NationStates Jolt Archive

So I was reading the financial times this morning and I came across an article entitled Did Descartes Doom Terry?

Now I thought, okay, I'm in an intro to philosophy class and know a little about this stuff, lets see what they say.

What it basically boiled down to was the philosophical camps of aristotle and descartes. Aristotle argued that all life is god given and sacred, therefore, it must not be interrupted by man.

Descartes, on the other side argued that what makes humanity is conciousness, therefore, as soon as conciousness is lost, humanity is lost.

The Courts have sided with the Descrates camp, which I currently reside in, even though I have a profound distaste for Descartes. Many of the 'family-orineted' groups are with Aristotle and acadamia is split more or less down the middle.

What camp are you in? Why? What do you think about this case and its more far-reaching implications? Why do you follow whatever philosophy you follow?

anyone happen to know if her pineal gland is part of her brain that is gone at this point?

This is an oversimplification on the part of the Financial Times.

Aristotle also said that we must not interfere in the development of a human being. Does it sound to you like we are? Yeah. Yeah, we are. Autonomy is to be upheld.

In addition, according to Aristotle, she is incapable of leading a virtuous, or "good," life, as the vegetable that she is.

It's not as simple as "Aristotle is pro-life and Descartes hates babies!"

If I understand then I'm with Descartes.

I really don't like either of them (I think Nietzsche, Sartre, and the other existentialists are much cooler, though I disagree heavily with Nietzsche, I respect his willingness to say things that would piss almost everyone off).

Aristotle also said that we must not interfere in the development of a human being. Does it sound to you like we are? Yeah. Yeah, we are. Autonomy is to be upheld.

The he goes and supports slavery. Talk about hypocricy.

My personal philosphies tend to lean heavily toward the Aristotelean, but in this case I'd say that Decartes got it right. As human beings, we are the sum of our experiences. Without our cognative functions, we effectively cease to be.

I'm slightly biased against Descartes myself, because I think he glossed over some things a bit too much. Saying that animals are simply like pre-programmed automatons, for example.

What it basically boiled down to was the philosophical camps of aristotle and descartes. Aristotle argued that all life is god given and sacred, therefore, it must not be interrupted by man.

Weren't we tampering with her life by artificially prolonging it long after she should have died? She was as good as dead, simply kept alive by machines. I doubt Aristotle took this possibility into account when philosiphizing it up. He was smart, but he couldn't see into the future.

The he goes and supports slavery. Talk about hypocricy.

Some of his justifications are funny though.

The big aristotle can't rap. I won't explain it if you don't get it. I'll give you a clue (basketball).

I'm in descartes camp.

But i'm with a bunch of vikings, and we just ran him through and we're moving on to his family/friends.

[bump]