i believe that morality comes from the social and political traditions that vary from person to person. i believe that depending on the upbringing, the social environment, the political orientation of said environment. this follows the logic of my own morales being much more different from that of most ticos. even though within the Costarican society morales change, mine are even more different from them. i was brought up in a very liberal environment, with a women's rights activist and a socialist journalist as parents, my morales obviously very different from the often macho, religious and capitalistic morales.
nevertheless i also believe that those traditional morales that each society imprints have been created by other, less honourable means, and that they often are useful particularly to one group or another. that is why morale should be then developed through reasoning and observation. this way we get to chose which of the traditional values we want to keep, which ones we dont and what else is out there.
jueves, 9 de junio de 2011
eating meat is moral because people naturally eat meat for food.
i agree with this statement, simply because its the most logical one. humans are omnivores, which means that we eat basically anything. we eat plants, meat and anything in between, so not eating meat would be against our nature. naturally there is a certain meat diet and it should be carefully selected meat, not just any hamburger, or hotdog. in general im against eating meat simply because 80% of the meat we eat is a shitty product.
i agree with this statement, simply because its the most logical one. humans are omnivores, which means that we eat basically anything. we eat plants, meat and anything in between, so not eating meat would be against our nature. naturally there is a certain meat diet and it should be carefully selected meat, not just any hamburger, or hotdog. in general im against eating meat simply because 80% of the meat we eat is a shitty product.
i'm still on fire!
To what extent is knowledge gained in Mathematics similar and/or different to knowledge gained in History?
knowledge gained in Math should in theory be pure, objective and universal. in history there are so many other human factors that manipulate history and the way we get things from it. history is much more influenced by emotion, sense perception, even language, than mathematics. Math should only depend on reasoning and logic, and most of the time it does. Reasoning and logic are much more universal and uniform than emotion or language.
knowledge gained in Math should in theory be pure, objective and universal. in history there are so many other human factors that manipulate history and the way we get things from it. history is much more influenced by emotion, sense perception, even language, than mathematics. Math should only depend on reasoning and logic, and most of the time it does. Reasoning and logic are much more universal and uniform than emotion or language.
i'm on fire!
Is Mathematics discovered or invented?
R:// i think that this is a trick question, because math isnt actually a thing, its more like a tool, an instrument to describe another thing. this means that the thing it describes has obviously always been there, however the ways to describe that thing havent. it is not like we invented the right angle, we just gave it a name and a number. which means that the use of math has been discovered, but the math itself has been invented, so that we could discover how to describe an isosceles triangle, or whatever.
R:// i think that this is a trick question, because math isnt actually a thing, its more like a tool, an instrument to describe another thing. this means that the thing it describes has obviously always been there, however the ways to describe that thing havent. it is not like we invented the right angle, we just gave it a name and a number. which means that the use of math has been discovered, but the math itself has been invented, so that we could discover how to describe an isosceles triangle, or whatever.
What do you understandd by George Orwell's observation, 'Who controls the past controls the future, who controls the present controls the past'? To what extent do you think it is true?
What do you understandd by George Orwell's observation, 'Who controls the past controls the future, who controls the present controls the past'? To what extent do you think it is true?
R://
George Orwell is basically saying what everybody knows: whoever is in charge of public information, is in charge of history, and whoever controls history controls what is to come.
this means that whoever controls information about the past, history books, school texts, movies, television, any record of the past, can use it to shape history into whatever they need it to be. As an example, China has only very few public records of the past, and they are government controlled so that the Chinese people shall never question any of it. this allows the government to act as they please, and still be able to justify their actions with new historical information, made by them. if they can control the way the Chinese see their past, they can control what the Chinese see in their future, which gives them control over them, entirely. i don't agree with Orwell completely, i believe that it gives them a very powerful tool, however if anybody would truly wish to rebel and not be controlled by their past, nor their future, it could be done. this means that if the desire to live without these restrictions mentioned by Orwell was strong enough, it could be done, and people could live without a defined and standardised historical past.
R://
George Orwell is basically saying what everybody knows: whoever is in charge of public information, is in charge of history, and whoever controls history controls what is to come.
this means that whoever controls information about the past, history books, school texts, movies, television, any record of the past, can use it to shape history into whatever they need it to be. As an example, China has only very few public records of the past, and they are government controlled so that the Chinese people shall never question any of it. this allows the government to act as they please, and still be able to justify their actions with new historical information, made by them. if they can control the way the Chinese see their past, they can control what the Chinese see in their future, which gives them control over them, entirely. i don't agree with Orwell completely, i believe that it gives them a very powerful tool, however if anybody would truly wish to rebel and not be controlled by their past, nor their future, it could be done. this means that if the desire to live without these restrictions mentioned by Orwell was strong enough, it could be done, and people could live without a defined and standardised historical past.
History KI's
1. To what extent does logic shape the perception of history more than emotion?
2. What role does language play in shaping the perception of history?
2. What role does language play in shaping the perception of history?
3. To what extent does history depend on a combinations of all of the ways of knowing?
martes, 15 de marzo de 2011
KI
General question:
when can we trust our senses to give us truth?
KI: to what extent can our senses give us truth if isolated from reason.
Main Points: can not function one without the other
1.senses give us personal truth.
c.c senses dont guve us truth (cata senses that she is right)
2.reason expands personal truth to universal truth
c.c ??
when can we trust our senses to give us truth?
KI: to what extent can our senses give us truth if isolated from reason.
Main Points: can not function one without the other
1.senses give us personal truth.
c.c senses dont guve us truth (cata senses that she is right)
2.reason expands personal truth to universal truth
c.c ??
domingo, 6 de febrero de 2011
about apples and bananas
Sprache ist sehr schwer zu definieren, da im Grunde jede Kommunikation Sprache ist. Ob Körpersprache oder Zeichensprache oder einfach nur die deutsche Sprache, macht keinen unterschied. Damit Sprache jedoch einen Sinn ergibt, brauchen sowohl Empfänger als auch Sender die selben Sprachkenntnisse, ansonsten wären es zwei verschiedene Sprachen, und es würde keine Kommunikation stattfinden. Um wirklich Kommunikationsfähig zu sein muss man den genauen Kontext, Vokabular und Wissen haben, dass in den verschiedenen Momenten gefragt ist. Nur wenig Sinn hat es mit einem chinesischen Arzt über Südafrikanische Ekonomie zu fragen, oder sich mit einem schwedischen Theologen über die Fauna von Costa Rica zu streiten. Natürlich können sowohl der Arzt als auch der Theologe viel über die jeweiligen Gebiete wissen, ob sie jedoch die sprachlichen Mittel haben, um sich ordentlich auszudrücken ist zu bezweifeln.
the above written is what i think of language in german. since it is in german, only few of the TOK classmates will understand it. if one (google) translates it, and im sure something vaguely similar will come out; but surely not the same. this is the perfect example for how language can be very hard to interpret. different situations, different vocabulary, different cultures, or different times, change the meaning of words, the meaning of gestures, the meaning of symbols.
i can easily think of about 39 different words for something to do with snowfall in german. i can think of 10 words in spanish. there are tons of different banana names in spanish. in austria there are about 7000 ( :) ) different names and sorts of apples. i only now one name for a bobsled in spanish, in austria there are about 5 for only one kind of bobsled, then each of the different types of sleds has probably other 5 names.
the above written is what i think of language in german. since it is in german, only few of the TOK classmates will understand it. if one (google) translates it, and im sure something vaguely similar will come out; but surely not the same. this is the perfect example for how language can be very hard to interpret. different situations, different vocabulary, different cultures, or different times, change the meaning of words, the meaning of gestures, the meaning of symbols.
i can easily think of about 39 different words for something to do with snowfall in german. i can think of 10 words in spanish. there are tons of different banana names in spanish. in austria there are about 7000 ( :) ) different names and sorts of apples. i only now one name for a bobsled in spanish, in austria there are about 5 for only one kind of bobsled, then each of the different types of sleds has probably other 5 names.
lunes, 31 de enero de 2011
Suscribirse a:
Comentarios (Atom)