Philosophy Paper on Minority Report free essay sample

Minority Report As In the movie quote you dont chose the things you believe in, they choose you the quote basically says that we dont choose how to act on situations its faith who chooses what and how we act, also the movie states that faith can be changed with the right actions which are dependent on us for example from the movie When John went to kill Leo as his faith was shown In prediction of the future and still he manage to change his faith by the way he reacted towards the situation.From the movie we can take the example that faith can be changed and our actions writes the future. Also for freedom when John goes to meet Dry. Iris Hellman she quotes Its funny how all living organisms are alike when the chip are down, when the pressure Is on, every creature on the face of the Earth Is Interested In one thing and one thing only, Its own survival. We will write a custom essay sample on Philosophy Paper on Minority Report or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page In the long run every man for him self, saying can be used. Cause every man thinks for himself when the pressure is on. And freedom I think we dont get much freedom because from the day we are born, we have our parents telling us what to do and what not to do, like we are not free for our choice that if we want to go to school or not its not our choice it is what our parents wants of course they want their children to be successful in life so that people in the society accept them for what they are.In the movie freewill is shown that the person have his way to choose on how to react to deferent situations like for John it was to prove his innocence he was searching for answers but after he got to know about Leo that he killed his son he acted with angry towards him and it was shown to him about his faith that he is going to commit ruder but in the end he controls himself and does not let anger take over him because of his actions he will have to suffer the consequences and he wanted to prove that he can change his faith and the prediction of the future.The conclusion is that freedom and freewill are sometime not an option for human being, I mean sometimes the human being have there freewill and freedom but not always, there is always someone or the other to them what they have to do and how they have to do. Philosophy Paper on Minority Report By cameraman As in the movie quote you dont chose the things you believe in, they choose you the went to kill Leo as his faith was shown in prediction of the future and still he manage Also for freedom when John goes to meet Dry.Iris Hangman she quotes Its funny how all living organisms are alike when the chip are down, when the pressure is on, every creature on the face of the Earth is interested in one thing and one thing only, Its own Survival.

Categorical Imperative Example Essays

Categorical Imperative Example Essays Categorical Imperative Example Paper Categorical Imperative Example Paper Kant is an 18th century German philosopher who wrote the book Groundwork for metaphysics. The book deals with his theory that morality is a priori synthetic (a priori is a statement that is knowable without reference to any experience and synthetic means having truth or falsity can be tested using experience or the senses) and that moral decisions should be taken with a universal view to one’s duty to mankind as a whole. He laid out his ideas about the categorical imperative in this book. An imperative is a statement of what should be done. The philosopher Hume said that you can’t get a ‘should’ statement out of an ‘if’ statement. This means that experience can only give us hypothetical imperatives (not moral commands to the will – they are ‘if’ statements and do not apply to everyone and you only need obey them if you want to achieve a certain goal, for example, ‘if’ you want to be healthy then you should exercise and eat a balanced diet). A categorical imperative is a ‘should’ statement, but it is not based on experience, and doesn’t rely on a particular outcome. According to Kant, categorical imperatives apply to everyone because they are based on an objective a priori law of reason (an objective law is something that is factually true). The categorical imperative is one principle with three formulations: The Universal Law, treat humans as ends in themselves and act as if you live in a Kingdom of Ends. The natural law is to â€Å"act according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law† and what it says is that everyone should universalise their maxims without contradiction – for an imperative to be categorical or deontological it must consist of principles that can be applied in any situation. This basically means that before you do something you should ask yourself if you would like everyone in the same situation. If not, then you are involved in a contradiction and what you are thinking of doing is wrong because it is against reason. Kant uses the example of a suicidal man as an example: A man feels sick of life and wants to commit suicide. His maxim is that from self-love I want to shorten my life if its continuance threatens more evil than it promises pleasure. He asks himself whether he would universalise this law, his answer is no because it is humans’ duty to stimulate the furtherance of life and to destroy life would contradict itself and therefore is entirely opposed to the supreme principle of duty. The second principle is to treat humans as ends in themselves: â€Å"so act as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of any other, never solely as a means but always as an end†. Kant argues that all humans are searching for the summam bonum (a state in which human virtue and happiness are united). Kant believes that we all have an immortal soul and because of this immortal soul, humans deserve special treatment and that we should seek happiness as long as this happiness does not infringe on other humans ability to seek happiness and this means that we should not exploit others or treat them as things to achieve an end, as they are as rational as we are. To treat another person as a means is to deny that person the right to be rational and independent judge of their actions. It is to make oneself in some way superior and different. An example could be having a sexual relationship with someone – if you have only have sex with someone because you want something from them and not because you love them. The final principle is to act as if you live in a Kingdom of Ends; Kant said â€Å"act as a legislating member in the universal Kingdom of Ends†. This means that everyone should act as every other person were an ‘end’ – a free, independent agent. Kant believed that each person is independent and moral judgements should not be based on any empirical consideration about human nature, human flourishing or human destiny. What this means is that every individual has the ability to understand the principles of pure practical reason and follow them. Pure practical reason must be impartial and so its principles must apply equally to everyone. An example of this is if you’re trying to decide if it would be justified to kill someone who was threatening your family – using Kantian principles – you should not kill them. Acting according to the third principle (and taking the first and second into account) murder can obviously not be universalised or humanity would be wiped out, and killing the man threatening your family is treating him as a means (to saving your family) rather than an end: a human seeking summum bonum. In conclusion, there are three different formulations for Kant’s categorical imperative: The Universal Law, treat humans as ends in themselves and act as if you live in a Kingdom of Ends. Together these three formulations seek to allow humans to make moral decisions which do not infringe the happiness of others but also allow us to progress to perfection.

Service organization analysis services marketing plan on a service Essay

Service organization analysis services marketing plan on a service company - Essay Example The bank is one of the largest in the country and has presence in more than 50 countries. The department chosen in this case is the bank's internet banking services. The bank has a well established department for this and gives comprehensive information in its web pages. The characteristics of services marketing with reference to this department is given in the paper. Relevant marketing theories with reference to services marketing is also given. An overview of the internet banking service of the bank is also given. This is followed by the internet banking industry in the country. Major competitors of the bank are also provided. The internet usage and habits of the public are also included. The bank is in a good position regarding this since the usage and penetration of the internet is one of the highest in the world. The bank's biggest challenge would be to convert the users to be more active in internet banking. One important aspect, namely service recovery is also discussed. It se ems that ANZ Bank is keenly aware of this factor and has chalked out well laid out plans for customer service and satisfaction. The organization selected for the service market analysis is ANZ Bank. ANZ bank (Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited) is an Australia based major banking and financial institution. It renders services of home loans, car loans and business loans to its customers. Internet banking and phone banking is its peculiar features. Credit cards and savings accounts are also offered by it to the customers. It carried out insurance services also. Main strategy of ANZ Bank is offering a range of products suiting with different needs of customers in a better convenient way. Savings and investment accounts of ANZ carry competitive interest rates. ANZ online saver helps customers to manage their own accounts through online. (ANZ, 2008). ANZ bank is recognized as a major international banking and financial services group in Australia and New Zealand and included in the 50 list of top 50 banks in the world. It started its working in 1830s by opening office in Melbourne. (ANZ: History, 2008). Business Strategies of ANZ Bank: For sustaining in the highly competitive banking industry in Australia, the ANZ Bank has accepted good corporate governance and transparency as the fundamentals of its business. For guiding the business decision making on the right way the bank has insisted on specific codes of conduct ensuring company value. The Board of Directors is mutually responsible for the corporate governance and directing the financial performance. It has company policy of concrete honest and ethical behavior of the organizational members. ANZ is a member of the Code of Banking Practice, which specify standards of good banking practice. (ANZ: Corporate Governance). Characteristics of service marketing: Marketing can be of products, services or both. In the case of services, there are some characteristics that make it different from product marketing. They are referred to as the IHIP characteristics namely intangibility, heterogeneity, inseparability and perishability. (Lovelock, 2004, p.3). Services are intangible and unlike a product, a person cannot see or touch them. Heterogeneity means that the same service given to different customers will different from each other. The service experience of customers on a particular service will be

Human rights Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words - 1

Human rights - Essay Example With regard to the concept of `permissible roughness of treatment, treatment or punishment can only be adjudged to be in breach of Article 3 ex post facto, essentially because it is only then that all the relevant circumstances can be considered. To reach firm conclusions as to the nature and effect of treatment or punishment before it occurs clearly departs from the principle of assessment after the event. Whilst endorsing that principle in Soering, the Court indicated that a departure from it may be appropriate in certain cases: â€Å"It is not normally for the Convention institutions to pronounce on the existence or otherwise of potential violations of the Convention. However, where an applicant claims that a decision to extradite him would, if implemented, be contrary to Article 3 by reason of its foreseeable consequences in the requesting country, a departure form the principle is necessary, in view of the serious and irreparable nature of the alleged suffering risked, in order to ensure the effectiveness of the safeguard provided by the Article.†2 Such a departure is justified on a number of grounds, besides the risk of serious and irreparable suffering. They include the principle of effective protection, the belief that the Convention is designed to promote and maintain democratic ideals, the fact that Article 3 admits of no exceptions or derogations3 and, more to the point, that Article 3 represents an absolute standard. In Soering, the United Kingdom Government argued that speculative ill-treatment is prohibited under Article 3 only if it is certain and imminent.4 Such a standard can be achieved only where the treatment is required by law and its occurrence is not simply a matter of speculation. Accordingly, since the death penalty and the death-row phenomenon were not necessarily automatic and inevitable,5 the

Independence vs. Commintment (Men and Women) Essay

Independence vs. Commintment (Men and Women) - Essay Example There are a number of researches showing that this is not really the case. In fact, these researches show that there is no difference between the predisposition of men and women to be committed. Most men just like the most ordinary women, desire to be in a healthy, happy relationship. However, the difference is in the fact that men face various societal and legal barriers, and/or penalties that women do not. These barriers are the key reasons why most men tend avoid commitments first (Rudov, 2004). They are still fixing up these barriers so that when they feel ready to commit themselves, possible problems are already eliminated. Rudov (2004) has categorized the evolution of man's readiness to commit in a relationship. The picture below shows the factors men take into consideration prior to entering into a higher level of relationship. In the picture above, it can be seen that the "bachelors" doesn't get involved with women to avoid dealing with different sets of friends, extended families and other community members who are the usual members of the women's circle. Meanwhile, men in the committed/unmarried category experiences all levels of the stack. He is either seeing his woman all of the time from a separate residence or is already living with her. This level of relationship contract is a continuously evolving.

Chinese Room Argument

Chinese Room Argument Searles Chinese Room argumentfails because the room proves nothing Abstract Searle argues that without understanding, computers can never really have mental states. Searles argument that computers can never have understanding depends onhow he portrays the Chinese room. If we pick apart the rooms imitation process, we find that there is a computer-simulation defect and as a result the room would never pass the Turing test. We could of course let the man fix the defect. He would need to remember and change what he does as a result of what he experiences and this, I claim, is precisely what it needs to achieve intentionality. Intentionality, as Searle states, is what distinguishes mental states from physical ones. Given that there is intentionality in the room, it then becomes clear that understanding appears. Searle may counter-claim that the room itself can fix its own defects; but as the room has no semantic understanding and only syntactic translation, we can infer that the room mustve anticipated every question with a predetermined instruction. If a finite room has the capacity to predict every possible question in the universe as well as know the events of the future, then the room is ineffable. If there is understanding, or the room is simply ineffable, then the room proves nothing and Searles argument fails. Essay Searles famous Chinese Room Argument has been the target of great interest and debate in the philosophy of mind, artificial intelligence and cognitive science since its introduction in Searles 1980 article ‘Minds, Brains and Programs. It is no overstatement to assert that the article has been the centre of attention for philosophers and computer scientists for quite some time. Preston and Bishop (2002) is a perfect example of exclusivity into the ongoing debate regarding the Chinese Room, because the significance and importance of the Chinese Room is meant to be obvious. The Chinese Room is supposed to scuttle the thought of strong AI: which implies that computers have mental states. The Chinese Room arises out of the following, now familiar, story: Searle asks us to imagine that a man is seated in a sealed room with 2 doors: one allowing input from one source outside the room (in the form of a slot) and one allowing output to the source outside the room (also in the form of a slot). The input from the outside source are Chinese squiggles that have been printed on card, but to the man in the room they are nothing more than incomprehensible gibberish(since he does not know the first thing about Chinese). The man is told that upon receiving the input squiggles, he must open a heavily-indexed reference book, wherein he must scrupulously track down the squiggle he received and find the matching squiggle of another sort. Once the man finds the matching squiggle, he must record it on an output piece of card and send it back through the output doors slot. Unknowingly the man has just performed some sort of translation that is altogether opaque to his understanding. To the outside source, the Chinese room as a whole, is a sort of system and is being treated as a subject of a Turing test. The interested parties of the outside source are typing in questions in Chinese and receiving answers in Chinese. If the Chinese room is of good quality, then it should be possible to convince the interested parties that the room, or something inside it, is intelligent, thus suggested that the room, or something inside it, could pass the Turing. Searle suggests that this is an error, as the man in the room does not have any conscious states that exhibit and sort of understanding of the questions that he receives. To him it is all just squiggles. It seems, therefore, that the Turing test is not a reliable way of ascertaining true thought, and moreover that any machine exhibiting such a formal architecture, no matter how complex, could never be called intelligent in the way that we mean. Certainly it might simulate intelligence impressively, but Searle suggests th at this is precisely the problem, since it means only that we have an automata that is extremely good at fooling our test. Therefore, the Chinese Room argument appears to contain the following argument: 1. The room occupant knows no Chinese. 2. The room occupant knows English. 3. The room occupant is given sets of written strings of Chinese, {Ci, Cj,†¦, Cn} 4. The room occupant is given formal instructions in English that correlate pairs of sets of Chinese strings, hCi, Cji. 5. The room occupant is given formal instructions in English to output some particular Ci given a particular Cj. 6. The room occupants skill at syntactically manipulating the strings of Chinese is behaviourally indistinguishable from that of a fully competent speaker of Chinese. 7. If 1-6 are jointly possible, then syntax is not sufficient for mental content. 8. 1-6 are jointly possible. 9. Therefore, syntax is not sufficient for mental content. Searles contention is that no matter what may happen, the man in the room will never understand any of the Chinese. Searle takes this to broadly mean that formal architectures, such as our great look-up book, can never produce understanding, because real thought requires semantics—meaning—whereas the book gives us only syntax, or relation. Unfortunately, what the Chinese Room argument really implies about mental states and strong AI has always been a matter of great controversy. Much of the controversy and debate today comes from how Searle is challenged. The two most obvious ways to challenge Searle can be understood to be versions of what is known as the systems reply to the Chinese Room argument. The first is to challenge premise (8) of Searles argument by asserting that (1-6) are inconsistent due to premise (1) being incorrect -concluding that, in some sense, the man in the room actually knows Chinese in some important sense when we carefully consider all the details of Searles argument. The second is to challenge premise (7) of Searles argument by asserting that (1-6) are consistent but that the room understands Chinese even if the occupant does not. Searle intelligently built the Chinese Room so that those who try to pick-apart his argument with a systems response get tangled up in a web of truth in regard to strong AI or more specifically, what is understanding. A systems response simply asserts that the man in the room knows Chinese because the mans formal manipulations, or the operations of the man and the room as a whole, are structurally identical to a native Chinese speakers formal manipulations. Searles counter-argument is that if the man memorized the program, then the program has become part of the man—but for the program, which understands Chinese, the man is still simply providing the hardware on which it runs. One might attempt to apply a subtle version of the system, commonly called a virtual mind reply. Yet virtual mind replies, like system replies, do not prove that strong AI is true either: they provide no evidence that the system (or the virtual mind) understands Chinese, other than the hypothetical premise that it passes the Turing Test. Searles argument remains, for neither the systems or virtual minds succeed at challenging Searles argument. That is because both replies have tried to find understanding in the room. Thats a mistake, its playing into Searles hands, as understanding simply isnt there. Understanding is not missing because computers cant have it. Its missing because the claim that Searles claim that the Chinese room can simulate what computers can do is false. The rooms computer-imitation is so flawed that the claim that the Chinese room can produce the appearance of understanding Chinese is also false. We can easily show that there is a defect in the room when we pick apart the computer-imitation (or the rooms process), with a conversation that might take place: Dominic: Hello there. Before we begin our conversation, Id just like to point out that from here on in Im going to use the word ‘hot to mean good looking. Chinese Room: No problem, I speak slang now and then too. Dominic: I heard your cars cooling system was overheating. Did you think that your cars engine was getting too hot? Chinese Room: No the temperature was fine. Dominic: Talking about cars, did you see the yellow Ferrari parked outside your house yesterday! Dont you think Ferraris are hot cars? Chinese Room: Yes, Ferraris are commonly hot due to their high-performance engine components. The reason the room cant handle this sort of thing is that it cannot write anything that the man in the room can read. According to Searle, it can only write Chinese characters which Searle cannot read. Which is why it cannot remember things like the â€Å"hot† car. If we gave the room the right machinery so that the man in the room has the ability to change the script (similarly compared to a computer changing its own program), then the man would, essentially, be changing the rooms behaviour in response to events. Admittedly, giving the room the right machinery so the man could do this is more complicated than having a giant heavily-indexed book do all the processing, but it would remove the computer-simulation defect. Furthermore, it certainly would make intentionality possible. And it is intentionality that, according to Searle (1980) and Brentano (1874/1973), distinguishes mental states from physical ones. And, if the room had the machinery, or the fundamentals, to produc e intentionality, then the room could be made to understand. According to Searle (1980), intentionality exists in internal states if they are â€Å"directed at or about objects and states of affairs in the world†. This means, to me, that internal states can change appropriately when they are â€Å"directed at† changes. For example, if I always thought that the Chinese room was painted â€Å"green† and I found out that the room was actually painted â€Å"white†, then the Chinese rooms would think that my intentionality is lacking because my â€Å"thoughts of the room† change upon learning of a colour change. Yet, the rooms â€Å"thoughts about me† also lack intentionality because they cannot change when I tell the room that Im temporarily using â€Å"hot† differently. There are other mental states that have intentionality for similar reasons. For example, what gives my belief that â€Å"All elephants are grey† intentionality is that, after I see a few black elephants, my belief can change appropriately, to maybe â€Å"All elephants are grey or black†. Yet not all changes produced by experience are sufficiently complex or flexible enough to count toward intentionality. parent knows. http://degreesofclarity.com/writing/chineseroom/ http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/

Free Julius Caesar Essays: The Role of the Mob :: Julius Caesar Essays

The Role of the Mob in Julius Caesar The most important characters of the play Julius Caesar are clearly the citizens of Rome. The citizens have an important effect on both the audience and the characters in the play because of their unlimited desire to passionately express their emotions. Throughout the play these emotions are communicated through various events. The first event is the celebration of the feast of the Lupercal. It was the citizens’ positive reaction to Caesar during his triumphant return after his victory over the sons of Pompey that fueled the fear of caesar’s becoming king. The citizens’ opposition to Pompey’s allies caused great disturbances in the streets because a short while before, Pompey was their hero. Now Caesar, victorious, is the hero of the hour. Their response also influenced the idea that Caesar was becoming too ambitious. Thus, the citizens of Rome had a role in the fate of Julius Caesar. A later example occurs during the funeral oration by Mark Antony. Brutus logically gives his reasons that necessitated Caesar’s death. He informs them that he acted out of love of Rome and his desire to prevent tyrants from controlling her. The citizens embrace his words with cheers and understanding. However, their mood alters when Antony offers his interpretation of the situation. He passionately described the deeds Caesar performed in behalf of the citizens of Rome, which clearly contradict the opinion of the conspirators that Caesar was too ambitious. Antony carefully uses irony in referring to Cassius and Brutus as honorable men; the strategy wins over the citizens and they listen with growing anger to his words. He leads the citizens to the body and begins to show the brutal results of the murder while simultaneously influencing them to believe that the conspirators are murderers and traitors. Ultimately, Antony reads Caesar’s will, which leaves his parks, private estates, and newly planted gardens to the citizens of Rome.