PART 1:
“No person knowingly does evil, and therefore, all evil is ignorance.”
I think that Socrates’ conclusion is valid, but is ultimately false. This type of argument is setup to automatically make the person stating it right, even if it has false premesis. Although, I can understand where this conclusion is coming from. In many cases, a person becomes so angry, or confused in a situation they can temporarily lose control, or even sanity, but this is not always the case. Overall, I disagree with this conclusion. I feel that some individuals know exactly what they are doing when they commit evil. There are some people who feel what they are doing, even though it is evil, is right. Also, evil sometimes gives individuals happiness. These people may be sick and need professional help and rehabilition. Regardless,it proves Sulcrates’ conclusion, and I do not believe it to be true.
PART 2
If people believed that all evil is ignorance, the justice system would change dramatically. Everyone could plead temporary insanity, or go around sentencing using this conclusion. They could say that they did not know what they were doing was wrong. Although it may be true for some people, the ones who it is not true for would not suffer the consequences for what they have done. Lawyers would use this statement to get their client off the hook. It would be a huge loop hole in the justice system. Families and victims would not be served justice. Prison sentencing would probably consist of short sentencing, and be based mainly on misdemeanors. How could a judge prosecute someone if they were unaware wht they were doing was evil. At the most, they would get a slp on the wrist with the least amount of sentencing. The death senetence would probably never be used. There would be no way for them to be convicted of a crime if they “did not know what they were doing was evil”.
References-
Solomon/Higgins. (2014). The Big Questions: A Short Introduction to Philosophy, 9th Edition. Cengage Learning
Stern, P. (2002). The philosophic importance of political life: On the “digression” in plato’s theaetetus. The American Political Science Review, 96(2), 275-289. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/214421417?accountid=144459
Week 3 IP (Due Sunday 5.18.14):
In philosophy, a logical error is called a logical fallacy. Thereare many logical fallacies to watch out for when making or evaluating a philosophical argument.
Demonstrate your understanding of each of the following logical fallacies by using your own words to provide a definition of the term and an argument of 2–3 sentences:
Please submit your assignment.
They have a magnificent team. These people are always kind and willing to listen to your concerns or issues. Better yet, your assignment is always ready before the time, they usually send you a draft to double-check before they finalize your paper.
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more