar v Belguim 11 EHRR 1 1987 D.G. v. Ireland 39474/98 Ichin and Others v. Ukraine 28189/04 28192/04 Koniarska v United Kingdom (2000) (Unreported, 12/10/2000) Mubilanzila Mayeka and Kaniki Mitunga v Belgium 13178/03 and S. v. Poland 57375/08 Regina v Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council, Ex parte Tammadge (1998) 1 CCLR 581 X v Switzerland 8500/79 Statutes and statutory instruments Children Act, 1989 European Convention of Human Rights Human Rights Act, 1998 Secondary Sources Books Bates E, The Evolution of the European Convention on Human Rights: From Its Inception to the Creation of a Permanent Court of Human Rights (Oxford University Press 2010) Goldhaber MD, A People's History of the European Court of Human Rights (Rutgers University Press 2009) Harris D, O'Boyle, M, Bates E, and Buckley C, Harris, O'Boyle Warbrick: Law of the European Convention on Human Rights (3rd edn, Oxford University Press 2014) Schabas WA, The European Convention on Human Rights: A Commentary (Oxford University Press 2015) Verhellen E, Monitoring Children's Rights (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1996