Up@dawn 2.0

Friday, October 6, 2017

Quizzes Oct 9/10, 11/12

Oct9/10-DR 13

1. In the Hellenistic period Western philosophy came to be seen as what? What did the Hellenistic philosophies all praise, and what did they all see as the key to wisdom?

2. Of what later philosophy was Epicureanism the main ancestor?

3. What central problem of philosophy was Epicurus apparently the first to state?

4. From what did the Stoics take their name?

5. What was the one thing the Stoics thought the Epicureans were right about?

6. How does Gottlieb say the Stoics were inconsistent?


The Ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus was born in 341 BC, on the island of Samos, a few miles off the coast of modern Turkey. He had an unusually long beard, wrote over three hundred books and was one of the most famous philosophers of his age.

What made him famous was his skilful and relentless focus on one particular subject: happiness. Previously, philosophers had wanted to know how to be good; Epicurus insisted he wanted to focus on how to be happy.

Few philosophers had ever made such a frank, down-to-earth admission of their interests before. It shocked many, especially when they heard that Epicurus had started a School for Happiness. The idea of what was going on inside was both entirely shocking and deeply titillating. A few disgruntled Epicureans made some damaging leaks about what was going on in the school. Timocrates said that Epicurus had to vomit twice a day because he spent all his time on a sofa being fed luxurious meats and fish by a team of slaves. And Diotimus the Stoic published fifty lewd letters which he said had been written by Epicurus to some young students when he’d been drunk and sexually obsessed. It’s because of such gossip that we still sometimes now use the adjective ‘Epicurean’ to describe luxury and decadence... SoL


What is the best life we can live? How can we cope with whatever the universe throws at us and keep thriving nonetheless? The ancient Greco-Roman philosophy of Stoicism explains that while we may not always have control over the events affecting us, we can have control over how we approach things. Massimo Pigliucci describes the philosophy of Stoicism...Ed.ted




‘Stoicism’ was a philosophy that flourished for some 400 years in Ancient Greece and Rome, gaining widespread support among all classes of society. It had one overwhelming and highly practical ambition: to teach people how to be calm and brave in the face of overwhelming anxiety and pain.

We still honour this school whenever we call someone ‘stoic’ or plain ‘philosophical’ when fate turns against them: when they lose their keys, are humiliated at work, rejected in love or disgraced in society. Of all philosophies, Stoicism remains perhaps the most immediately relevant and useful for our uncertain and panicky times... SoL
DQ

  • What do you think of when you hear the word "therapy"? Do you think philosophers can be good therapists?
  •  Do you think "the greatest happiness of the greatest number" is an appropriate goal in life? Can it be effectively pursued by those who shun "any direct involvement in public life"?
  • If the motion of atoms explains everything, can we be free?
  • Is it true that your private thoughts can never be enslaved?
  • Do you agree with the Stoic critique of Plato's Forms? (321)
  • How do you distinguish things that are and are not subject to your control?
Oct11/12, LH 3, DR 13 (p.336-357)

1. What was the main teaching of skepticism? ("Scepticism" in Br. spelling)

2. How did Pyrrho say you could become free from all worry? Does Warburton think this would work for most of us?

3. How does modern skepticism differ from its ancient predecessor?

4. Why does Gottlieb think Pyrrho must not have been as radically skeptical as legend has it?

5. What did David Hume say about too much skepticism?

6. What did "throwing in the sponge" mean, in Sextus Emiricus's story?


DQ

  • Is it possible to go through life questioning and doubting everything, committing always to nothing, and holding no firm opinions? Is it desirable or useful to try doing so?
  • Whose view on the reliability of the senses do you find more persuasive, Pyrrho's or Epicurus's (see DR 309-10)
  • In what ways are you skeptical? In what ways are you not?
  • Comment: "Even determinists and fatalists look both ways before crossing the street."
  • What do you think of "the Empiricist approach to medicine"? (350) Does anyone still practice it?

Skepticism mentioned under last week's quiz...


It’s certainly a long way from “Grand Theft Auto.”

Henry David Thoreau’s classic “Walden” is the inspiration for what Smithsonian Magazine is calling the world’s most improbable video game: “Walden, a Game.”

Instead of offering the thrills of stealing, violence and copious cussing, the new video game, based on Thoreau’s 19th-century retreat in Massachusetts, will urge players to collect arrowheads, cast their fishing pole into a soothing pond, buy penny candies and perhaps even jot notes in a journal — all while listening to the author’s meditations on nature... (continues)

130 comments:

  1. 8 - DQ
    1. When I hear "therapy", I think of exploring the mind. Often therapy can be a restructuring of how you think about and view the world. I do think philosophers can be good therapists, I believe that discussing philosophy requires and open mind, and when you have an open mind, you can discover a lot about yourself and the world.
    3. I think that, if the motion of atoms explains everything, we can still be free. We can participate in the motion, influence and change it - have an active role.
    4. I do believe it is true that your private thoughts can never be enslaved. They are yours to have and think about as you wish. No one else can possibly know or control your private thoughts. They are the epitome of privacy.
    6. I ask myself honestly what can I do about X? If the answer is nothing, I let it go. If the answer is something else, I set about doing what I can. I try really hard not to old onto things that I can not control.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 8 - Quiz Questions
    1. The Stoic system not only enjoined a selfless devotion to the welfare of others, it also..?
    dwelt on the vanity of the world, and on the guiding inner voice of conscience.

    2. What was the Stoics' Nature?
    an earnest intelligence with the serious work of running a universe to do

    3. What was the Epicurean Nature?
    warm-hearted and not averse to a little enjoyment— provided, of course, that it was nothing too indulgent, for this might interfere with the pursuit of more refined and longer-lasting pleasures.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 8 AQQ 2-28
    1.What did some of the Stoics enemies try to strangle
    2.Were the Stoics just as keen as the Epicureans to establish that people were responsible for their own lives?
    3.The Epicureans had simply denied what?
    4.The Epicureans used their random swerve of what to break the chain of physical cause and effect?
    5.Why was Zeno flogging a slave?
    6.What did the slave say about being flogged?
    7.What was Zenos reply to the slave?
    8.Cato was fated to be a what?
    9.Was Caesar fated to be a hero?
    10.What were Zeno and others fated to go on about?
    11.What did the Lazy Argument go like?
    12.Did Chrysippus spot the fallacy in these such arguments?
    13.What was true according to Chrysippus?
    14.What is the answer to the lazy argument?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. #10 AQA

      1.) Stoicism
      2.) Yes
      3.) Fate
      4.) atoms
      5.) for stealing
      6.) He was fated to steal
      7.) The slave was fated to be flogged
      8.) hero
      9.) No
      10.) virtue, duty, reason, and the rest of it
      11.) It aimed to show that if there were such a thing as Fate then there would be no point in trying to do anything.
      12.) Yes
      13.) That if you were ill then you would either be caused to recover or caused not to recover.
      14.) There is a point in calling a doctor, because this may well make your recovery more likely; there is a point in punishing people, because this may well discourage them from doing wrong in future; and there is a point in offering philosophical advice because this may well make people happier.

      Delete
    2. #10 AQA
      1.They tried to strangle Stoicism
      2. Yes
      3. They denied Fate
      4. Atoms
      5. Zeno was flogging a slave for stealing
      6. The slave said that he was fated to steal

      Delete
  4. 8 AQQ 3-2
    1.Real Sceptics do not endorse what?
    2.You cannot catch a real Sceptic out by claiming what?
    3.You cannot hurt a Sceptic with what objection?
    4.A Sceptic puts fowards the alternatives for what reason?
    5.When Sextus cites the large variety of beliefs among different nations he is not trying to demonstrate what?
    6.He is however, trying to unsettle what?
    7.What did Epicurus and Lucretius say about a Sceptic?
    8.Does the Sceptic want a leg to stand on?
    9.What does a Sceptic want to suspend?
    10.What must a Sceptic leave open to question?
    11.What will a Sceptic refuse to make firm assertions about?
    12.A Sceptic will happily say what about things?
    13.Sextus says that Sceptics happily go along with what?
    14.What is the guardian in this case?
    15.What does the guardian cause us to have?
    16.Sextus says that hunger conducts us to what?
    17.Why will a Sceptic lead a fairly conventional existence?
    18.The Sceptics unresisting attitude to everyday observances extends not only to what?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. #10 10/11

      1.) any philosophical thesis
      2.) that he is being too dogmatic
      3.) "How do you know nothing can be known?" or "How do you know that there are always equally powerful alternative views?"
      4.) the sake of argument
      5.) that some or other of the foreigners are right and Greeks are wrong
      6.) Greek's confidence in their own views and merely inviting them to join him in keeping an open mind
      7.) a Sceptic who tried to cast doubt on everything would not have a leg to stand on: no standard of correctness and no basis for condemning any belief is false
      8.) No
      9.) His judgement
      10.) anything which people argue about or any subject of investigation or intellectual relfection
      11.) ultimate nature or cause of anything
      12.) appearance
      13.) everyday appearances in the way that a child unthinkingly follows his guardian
      14.) nature
      15.) thoughts, experiences, and impulses
      16.) food
      17.) because he will happily go along with the laws and customs that are passed down in his society
      18.) conventional customs and pities and to matters that "depend on passive and unwilled feelings and are not objects of investigation," but also to some forms of technical expertise.

      Delete
  5. Discussion question responses feb 28
    1. I think of a typical therapist asking questions to someone who needs help. I don't think a philosopher would be a good therapist, I think they would argue too much with the client.
    2. But the happiness of the greatest number of people may not outweigh how the minority may feel. Could this not be seen in white supremacy?
    3. Our minds can.
    4. I don't think so. You can be enslaved by the world we live in. Racist's minds could be enslaved because they have been taught or tricked by society that the way they think is normal.
    5. No.
    6. I think of steps I could take to change something, if there are no steps then I can't change it.

    Alternate quiz questions:
    1. Sextus said the suspension of judgement was only to be applied to what?
    2. Sextus says that Sceptics should happily go along with nature just like what?
    3. Sextus was an advocate of what approach to medicine?
    4. What comparison is made about the arguments Sceptics use to dislodge dogmatic beliefs?

    Alternate discussion questions:
    1. Do advertisements affect the way we think? Can our minds be free if we are constantly seeing advertisements?
    2. What would it take to "free" your mind after growing up in a society like America?
    3. What is a free mind?
    4. How can you free your mind if there are variables you cannot control?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Devin Willis9:37 PM CST

    Devin Willis 8
    1. When I hear the word therapy, I think of a helping hand. Therefore, I do believe that philosophers can be good therapists.
    2. I feel like it is because you want to have as much pleasure as you can in life without having as many painful experiences.
    3. Yes, I believe you will be more free-spirited.
    4. Your private thoughts can never be enslaved.
    6. Things that I cannot personally change or alter are out of my control.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 4. What about the instances of authoritarian brainwashing (e.g. North Korea)?

      Delete
  7. Devin Willis10:19 PM CST

    Devin Willis 8
    1. Pyrrho's lived to be how old?
    2. What is the Jain religion?
    3. Who took over the headship of Plato's academy, just before Phyrrho's death?
    4. The lazy argument aimed to show what?
    5. What practice did Carneades adopt?
    6. What did the Methodist doctors agree with mainstream Empiricists?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1) 90
      2)Hinduism
      3) Arcesilaus
      4)belief in fate implied that there was no point in doing anything,

      Delete
  8. Sam Rozell
    Section 8
    D.Q. Questions
    1. Hearing the word "therapy" to me brings on the idea of delving into the mind and understanding personal thoughts and beliefs as to how the world works and why certain events have shaped you into the person you are. I do believe philosophers could be considered therapists, as they work to provide answers to the unknown.
    4. Private thoughts can never be enslaved thoughts. They are your thoughts, your beliefs; while their can be challenges to those thoughts, they will never not be your own.
    6. I have to take a step back in order to determine if something is within my control or not. If I can't do anything immediately to control whatever it may be, or be able to control it years from now, I'll let it go and come to the conclusion that it is out of my control.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Clayton Thomas (10)10:33 AM CST

    DQ: 2/28

    1. When I hear the word therapy, I think of people being helped through some situation that has caused them some form of pain (emotionally, physically, or spiritually). I think philosophers could make great therapists because they could help you to examine life as a whole and what it means to live rather than dwell on that small spec of life which is causing the pain.

    2. I think that "the greatest happiness of the greatest number" is not necessarily a good goal to have in life. It could be, but not necessarily. I personally the greatest goal in life is to achieve happiness, and if making 'the greatest number' of people you can happy makes you happy then it is an appropriate goal to have. Otherwise, leave it to those who do care about the greater good and go make yourself happy. I would say this goal cannot be effectively pursued by those who shun involvement in public life because if your ultimate goal is to provide 'the greatest happiness to the greatest number' then you would have to know the greatest number and understand what makes them happy; which, cannot be done if you shun involvement in public life.

    3. Solely going off the idea that atoms do explain everything, then yes we are free. We are free move to move about space and time clashing with some and bonding with others. Which in a sense is kind of what happens. We have atoms in our lives (people) that we like and atoms that we don't. We get close and bond with the ones we like forming compounds of atoms (groups of people), and push the others away.

    4. I would say that it is true that your private cannot be enslaved; however, they can be infatuated with something for awhile that can be hard to forget. We control our private thoughts with no limits simply because no one else will ever know what is going on in your head, which is why they cannot be enslaved, but if some tragic/shocking event were to happen chances are you will think about that thing for awhile. So i would say it can be predictable but not enslaveable.

    5. I would have to disagree with their assessment of Plato's Forms because they say concepts are material things, but I would argue that sometimes concepts are just non-material ideas in the brain. An idea is not a tangible thing, but rather has the form of one. Same with the concept of the soul. It isn't a tangible thing made of material things. It's an idea that people accept to help them accept death and the after life. It takes on this form, but it cannot be proven to exist.

    6. The way i determine if something is out of my control or not is based on the circumstance I am in and any previous circumstance that could've led up to it. You would have to consider every moment up to the moment in question out of your control, because if even one of those was fixable or solvable on your account then the situation was controllable by yourself. Otherwise, it probably wasn't in your control to begin with.

    ReplyDelete
  10. 10
    DQ

    1. When I think of the word therapy I think of a person going to seek help with certain problems they are having in their life with someone who can help them through that by using different methods that are proven to be helpful.

    2. I think you can still be happy if you work for the public, if it something that you are passionate about doing.

    3. I don't think that motion of atoms explains everything, that's kind of a long jump. I don't think the motion of atoms proves if people are free or not either. I believe that people are free to make their own decisions, but usually people will based their decisions on a circumstance where they may feel that their decision making is restricted.

    4. You would think that, but a persons thoughts can be changed and controlled in a way by persuasive people. The may be that person's private thoughts but they are vulnerable to people they may want to change them.

    5. I don't agree with Plato's Theory of forms. Plato appears to be weary of how the reality of things are, because he does not want to accept that the observable world is reality. Due to this his claims do not have a strong foundation because he is basing his claims on what he want the truth to be, and not what observation points too.

    6. Things that are in or not in your control is dependent on how much power you have over that situation, and how many variables are involved.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 5. I entirely agree. I think Plato just went with the whole "Forms" thing so he'd have an answer for everything. And then to put words in Socrates' mouth affirming it. Disgraceful.

      Delete
  11. 10
    1. Hearing the word "therapy," I think of sitting down with someone and discussing your problems, or really just any method of working through your problems and making yourself feel better. I guess philosophers could be good therapists, they may be able to look at things in different ways and give more insight.

    2. I think it would be better to strive to be happy and content. I feel like you also need to be involved in public life and surround yourself with people who love you. That's really what life is all about.

    3. Yes I guess so, because atoms are constantly moving freely and going wherever they want to go.

    4. Yes, I think it's true. They are yours and they are private, no one else can get to them. They're for your consideration only, and it's up to you to choose how to deal with them.

    5. Yes, I do.

    6. I think you have to step back and look at the situation. Sometimes there might be other people involved, so the situation might be out of your control. You also have to think about how your decisions and actions would effect the outcome of a situation, and that might help you to decide if it was in your control or not.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 10

    1) Therapy for me is that a way to reflect our life and have a better understanding of who we're.
    I do think philosophers will be good therapists because they challenge our belief and make us question what we know to broaden our perspective.

    3) Our action are never free. We are controlled by the influence in our environment.

    4) With a lot of meditation and concentration, it can be controlled. The only time our private thoughts escape us is when we get distracted.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Devin Willis12:19 AM CST

    Devin Willis 8
    1. No it is not possible because you will be clueless and always indecisive, which will make life harder than what it has to be.
    2. Epicurus because Pyrrho's logic behind senses is completely insane and will get me killed.
    3. I am skeptical because I think for myself and come up with my own analogies, however I do believe in certain norms and standards in society.
    4. Everyone cares for their life and will not voluntarily destroy it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Maddy Russell 10
    DQ
    1. I think it is possible to live your life by not committing to anything. I do not think this a desirable life and it id definitely not useful to do so. You would live your life in sort of bubble, not committing or feeling anything.
    2.Epicurus because for me it makes more sense logically.
    3.I am skeptical of some social norms, like religion. But in most things I follow norms and am not skeptical.
    4. Even if you think death is inevitable, you still care for your own life and do not want to give it up.
    5. It is the idea that you learn through experience and not necessarily through science.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Maddy Russell 10
    Quiz Questions
    1. What kind of doctor agreed with main stream Empiricists?
    2. What did Sextus compare Septics ability to go along with to?
    3. According to Sextus, why do people become Sceptics?
    4. Who took over the headship of Plato's Academy after Pyrrho's death?
    5. According to Sceptics, what is worth suspending for a quiet life?
    6. What did Sextus point out about hearing everyone's argument about some question?
    7. What does Scepticism apply to?
    8. What did Epicurus and Lucretius say about Sceptics?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. methodist doctors
      2. a child unthinkingly following their guardian
      3. they have found that a welcome wave of tranquility tends to follow in the wake of such open-mindedness
      4. arcesilaus
      5. judgement
      6. it's important to keep an open mind

      Delete
  16. 1. I don't think it's possible to live a fulfilling life questioning everything. It causes us to miss opportunities to explore the world and invest in new opportunities in life. It's possible, but not desirable.
    2. Epicurus'. Pyrroh's logic is extreme, honestly too much for me to handle and actually survive.
    3. I question quite a few things in life. Why things are the way they are and if the decisions I make are the best. I rely on everything around me to make conclusions, however, rather than ignoring my senses because they are deemed "unreliable" by traditional sceptics.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Alexus Uqdah 8
    DQ
    -I don't believe it is possible to go through life that way because there will always be something you forget to doubt or commit to. And no I don't think this is useful or desirable.

    -I find Epicurus's view more persuasive. Pyrrho's view is too extreme for me.

    -I guess I tend to be more skeptical of things that are new to me. However, I don't question things I have been taught when I was younger and I guess that can be the wrong outtake on things, but for example, I don't question my religious beliefs.

    -I hope they would. I don't know anyone that wouldn't. I think everyone cares enough about their own life to not want walk into death.

    -I don't think it would work in today's society and I don't think anyone still practices that belief.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Clayton Thomas (10)10:32 AM CST

    3/2: DQ

    1. I would argue that it is possible for for one to doubt and commit to nothing; however, I would also say that this a futile effort to try and do so for two reasons: 1) it is not useful for application in society because you will never be able to make your own decisions without doubting them and couldn't be told what to do without doubting them so you'd be stuck in an vicious cycle, and 2) it is not desirable to walk around doubting everything and not even forming your own opinions because you would just doubt your opinions which leads to uninteresting conversations and constant reassurance by the other party since you have so much doubt and eventually that other party will get tired of constantly reassuring you. So i would say yes it's possible, but I would advise against pursuing it.

    2. I think Epicurus sums up the senses perfectly, "If you fight against all sensations, you will not have a standard against which to judge even those of them you say are mistaken". In this, it seems like Epicurus is trying to say that without any falsities there can be no truth, so one must know what to base his assessment on before he can make the assessment, which seems like sound logic to me.

    3. There are many accepted ideas and various traditions practiced that I highly question because of their nature (such as certain political views and religious ideas just to name a few); however, I am not a complete skeptic because I do have my own set of accepted opinions and values I follow, but their are plenty I question.

    4. Whether you see the glass as half full or half empty, you still have to look at the glass of liquid to make your assessment. Your assessment of this liquid is completely subjective, but without a glass holding some liquid it can't be half full or empty, it is just nonexistent.

    5. I think, especially for the time period and lack of technology, that the Empiricist approach to medicine was extremely plausible. They practiced the idea of observing what works to fight what, and what doesn't work through tests and just go from their until they developed a system of what cured what and what didn't. Which, for not having technology to run tests and know exactly or with better precision what will work, this was a great way to practice I feel. I would hope no one practices this because of our knowledge of medicine now and how precise we can make treatments, however new things arise and sometimes the only to determine if something will work or not is trial and error.

    Alternate DQ:

    1. Why do you think people followed the Sceptic ideals and refuse to commit themselves to anything?

    2. Can one practice ataraxia without becoming a Sceptic? Why?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. Its seems to be a safe way to live. If you don't have any opinions no one can fault you for them.

      2. In a way yes, because sceptic refuse to old an opinion which is supposed to alleviate the mind, you can reach the state without giving up any beliefs

      Delete
  19. 10- D.Q responses:

    1.) it is possible to go through life being a consistent skeptic, but i personally see no reason or benefit in doing so. It's a waste of time and waste of a life to not accept anything and deny everything.

    2.) Epicurus make more sense and is more logical to me than Pyrroh's useless and undesirable lifestyle and logic.

    3.) I am not very skeptical at all, rather open-minded. I am firm on my beliefs and decisions ( most of the time ) but will not take a skeptic form of approach on different things and deem everything untrue and/or impossible.

    4.) whether you are a determinist or a fatalist, as human beings, either have a sense of caution on decisions/actions they make in life.

    5.) I think it is the approach to medicine through experience in the particular field. I think some still use this approach, of course not the the extent Sextus did, but rather through experience through practice.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Is it possible to go through life questioning and doubting everything, committing always to nothing, and holding no firm opinions? Is it desirable or useful to try doing so?
    * I don't believe so, but I'm sure people have tried to live such a way. I do think that living this way does have some benefit though I believe that it is impossible to be without any firm opinions. Still thinking this way does free the mind to new idea

    Whose view on the reliability of the senses do you find more persuasive, Pyrrho's or Epicurus's (see DR 309-10)
    *Epicurus

    In what ways are you skeptical? In what ways are you not?
    *I'm skeptical in the ways of people and humanity. Though this could be seen more as pessimism then anything.

    Comment: "Even determinists and fatalists look both ways before crossing the street."
    * People rarely want to end their lives by making a stupid mistake. Therefore we take precaution to stop ourselves from doing things like that.

    What do you think of "the Empiricist approach to medicine"? (350) Does anyone still practice it?
    *No!!

    ReplyDelete
  21. 10
    1. No, I don't think it's possible to go through life without caring about anything and doubting everything. You need to commit, you need to have roots and trust people, have your own opinions and be able to stand up for yourself. I don't think it's desirable or useful at all to live that way.

    2. I find Epicurus's view much more reliable. You do have to trust your senses, they are really all you have to give you your perception of everyday life, so you need to rely on and trust them.

    3. I think I can be skeptical when it comes to people that I don't know, it takes me a little while to fully trust people.

    4. I think at the end of the day you have a natural instinct to protect yourself and preserve your life. You can preach all you want that you are leaving your life to fate and whatever happens happens, but at the end of the day your first reaction is always to protect yourself.

    5. I don't think it's a very smart approach to medicine, and it is not practiced anymore.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous11:55 AM CDT

      #1
      Your answer is so right, everyone cares, the amount of caring is different, for sure, but everyone cares about something.

      Delete
  22. DQ
    10

    1. I feel like it is possible, But always questioning and doubting seems like a commitment to always be confused, which I don't think would be very desirable if you prefer not to be confused about every aspect of how things work.

    2. I consider Epicurus's to be more persuasive.

    3. When I'm skeptical about somethings it's usually based on the consistency of how something has worked or not in the past, and I am skeptical about things when they seem to be going against what I consider to be more accurate based on the facts that have been collected.

    4. I think think everyone that considers them self to be a fatalist would jump in front of a moving car. Fatalists I don't think are more suicidal in that way, more in that they won't go out their way to kill themselves that directly. They would more likely be heavy drinkers and just accepting that they will probably die early from it and not caring because we are all going to die anyways. I think it's more like that rather them intentionally seeking ways to kills themselves. This is based on people that I have talked to that consider themselves to be fatalists.

    5. I think it is not the best approach to medicine, and I'm sure a minority group of people still practice it

    ReplyDelete
  23. Caroline Pyles2:10 PM CST

    Discussion responses March 2:
    1. It could be possible but i don't think anyone in today's world would do it to the extent that Pyrrho did.
    2. Epicurus
    3. I'm very skeptical about how other people's minds work vs my own. I'll never be able to know how other people think, so i'll never know if what i think is "normal".
    4. I think it's true. No one wants to or is willing to die except Pyrrho.
    5. I'm sure some people still practice it... maybe not very successfully.

    Alternate discussion questions:
    1. If we are to not care about anything, do we not build relationships either?
    2. How can you live your whole life questioning everything without going mad while questioning your own mind?
    3. Is scepticism practical for students?

    ReplyDelete
  24. 10

    1) It is a good idea to question most things because when we try to answer the question it will help us understand life better but it is not practical to question everything. It is useful in a way but the risk out weighs the usefulness.

    3) I'm a skeptic until I'm given sufficient data or reasoning about anything. I usually trust my senses, but question them one third of the time. The only thing I'm not skeptic about things I've experienced, once I know something is painful I will never question myself if that thing is painful ever again.

    4) As much as we try to be skeptic, we've involuntary actions. Our senses will always try to protect us from any danger that we know of. It takes a lot of effort to jump into danger knowing it is dangerous.

    ReplyDelete
  25. 9 DQ-Responses
    Kierah Pruitt


    1. What an unnecessary way of wasting like by deny everything and not being acceptance of anything. This is life. Generally speaking, we aren’t supposed to navigate through our entire existing by simply being skeptical about every wrong or right move us, as humans tend to make.

    2. Epicurus feeds off justice and reasoning where as needed through our life.

    3. Personally, I’ve never planned nor identified myself as a skeptical individual. For the most part, I have always seem to be fairly open-minded with just about any dilemma I face throughout my life or at least to my greatest advantage.

    4. Regardless, of what an individual may label themselves as, we all have the right to the same properties when undergoing certain decisions.


    5. The approach to medicine throughout specific fields tend to indeed, play a traumatic roll, even as far as today.

    ReplyDelete
  26. DQ Responses
    9 - Kierah Pruitt

    1. Speaking of, therapy means a volunteer willing to help another in need even when they feel they have no need at all. So, yes, I do believe philosophers could have positive therapeutic roles.
    2. More so because we look forward to more of the pleasurable things in life, forgetting that pain comes alongside.
    3. Most definitely more free-spirited and open-minded.
    4. It is ultimately up to you to maintain your private thoughts enslaved.
    6. Simply, not everything is in my control.

    ReplyDelete
  27. DQs 10/10/2017
    1. I think of therapy
    2.I do not know.
    3.We can be free in our conscience. It depends one ones definition of free as well.
    4.Yes, be definition.
    5. No
    6. Do I have authority over that thing? Do I have power over it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It does depend on the definition of ones own freedom.

      Delete
  28. DQs 10/12/17
    1. I don't think anyone can not have an opinion. If someone has the ability to want they are potentially committing to something.
    2.Epicurus
    3. Hmmm, I don't think I have ever thought of myself as skeptical. Maybe when it comes to new relationships I can see myself as a skeptic.
    5.People probably still do practice it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous9:15 AM CDT

      Anna Morgan
      #9
      2. I agree, people who claim that they are "neutral" or "not opinionated" are choosing to not think as far as they can. "Not sure yet" would be a better term for them to use. Everyone can become infintely educated about any topic and develop an opinion. And they can always change their mind.

      Delete
    2. although, some people have an opinion but say they don't care as it doesn't affect them regardless of the outcome.

      Delete
  29. #6
    Alternative Quiz Questions:
    1. What is the best known mark of Stoicism?
    2. How are you suppose to cope with fate?
    3. Who said, "Withdraw into yourself?"
    4. How do the stoics get great store?
    5. Who was the first Stoic?
    6. What were tales of noble suicides?
    7. What did the anecdote about the flogged slave give?
    8. What example did Chrysippus use to illustrate what he was trying to say?
    9. What is the one reason the Stoics found it possible to live with the idea of fate?

    ReplyDelete
  30. #10 10/09/2017

    1. Therapy is any course of action that aids in the recovery or improvement of the person. Aroma therapy improves one's mood, massage therapy relieves tension, psychotherapy... does something..., heat therapy can help improve circulation and cold therapy can help reduce swelling. If psychotherapy does anything at all - and we're told it does - then I see no reason why another form of thought therapy wouldn't also function.

    2. I think "the greatest happiness of the greatest number" is a great hope, but it is a useless goal. One cannot control the happiness of people - so if spreading happiness is the goal, your method should be to make as many people happy as you possibly can. Useless goals are, generally, even worse than no goals.

    3. If the motions of atoms explain everything, then not only can we not be free, but we aren't really people. Thus, human life doesn't matter at all - because it's no different than the existence of a rock, except perhaps in how other people perceive it. But I have wonderful news! If the motion of atoms controlled everything, then we couldn't control our thoughts or our actions, so teaching and learning would both be impossible. So there's more to this than the random motion of atoms.

    4. Your private thoughts can be enslaved by circumstances, absolutely. If you don't have leisure time, you also don't have thought about things other than what you must think about - as any combat arms soldier knows.

    5. Yes, and no. That the Forms are, in fact, concepts in the human mind is definitely a point I agree with, but the idea that there is nothing but the physical, though perfectly plausible, is something that experience has convinced me is untrue.

    6. It is generally not advantageous to waste time deciphering what is or is not beyond your control. Rather, one is better served by attempting to influence those things which matter most, and then accepting the consequences whatever the outcome. Running a marathon may or may not be entirely within your control; if you train hard, you may complete it effortlessly, or a bird may defecate on your head and cause you to start wiping your face, thereby tripping on a rock and breaking your neck... but if you do not train at all, it never mattered which was the predestined outcome - except presumably a bird will still defecate on your head.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that your private thoughts can be enslaved by circumstances.

      Delete
  31. #10 10/11/2017

    1. Certainly it's possible, and to some extent we should all resist committing too strongly to ideas that are not firmly established, but no, it probably isn't desirable or useful to attempt to believe absolutely nothing.

    2. I find Epicurus' argument to be more persuasive, though he was actually wrong. Our senses are active processes and are heavily influenced by our brains; the number of sights, smells, sounds, and even tactile sensations that you ignore on a daily basis is entirely a function of your life. You become conditioned to the smell of fish when you fish for a living, you know!

    3. I try to keep an open mind and, most importantly, to evaluate evidence thoroughly. I am not, however, convinced that we should believe in nothing, if for no other reason that believing in nothing we tend to achieve nothing.

    4. Indeed, a healthy dose of caution doesn't hurt anything, whether you believe it matters or not!

    5. The foundation of medicine remains observation of the patient, rather than excessive reliance on the theories we have about how the body works. "Treat the patient, not the reading" is a common instruction for dealing with respiratory patients who appear to be having difficulty breathing but appear to have adequate amounts of oxygen in their blood. However, we do apply theories in modern medicine (particularly various theories of pathophysiology and pharmacokinetics). I'm quite certain that the Empiricist approach to medicine still exists somewhere, as it is still the guiding principle for many medical professionals.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anonymous9:12 AM CDT

    Anna Morgan
    #9
    1. What do you think of when you hear the word "therapy"? Do you think philosophers can be good therapists?
    When I think of the word therapy, I think about improving one's lifestyle and learning how to grow, cope, and accept or move on from the past. It's about realizing that you have to confront your trauma instead of bury it. I would not want a philosopher to be my therapist because I feel like they tend to see things in black and white, and give bleak definitive statements about how to improve. They are very opinionated.

    2. Do you think "the greatest happiness of the greatest number" is an appropriate goal in life? Can it be effectively pursued by those who shun "any direct involvement in public life"?
    I don't think it's an appropriate goal because numbers do not equal happiness. Happiness is a state of mind and sometimes takes a process to achieve. I think it can be achieved by any type of lifestyle one prefers to live, as long as it is not materialistic or hedonistic, and yes it can be pursed even by those in solitude.


    3. If the motion of atoms explains everything, can we be free?
    If the motion of atoms controls us, then no, we cannot be free.
    4.Is it true that your private thoughts can never be enslaved?
    I think private thoughts can certainly be enslaved if someone suffers from a mental illness, especially schizophrenia. Without the help of medications it is impossible to control the hallucinations, audible and visible. Same for depression, anxiety, or mania.
    5.Do you agree with the Stoic critique of Plato's Forms? (321)
    Yes
    6. How do you distinguish things that are and are not subject to your control?
    Other people's feelings and things that have happened in the past are things I cannot control. How I live my day to day life is in my control.

    ReplyDelete
  33. #10- alternate quiz questions for 10/9

    1. What was Fate to Chrysippus?
    2. What was one reason the Stoics found it possible to live with the idea of Fate?
    3. Major misfortunes in life aren't really misfortunes, but what?
    4. According to Stoics, all things in nature were arranged with what in mind?
    5. What is one of the main differences in early Christianity and Stoic theology?
    6. By definition, what does a good man not do?

    ReplyDelete
  34. What do you think of when you hear the word "therapy"? Do you think philosophers can be good therapists?- I don't really think so, because to me philosophy is up to each individual person; it's how you interpret the world and things in it. I feel like by trying to help a person with just the way you perceive things wouldn't work out.


    Is it true that your private thoughts can never be enslaved?- In a way they are because they are your private thoughts- meaning you probably won't share them so they'll just stay locked in your mind.


    How do you distinguish things that are and are not subject to your control?- I distinguish them based on what I can actively play a hand in. The things I can play a hand in are things I can control.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like how you put you second answer it was very interesting.

      Delete
  35. Alternate quiz questions
    DR 13

    1. What marks the start of the new 'Hellenistic age'?
    2. Name one famous Hellenistic philosopher.
    3. what were the dynamics among the three Hellenistic schools of thoughts like?
    4. What was the one thing they all agreed with?
    5. What is 'ataraxia'?
    6. The new schools of thoughts claimed descent from which famous philosopher?
    7. who claimed that the point of inquiry was to crush dangerous false beliefs?
    8. who claimed that the point of inquiry was to help man to live a life 'in accordance' to the nature?
    9. What did the Sceptics hold as the aim of inquiry?
    10. Who was widely credited with 'bringing philosophy down from the heavens'?
    11. Who formulated the principle of utility?
    12. What is the main difference between Epicurus and the utilitarians?
    13. Who were the three best known stoic writers?
    14. Who said that the world is the unplanned product of haphazard forces?

    ReplyDelete
  36. #6

    1. I think of someone who helps talk someone through their problems. Philosophers could be good therapists, but it would have to be a philosophy that resonates with the client. In practice, therapists adjust what they say to fit their clients' ideals. I have a feeling many philosophers were instead try to convert them, with potentially disastrous effects.

    2. Maximizing happiness is the best way to enjoy life. Some people could do this while simultaneously shunning social interaction, but I don't believe the majority of people could do this.

    3. No, because anything and everything could be perfectly predicted with physics. Fortunately, this is not the case in reality, as quantum phenomena are unpredictable.

    4. No, there are many examples of people, and even entire societies that have effectively been brainwashed. For instance, North Koreans attribute every good aspect of their lives to their dictator. Moreover, nearly all religions harbor unsubstantiated hatred for specific groups of people or ideas, and their followers blindly follow.

    5. I agree with the stoics, as I don't agree with Plato's notion of a higher, ideal, and spiritual world.

    6. If it's something I'm doing, it's under my control. Otherwise, it's almost always out of my hands.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with number 2 DQ. I like how you put this.

      Delete
    2. In reply to #2, I agree. Some people are completely content with being alone, but most of us find energy, approval, confidence, and happiness in others.

      Delete
  37. #10 Quiz q's

    1. What marked the start of the helenistic period?
    2. Who died one year after Alexander the great?
    3. What is the best life for epicurus?
    4. Who was the Roman states men that favored epicurianism?
    5. What does epicurus say about the stomach?
    6. What did lucretius saw on the swerve of atoms?
    7. What did epicurus argue about from democritus?
    8. What are the 3 hellenistic schools?
    9. What did lucretius say when epicurus died?
    10. Who were the stoic thinkers?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. Alexander's death in 323 B.C.
      2. Aristotle
      3. Life of freedom from pain in the body and disturbance in the soul
      4. Cicero
      5. Pain lurks around every corner, especially if one tries too hard to pursue a life of intensely agreeable sensations.
      6. if atoms never swerve so as to originate some new movement that will snap the bonds of fate-what is the source of free will possessed by living things throughout the earth?
      7. Death can't be either pleasant or unpleasant. (When we exist, death is not present and when death is present, we do not exist. )
      8. The epicureans, the stoics and the sceptics
      9. "You, who out of black darkness were first to lift up a shining light, revealing the hidden blessings of life, you are my guide, O glory of the Grecian race. In your well-marked footprints now I plant my resolute steps."

      Delete
  38. Anonymous11:46 AM CDT

    When i hear the word "therapy" i think of talking about feelings and working through problems. I think philosophers would be bittersweet therapists because they enjoy thinking outside of the box however, people need someone who is going to listen to their ideals.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Anonymous11:50 AM CDT

    You should do everything in your power to have the highest amount of happiness in your life as possible. Happiness is something that you have to "work" for, as far as, you need to strive to do things that make you happy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why do you have to work to be happy isn't happiness something that happens inside you.

      Delete
    2. I think that a lot of things happen around us that interfere with our happiness, and we have to fight against those things and CHOOSE happiness instead of sulking in it. I think that is why we have to work for it.

      Delete
  40. Anonymous11:52 AM CDT

    No, your private thoughts can be enslaved for long periods of our lives.

    ReplyDelete
  41. #9
    1. When I hear the word therapy I think of talking about your problems and yes because they always communicate about their problems and come up with ways to fix them.
    2. No
    3. It explains an extremely small amount of a thing or quality but it doesn't explain if we are free.
    4. It is true because at that point you are entitled to your first amendment the right to freedom of speech.
    5. Yes
    6. I tend to understand that thing are going to happen like the uncontrollable.

    ReplyDelete
  42. 10
    What do you think of when you hear the word "therapy"? Do you think philosophers can be good therapists?
    I think of two people in a comfortable, office like room. Whenever I personally seek therapy, that is the environment I walk into. I do think that philosophers would be good therapists as long as the beliefs between the two lined up.

    ReplyDelete
  43. 10
    Alternate Quiz questions
    -What was the length of Epicurus life?
    -What does Epicurus compare the gods to?
    -What is Lucretius talking about when he says its like food and fluid you take in the body?
    -Who believed that if atoms sometimes swerved unpredictably then the "bond of fate" could be snapped?
    -How long did stoicism develop?

    ReplyDelete
  44. Nava Sepehri2:53 PM CDT

    What do you think of when you hear the word "therapy"? Do you think philosophers can be good therapists?

    When I hear the word therapy I think guidance. I do believe that philosophers can be considered good therapists because philosophers have freedom of thought and can persuade others to have freedom of thought as well. Freedom of thought can help people figure out why they feel the way they feel and how to resolve that feeling.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 10
      I really like the way you view this. Guidance, as well as vulnerable, when we open up.

      Delete
  45. 10
    How do you distinguish things that are and are not subject to your control?
    I distinguish based on my confidence in the situation. I also analyze my position, to see if I even have a place, or a right to take control.

    ReplyDelete
  46. If the motion of atoms explains everything, can we be free?

    Yes we can be free, despite everything being made up of atoms. Atoms are the foundation of all things, but it doesn't mean we don't have the ability to have freedom of thought, or think for ourselves. Mentality is very curious and is hard to control. It's very creative and it evolves throughout ones lifetime. Atoms don't affect how we think or why we think the way we do. That's like blaming the cosmos or blaming air for all your problems.

    ReplyDelete
  47. #10
    10/9 DQ:
    1. The word therapy brings about the image of two people sitting across from each other, one with a pen and pad of paper and the other, distressed, speaking of events in their life. I think of someone analyzing the thoughts and stories of the patient. Philosophers have several theories of why people act the way in which they do and several theories surrounding death, an occurrence that brings many to therapy, so I believe they would be good therapists.

    4. Yes, our private thoughts can never be enslaved. We have the ability to think however we want. It is the only way in which we are totally free. However, our thoughts can be influenced by others and experiences we have. But they are still our thoughts.

    6. We do not know what is beyond our control until we attempt to control it. In order to determine what we can control, we must try to control it. If we are unable to impact the situation we must then move on and accept that we can't control it.

    ReplyDelete
  48. How do you distinguish things that are and are not subject to your control?

    It's simple. If what you say or do cannot change the outcome of the situation then it is out of your control and you should learn to accept it.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Is it true that your private thoughts can never be enslaved?

    If your thoughts are kept private then aren't they enslaved? The lack of freedom of thought is enslavement itself. Thoughts are for sharing, if you don't share them then they are simply enslaved.

    ReplyDelete
  50. #10- alternate quiz questions for 10/11

    1. What's the opposite of skepticism?
    2. To be a skeptic you don't have to be prepared to fall off a cliff, but you do have to be prepared to do what?
    3. Methodist doctors agreed with mainstreaming Empiricist on what?
    4. From medicine to cosmology, the sciences are full of what?
    5. According to Sceptics, what happens when people grasp what they've been striving for?
    6. What do good Sceptics manage to do?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anna Morgan
      #9
      1. I am thinking gullibility, because skepticism is questioning almost everything, and gullibility is believing everything. It is hard to say that believing in something is the opposite of skepticism, because you cannot believe in everything at once.

      Delete
  51. #10 DQ
    1. When I think of therapy I think of someone listening to my problems and trying to help me understand them in a deeper sense so as to become better with whatever I’m struggling with. I wouldn’t imagine philosophers being good therapist since they would question why I think I have such issues.
    2. No and no
    3.Yes I believe so. Just because the atom can explain everything doesn’t mean the idea of free will changes.
    4. If by enslaved you mean discovered by others who then you owe because they know your secrets then yes I do. You could be coerced to reveal things about yourself or things that you know and don’t want anyone to discover. So if it’s in that sense I say yes, your secrets can be enslaved. Even though you can’t technically enslave an idea.
    5.No, just because I can vividly imagine a Yeti monster doesnt mean Yeti monsters exist.
    6. It can only be done in the moment of the event. For instance, suddenly a cup falls from the table in front of me. I, being an able bodied human being, can control whether or not the cup hits the ground. You can only distinguish what you can and can’t control by trial and error.

    ReplyDelete
  52. 10
    Something that is under my control is something I act on using physical force. If something is acted upon by somthing else it is not under my control

    ReplyDelete
  53. #10 Alternative Discussion questions
    1. What does it mean for thoughts to be enslaved if indeed they can be?
    2. If we can move our atoms freely, even if their movements can be calculated, does that indeed mean we can be free?
    3.How do you define 'control'?
    4.Why should philosophy be a therapeutic practice?
    5. How would Socrates' respond to stoicism?
    6. Are your private thoughts truly free if they never escape your lips?
    7. If you don't think that essentially escaping public life can bring you happiness, why not?
    8.If public life were hypothetically terrible, why would a person pursue being a part of that life? Would being a hermit bring you piece then?
    9. Do you believe there are times when remaining in "plato's Cave" is beneficial for some people?
    10. If you are the type of person who believes what everyone tells you, are your internal thoughts free, or controlled by influences?
    11. Could philosophy still be considered therapeutic if finding the light out of the cave 'burns' the eyes of the captive?
    12. Do you believe in absolute control or absolute freedom? Why?

    ReplyDelete
  54. #6
    1. I think of therapy as a place to go and release any stress, anger, or fear to a non-bias party. Philosophers would be great therapist I think. That is their whole thing really. They would want to listen and hear what you'd have to say, put in some suggestions, and guide you to a conclusion for yourself.
    2. I don't think you can make everyone happy. That's just life, but I also don't think you should base your happiness off the amount of people you've made happy. I've noticed that the people who tend to try and keep other people happy are not happy themselves. So, I think you should make yourself happy first before trying to make everyone else happy as a priority.

    ReplyDelete
  55. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  56. #6 10/10/2017
    1. When I think of therapy I think of constructive conversation, internal reflection, and healing. I honestly am not sure that I think that philosophers would be good therapists, I feel like people typically need more straightforward, concrete reassurance rather than philosophizing.
    2. I do generally think this is a pretty good goal in life. I like the idea that if everyone thought the thing that helped the most was the thing that brought the most happiness to the largest number of people. To an extent I think it depends on the person, but I also think those who want to be less involved in public life will not agree with this as much.
    4. I think our thoughts can definitely be our own and kept to ourselves and not be enslaved. However, I also think that a good number of our thoughts are enslaved either by being effected by other people and the media or being found out somehow.
    6. For me I just think about if there's anything I can do to change or control the situation at all. Sometimes there isn't anything you can do and it's just up to the Universe to decide and handle it itself.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPS3Cd5xpZU hope this hasn't been linked before, here Sam Harris talks about Stoics

    http://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_epicurus.html I really liked this simple explanation of Epicurus and found it really easy to follow.

    ReplyDelete
  57. What do you think of when you hear the word "therapy"? Do you think philosophers can be good therapists?

    When I think of therapy I think of someone seeking help or healing in some physical or mental form. I don't think philosophers would be good physical therapists necessarily, however I do think they would provide stimulating conversation to help people mentally.

    Do you think "the greatest happiness of the greatest number" is an appropriate goal in life? Can it be effectively pursued by those who shun "any direct involvement in public life"?

    I do think it's an appropriate goal in life. People who don't like public involvement would probably not agree with this goal as much, although they could use the philosophy to pursue the greatest number of their own personal interests.

    If the motion of atoms explains everything, can we be free?

    I think we can be free with the motion of atoms explaining everything. They are the reason we move, but we determine when/how we move with free will.

    Is it true that your private thoughts can never be enslaved?

    Our thoughts are as free as we allow them to be. Mostly, we think freely, however, your thoughts can alter your perspective and enslave your mental state. For example, a lot of negative thoughts can create a negative attitude or a negative mental state can produce only negative thoughts.

    How do you distinguish things that are and are not subject to your control?

    I personally do not have the desire to control most aspects of life other than what's necessary. However, I believe that if you try, you can control most things other than inevitable's and the actions of others. If it's internal, you can probably control it. If it's external, you are more likely to not have control.

    ReplyDelete
  58. What do you think of when you hear the word "therapy"? Do you think philosophers can be good therapists?

    I think therapy may come off as a negative thing to some people but to me it's such a good thing and opportunity for one to better themselves. I believe that philosophers may make great therapists considering they are all about knowledge and wisdom, I think that is the best medicine.

    How do you distinguish things that are and are not subject to your control?
    Well it can be tricky sometimes but I think if you just sit back and truly think about it and ask yourself is there anything that I could've done to change the outcome, that's how you distinguish something that was in your control or not.

    Is it true that your private thoughts can never be enslaved?

    Hmm, I think that your private thoughts can be enslaved but you just have to work harder at it. Say you just think a lot of negative things and you don't want to think like that ,you can remind yourself to try and think positively but it takes a lot of work to diminish private thoughts.



    ReplyDelete
  59. If the motion of atoms explains everything, can we be free?

    Well we can be free and move about how we want but I don't think just because the motion of atoms explaining everything doesn't explain other variables that may play into one's life that may be holding them back from doing something they love and living "freely"

    ReplyDelete
  60. #6
    10/10
    1. Philosophers would make good therapists in the sense that they reason with people in order to have them think in challenging and uncomfortable ways, which is an important part of therapy.
    2. To me being involved in public life is an important key to happiness. I think those who deny community are denying an important part of life.
    3. Yes, to me freedom is not defined by scientific principles, but a sense of self worth and importance.
    4. Yes, your thoughts are your thoughts. For someone to know your thinking it must be communicated by yourself.

    Quiz Questions
    1. What are the three groups discussed in the chapter.
    2. Who does Gottlieb spend a lot of time comparing Epicurus to?
    3. What slave belonged to the Stoics
    4. Name two cities besides Athens who became known for their academic philosophy

    ReplyDelete
  61. 1.What do you think of when you hear the word "therapy"? Do you think philosophers can be good therapists?

    When I hear “therapy” I automatically think of someone going through a series of classes, or sessions helping them get through or accomplish something. I think philosophers would be interesting therapists because they could offer insight on your life, whether it be good or bad. But, for the most part I don’t think they would be good therapists because I see them as a bit more biased on their own beliefs and could see them wanting to push them on clients.

    4. Is it true that your private thoughts can never be enslaved?

    I personally believe that your private thoughts could never be enslaved if you know, in your mind, that you are free. The only way that I could see them being enslaved is if you are mentally convinced that you are a slave, in which you think that you have no control over your body or thoughts when really, you do.

    6. How do you distinguish things that are and are not subject to your control?

    I think that you distinguish things that are subject to your control by seeing the effect you have on it. If you have the ability to alter it in any way, then they are subject to your control — on the other hand, if you know that something can still repeatedly occur without you, then you know that it is not subject to your control.

    ReplyDelete
  62. What do you think of when you hear the word "therapy"? Do you think philosophers can be good therapists?
    I think the word therapy means to help. I don't think philosophers would be good therapist because i feel like philosphers think logically and sometime therapy isn't about being logical its able healing
    Do you think "the greatest happiness of the greatest number" is an appropriate goal in life? Can it be effectively pursued by those who shun "any direct involvement in public life"?
    I think happiness is an all-power type of thing that can make/break the world.
    If the motion of atoms explains everything, can we be free? no
    Is it true that your private thoughts can never be enslaved? It depends. I think people very well let other people control their thoughts and opinions.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Anna Morgan #9
    Is it possible to go through life questioning and doubting everything, committing always to nothing, and holding no firm opinions? Is it desirable or useful to try doing so?

    no, you would be so lost. it may feel desirable because commitment can be scary but it is better to believe in something than nothing, even if it’s astrology.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:45 AM CDT

      Although i agree you'd be very lost, there are many people who do question everything and don't have a firm belief system.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. I agree you would very lost

      Delete
  64. #10 quiz q's Lh, dr 13
    1. What is modern Skepticisim?
    2. Who was pyrro?
    3. What would pyrrho have done in the face of danger?
    4. What did pyrrho say about what he knew?
    5. Who founded Skepticism?
    6. Who was Arcesilaus?
    7. What did he believe in?
    8. Who was head of the academy during this time?
    9. What would a true sceptic to in the face of basic needs?
    10. Who was Carneades?
    11. What did he say on skepticism?
    12.Who said throwing in the sponge?

    ReplyDelete
  65. #6
    Alternative Quiz Questions (end of LH 3):
    1. What do philosophers challenge?
    2. Do most of us achieve freedom from all cares, according to Warburton?
    3. What is one common worry?

    Alternative Quiz Questions (end of DR 13):
    1. What is the Sceptic's therapeutic tool-kit full of?
    2. What is the one glaring fact that stands in the Sceptic's favor?
    3. What will emotional dangers in believing you you have gotten to the bottom of things make you think?
    4. What did Sextus acknowledge about the Sceptical approach to life?
    5. What do good Sceptics minimize?

    ReplyDelete
  66. #6

    https://thisibelieve.org/essay/56518/
    Freedom Through Pain

    https://thisibelieve.org/essay/102963/
    Precious Gifts from Heaven

    https://thisibelieve.org/essay/102416/
    I Believe In Hope

    ReplyDelete
  67. Anna Morgan
    #9
    In what ways are you skeptical? In what ways are you not?

    im skeptical of peoples honesty and genunuity. i am skeptical of whether everything is connected (i used to believe it is) or everything is random. i know that scientifically each atoms connect us to everything, technically, but do things happen for a reason? i used to feel that i had more control over my life and now i feel like i have less control. I'm skeptical about a lot of things, but the main thing i can think of that i am not skeptical of is mental illness. it is mental health awareness day, yay!

    ReplyDelete
  68. #9
    Comment: "Even determinists and fatalists look both ways before crossing the street."

    Our natural reflexes are to survive and be cautious. People may claim that they are certain that everything that happens is meant to happen, but deep down they want to survive their day-to-day life.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And who's to say it wasn't their destiny to rely on their natural instincts?

      Delete
    2. Yes this is very true

      Delete
  69. Anonymous10:42 AM CDT

    I am skeptical about things about people I first meet, only because I don't like the "unknown" of things or people.

    ReplyDelete
  70. #10
    AQQ
    LH 3
    1. What did the most extreme sceptics avoid?
    2.Who was the most famous and extreme sceptic of all time?
    3. Why didn't philosophers in Elis have to pay taxes?
    4. Why would have Pyrrho been in trouble every few minutes if he didnt have less sceptic friends?
    5. What was the reason why Pyrrho never got worked up aboput anything?
    6. What were the three questions summarized in Pyrrho's philosophy?
    7. Why does Nigel Warburton say that Pyrrho's philosophy may not work for the rest of us?
    8. What does he call the basic weakness of Pyrrho's approach?
    9. Why does he say it is possible to be skeptical about Pyrrho's sceptism?
    10. What is moderate skepticism?
    11. What characterizes a dogmatic person?
    12. According to Warburton, what do you need to be prepared to do to be a skeptic?

    ReplyDelete
  71. Anonymous10:43 AM CDT

    It is possible to go through life questioning everything, however, it isnt always the most productive way to go through this life. You should have some firm opinions, but it is okay to question things.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's like Aristotle's happy medium. It's just not practical to believe everything nor nothing.

      Delete
  72. Is it possible to go through life questioning and doubting everything, committing always to nothing, and holding no firm opinions? Is it desirable or useful to try doing so?
    In what ways are you skeptical? In what ways are you not?

    It is possible to go through life doubting everything, but it will become a miserable life. It is wise to think for oneself and not hear everything you believe, but not everything is a lie. Commitment is crucial in all aspects of life: health, love, family, etc. If you want to live healthy you have to commit yourself to eating better and working out. If you want a relationship you have to commit to your partner and not cheat. It is stupid to live like this, but I do admit it will result in less worrying and maybe, but probably not, more happiness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am skeptical because I always think for myself before believing what anyone says. Many people just accept things the way they are, but I am sometimes skeptical when it comes to mainstream acceptance of certain topics, such as the food we eat and how the food pyramid is built to kill us faster. You have to be skeptical in order to survive without being brainwashed.

      Delete
    2. not to mention the danger of falling off cliffs, like Pyrrho

      Delete
    3. Interesting really well put.

      Delete
  73. Nava Sepehri
    Weekly essay


    The food pyramid is set out to kill us all at a faster pace. I strongly believe that the human diet today is completely dysfunctional and out of proportion on purpose. Some people are vegan, vegetarian, or pescetarian. These people have, for the most part, the right idea on living longer and healthier. Not only is the food pyramid disproportional and wrong overall, but America has a huge diet problem. There are fast food restaurants everywhere. These are the causes of cancer and diabetes, yet it’s okay to eat from them? This is all very wrong, people need to wake up and realize that this will kill them in the future. Now, unto the food pyramid. The food pyramid consists of fruits, vegetables, dairy(milk), and meat. The fruits and vegetable, as well as some grains, are beneficial to the diet and should be consumed daily. The dairy, however, should not be presented on the food pyramid. First of all, most humans are lactose intolerant. Humans aren’t built to drink other animals’ milk. This isn’t only morale wrong, but our bodies literally can’t digest it. Also, calcium can be completely built through fruits and vegetables. The whole “drink milk to gain bone density” is a scam. The meat is even worse. Red meat and processed meat are insanely dangerous. They directly cause many diseases, such as heart disease, diabetes, and cancer. Yes, I said diabetes. I bet you thought that sugar caused diabetes, but meat is actually a much larger cause of diabetes. So why does the heart association of america promote meat? Because their sponsors are meat providers. That’s right, everything you thought was true is a lie.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting I never looked at it that way.

      Delete
  74. Anonymous10:59 AM CDT

    https://thisibelieve.org/essay/29/
    Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness
    https://thisibelieve.org/essay/20724/
    The Virtues of the Quiet Hero
    https://thisibelieve.org/essay/81479/
    The Ultimate Sacrifice

    ReplyDelete
  75. #6

    1. As both of the authors mentioned, natural instinct and involuntary motions are impossible to stop, which should tell you how insane Pyrrho was for trying to ignore them, choosing instead to talk himself off a cliff out of indifference. It would never be a good idea to try to live like this.

    2. Epicurus' philosophy is far more persuasive than Pyrrho's. Although Epicurus was stoic to a fault, at least he didn't tell people to let dogs bite them because they can't know for certain it would be a bad thing.

    3. I'm skeptical in the sense that I don't just blindly believe what people tell me without substantive evidence it's true. I'm not skeptical in the original sense of the word, where I even ignore evidence because it could be fake, nor the evidence for said evidence being true, because that could also be faked, ad nauseam.

    4. In both determinism and fatalism, events are predetermined. However, it could be part of their destiny to have looked for traffic. Who's to say it wasn't their destiny to not look and end up trampled?

    5. This approach to medicine is effective for a primitive understanding of physiology: do what has worked before, don't look for explanations as to why. However, where modern medicine is, this would be an enormous failure. There are certain diseases and conditions that we would never have found an effective remedy for had we not investigated why it was happening.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like your answer to question 5 very detailed and thought out.

      Delete
  76. #9
    1. Is it possible to go through life questioning and doubting everything, committing always to nothing, and holding no firm opinions? Is it desirable or useful to try doing so?
    No
    2. Whose view on the reliability of the senses do you find more persuasive, Pyrrho's or Epicurus's (see DR 309-10)
    Pyrrhos
    3. In what ways are you skeptical? In what ways are you not?
    Hard to say
    4. Comment: "Even determinists and fatalists look both ways before crossing the street."
    That interesting to know that they do this =
    5. What do you think of "the Empiricist approach to medicine"? (350) Does anyone still practice it?
    I think its interesting and many people still does it.

    ReplyDelete
  77. #10 DQ
    I find Epicurus’ view on the reliability of the senses more persuasive because the only way we have to experience the world around us is with our senses.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. #10
      With respect to the senses, do you think there are other ways out interacting with the world? If so how would it change your worldview.

      Delete
  78. #10
    I believe that whether or not consistent skepticism is a valid way to live all depends upon whether or not you are the type of person who seeks knowledge or not. If you don't, then your life won't progress, but if you do, then you'll often find answers.

    ReplyDelete
  79. 10
    Is it possible to go through life questioning and doubting everything, committing always to nothing, and holding no firm opinions? Is it desirable or useful to try doing so?
    I don't think so. It would be extremely difficult to do so, but why would anybody want to? At some point I think we all question why we are where we are. We all feel something about something.

    ReplyDelete
  80. #10
    -How was the Ancient Greek Philosopher Pyrrho?
    -Unlike Aristotle and Plato, most skeptics avoided from holding what?
    -What job was Pyrrho appointed to in his town of Elis?
    -What was Pyrrho's basic weakness?
    -What do philosophers challenge?

    ReplyDelete
  81. Is it possible to go through life questioning and doubting everything, committing always to nothing, and holding no firm opinions? Is it desirable or useful to try doing so?- I don't think it's possible because then you could never have a conversation about anything; it's because of this I don't think its desireable.


    In what ways are you skeptical? In what ways are you not?- I think I am curious but not skeptical. A skeptical has no firm belief or thought and I can't do that, I definitely have firm thoughts and beliefs.




    ReplyDelete
  82. #10 alternative DQ
    1. Is it desireable to commit to skepticism over willful ignorance?
    2. Is it better to have a mix of skepticism and belief?
    3. How do you be skeptical without paranoia?
    4. Why be skeptical at one instance and not another?
    5. Why do people have an aversion to skepticism?
    6. How is skepticism meaningful to us ?
    7. Can skepticism be therapeutic in your view?
    8. Why are base instincts sometimes victorious over skepticism ?
    9. In your view, does skepticism solve problems or just continuously make new ones?
    10. If we have no control over our actions and everything we do is pre programmed, what does it mean to have skepticism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. #10 AQA
      1. I would say no because you can still be happy as well as ignorant. Which philosophy is proposed to be about finding happiness
      2. Yes, to question all the time can not lead to healthy conversation
      3. Just by understanding that just because you question everything doesn’t mean that you can’t find answers
      4. Because skepticism should only be used in situations where it’s needed. The woman you love tells you she loves you but you question her love. This can lead to consequences of its own. But a man has a knife in his hand with blood covering his clothes and he says he won’t hurt you. In this sense, it’s okay to be skeptical.
      5. Because of its appeal in questioning everything. Cause in my opinion it’s more ideal to look for answers rather than question to no avail

      Delete
  83. #10 DQ
    1. Since I am not really a skeptic, or at least I don’t consider myself to be, I would have to say no. Unless you’re trying to be an ass, some things I consider to be absolute. I also don’t think it’s desirable to always question everything.
    2. I would say maybe when you question anything you become a skeptic in that moment. For instance, once I query a professor about a problem on some homework, I become a skeptic in that moment. However, when I think skeptic I think of questioning everything, so in that aspect I am not.
    3. Even determinists and fatilists look both ways before crossing the street.
    4. I don’t agree with them but I am certain that there are those who still follow their doctrine, even in the present.

    ReplyDelete
  84. #6
    -Is it possible to go through life questioning and doubting everything, committing always to nothing, and holding no firm opinions? Is it desirable or useful to try doing so?
    No I don't think so. I feel like everyone has a little doubt here and there but I don't think its possible nor desirable to completely not believe in anything, nor have an opinion about anything.
    -In what ways are you skeptical? In what ways are you not?
    I'm skeptical of things that don't have evidence behind them. I'm not skeptical of things that I strongly believe or know for certain.
    -Even determinists and fatalists look both ways before crossing the street
    -When I think of therapy I think of healing by releasing feelings, hurt, and emotions. I don't think therapist would make good therapist because they aren't straight forward enough. I think they beat around the bush to much and don't say exactly what they mean and leave interpretation up to you.

    ReplyDelete
  85. #6
    Discussion Questions:
    1. I don't think so, I think that lifestyle will get you nowhere and make your life less fun and easy than it could be.
    3. I'm skeptical of facts that don't have reliable sources and people that make arguments that they don't know anything about, especially when they are challenging things that I know are facts due to my research.

    Alternate Quiz Questions
    1. What is ataraxia?
    2. Which philosopher was a radical who broke away from the Academy to re-establish a purer form of skepticism?

    ReplyDelete
  86. Kerlous Ibrahim12:19 PM CDT

    #6
    1- I don't think so, everything happens should be lesson that we can learn from. and I think not thinking about anything isn't beneficial at all.
    2- Epicurus
    3- I'm not skeptical in anyways, I'm easily convinced by anyone.
    4- I don't agree, we choose what we do by own will. yes we can have some factors that push us to do something but at the same time the bigger portion is for our will.
    5- I think it's wrong because we may have different points to approach, especially doctors don't have to be Empiricist because they can harm the patients.

    ReplyDelete
  87. #6
    1. I think it is possible, however our human nature just doesn't ever desire to do that. It serves a purpose of playing devil's advocate, but loses it's effectiveness if it is used everyday.
    2. Pyrrho
    3. I am skeptical of large corporations and politics. I've never really found a reason to trust either.
    4. I think it's an important message that just because you have a different philosophy of life doesn't mean you're a much different person.
    5. While the method may not be the most popular, it is still freely practiced by others.

    ReplyDelete
  88. #6

    https://thisibelieve.org/essay/13/
    The Power of Love to Transform and to Heal

    https://thisibelieve.org/essay/13296/
    The Faith That Brings Me Peace

    https://thisibelieve.org/essay/170826/
    Happily Ever After

    https://thisibelieve.org/essay/42464/
    Love without Requirement

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.