![]() permitted by law, but conventionally considered immoral. forbidden by law, but conventionally considered permissible. forbidden by law, and conventionally considered immoral. According to Rachels, active euthanasia is currently: (Points : 1) If we reject a value in another culture, we must reject that value in our culture. If we accept a value in another culture, we must accept that value in our culture. If we accept a value in another culture, we can still reject that value in our culture. sympathy that we feel for the patient’s suffering. Kass argues that there is an important difference between withdrawing treatment and active, direct mercy killing, and this difference lies in the (Points : 1) Unjust people would use it differently than just people. If the Ring of Gyges really existed, (Points : 1) According to Rachels, many people accept the conventional doctrine because they believe: (Points : 1) it is never permissible either to let someone die or to kill them. letting die is morally worse than killing. there is no intrinsic moral difference between killing and letting die. killing is intrinsically worse than letting die. ![]() According to Rachels, the case of Smith and Jones shows that: (Points : 1) Because all of the parts of their character are harmoniously oriented toward the good. Because they are incapable of doing otherwise. ![]() Because they are compelled by their conscience. Because they know it is the right thing to do. ![]() Glaukon begins by claiming that “those who practice justice” do so (Points : 1) active euthanasia is always morally permissible. passive euthanasia is always worse than active euthanasia. active euthanasia is always worse than passive euthanasia. In this scenario, it seems reasonable to conclude that the Republic inaugurates a discursive project defined as philosophy which will function like a pattern for the utopian genre that will be developed later on.Question 1. In the intersection of these two lines of inquiry lies the definition of the genre of philosophy, understood as a speech that longs for immunity from the making of mistakes even if aware of its impossibility. This point indicates a carving of the ordinary sense of “possible”, which no longer refers to the practical effectiveness of a whole system, but now denotes a properly metaphysical reference that can be accomplished in different degrees. ii) It is stated in the text that the just city there built does not exist, did not exist and will not exist, but lies like a model for anyone who would take it as a reference for one’s own actions. If this is not a really infallible power, this does not undermine revoke the capacity of speech to unveil the consequences that would follow from this hypothesis. The thread to guide us is the platonic usage of the concept of dunamis (power) and its cognate adjective (dunaton) through two central axes: i) The argument that what is being drawn with this speech that founds cities – which despite of the anachronism we will call utopian – is a structure of political power based on the human power to prevent mistakes through knowledge. This work intends to present Plato’s Republic as an ancient source of the utopian tradition,not only for its project to found a just city in speech, but also for its project to justify the legitimacy of this literary/philosophical genre mostly through considerations about the possibility of this political form. However, the civic unity of Swillsburg depends on good fortune, is highly contingent, and thus unstable. On my reading, the city of pigs is healthy and true in that it is a civically unified community. I argue that these interpretations miss what is most deeply interesting about the city of pigs. Other commentators have supposed that the source of instability in the city of pigs is the nature of human desire. Is Plato sincere when he lauds the city of pigs? If so, why does the city of pigs degenerate so precipitously into the luxurious city (truphosa polis)? Some commentators have been unable to find any place for the 'city of pigs' in the substantive argument of the Republic. While Glaucon derides this polis as a 'city for pigs', Socrates is quick to defend its virtues characterizing it as a city which is not only 'complete' (telea), but a 'true' (alethine polis) and 'healthy' city (hugies tis) (37Ie-372e). peaceful, cooperative, and which provides a comfortable life for its inhabitants. At Republic 370c-372d, Plato presents us with an early polis that is self-sufficient.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |