Respond to TWO of the following questions:
  1. Aristotle argues that nature is teleological, in other words, that it has a purpose. However, the “new science” presented by Galileo, Newton, and Hobbes argues that nature is non-purposive. Which view of nature do you agree with and why?
  2. If you were in a state of nature, a primitive condition without civil government, would you help people or use your powers to fulfill your desires even if it meant not helping others? Do you think most people would help each other or act from self-interest?
  3. Hobbes thinks that the terms “good” and “evil” are relative to the individual. When we use those terms, we mean that good things bring us pleasure and evil things bring us pain. Do you agree with Hobbes that good and evil are relative terms, or do you think there is an objective standard to which the terms refer? Explain your answer with an example.
  4. Berkeley thinks that “to be is to be perceived.” But, if you leave the room you’re in and go to another one, do the things in the room you were in still exist? How does Berkeley answer this question, and do you agree with him? Explain.
Note: To earn full credit for this graded discussion, post at least two times. First, post your own thoughts. This post should be substantial (containing at least 150-200 words). Next, respond to the post of another student. Remember to follow the rules of netiquette. Be polite, professional, and thoughtful. This post should contain at least 50-100 words. All posts need to be in your own words.

Is this the question you were looking for? Place your Order Here