The main theistic package in Pascal sense is the better choice. It is really the only choice. Choosing the naturalistic package, if the author is true, is like dooming yourself. By choosing the main naturalistic package you are saying that life has no meaning, there is no free view and there is no hope in after this life. This left believer in naturalistic package with nothing but to acquire much joy as possible because this is the end; however, it is difficult to have fun when you know that when you die, that it. With this option, it would be logical to choose the theistic view which provide opposite of what the naturalistic package and in Pascal definition, you could still enjoy most of the fun things the naturalistic people do. Pascal believe that betting on the theistic package means paying attention to spiritual things. You don't have to be a nun or become a priest. It just a effort here and there. If Pascal is true then life as a believer is very casual and doesn't involve too much change. This makes the theistic view point even more appealing because you can have material fun as much as the non believer while still keeping hope and free view in life. Having peace knowing that there is God watching over you and know that you are going to heaven when you die. Comparing the 2 views, theistic view is the view point to take. http://goanimate.com/movie/0NdCP-XeH5gg?utm_source=linkshare

Ted talk

Ramachandran talks about the 3 distinct brain diseases. These diseases were thought to be problem with the mind. The first disease is the Capgras symdrom which makes you can't recognized people faces. The second disease is the phantom limb which makes you feel pain on amputate body parts. And the last disease is the Synthesis. This disease gives mix signal. When they see a number 5 they might see a blue. A weird conditions indeed. All of these disease seems to point toward the fact that mind doesn't exist. That we have no soul but just brain, which is the materialistic view expect the second disease. The first disease is the Capgras symdrom. Ramachandran explains that the disease start in the brain. That the emotional part of the brain got cut from the vision part causing people not to be able to recognize faces. This shows that the brain is the actual part that does the feeling. This leads us to question what is a mind and do we have one. Our feeling is created and control by the brain. If we have a mind and mind does leave the body then we will be robotic in life after death? The argument all point to the nonexistence of a mind and if the mind does exist, maybe we have to redefine it. The second case is phantom limb. Patients who have phantom limb experience pain on the amputated limb. Ramachandran fixs this case by using visual image to trick the brain. He said that phantom limb is created by repeating brain signal failure to move certain parts of the body. After long enough failure the brain remember the lesson and won't move anymore eventhough the area is healed. Ramachandran cure this by tricking the brain into thinking that the amputated limb moves. Once it moves the brain then release from it paralyze and work again. I think this disease argue for the dualism side. What trick the brain? The brain obviously can't trick itself so the only answer seems to be the mind. The last disease is the synthesis. The disease seems to be more metabolically disease which seems to concern with the mind. Ramachandran, though, explain that the disease is cause by the cross wire inside the brain. Something that people in the past used to think happen in the mind. This shows that more and more diseases concerning the mind is actually happen inside the brain. That maybe there is no mind at all. Everything is just the brain, tangible brain.

http://goanimate.com/movie/0f4jV6PDTZ5I?utm_source=linkshare&uid=0PEarhEnfbjY

Truman

http://prezi.com/yxydqpgefwkn/present/?auth_key=fzaop25&follow=im1zie440ful

Agent 007

http://prezi.com/05eajz2_rplm/agency/

Milgram Experiment

The Milgram Experiment is a very interesting experiment which we can examine it in many philosophical view points concerning free will. The first free view theory we will examine the experiment in light of is the Universal Casualty which the scientific determinism believe in. The universal casualty states that each event has a cause and the cause is resulted from another event and so on thus free will does not exist. This theory, first of all will eliminate the ethical issue because there is no free will; if we don't have a choice, how can we be blame for our actions? The volunteers' actions to shock people will just be an effect of the cause, the experimenters pushing them, which is result of another cause in a chain events.

Now that we established the Universal Casualty we will take a look at agency theory. The agency theory only believes a part of the universal Casualty: that every event has a cause but it doesn't result from another action. The theory says that an action by a thinkable thing is a free act no matter what. The action is the pushing the button and the cause is the volunteers. Since volunteers can think their action is free and thus become unethical.

When an indeterminist sees this experiment, he or she will see that the volunteers are unethcal people. Since they do not believe in Universal Casualty at all so the choice of whether the volunteers pressing the button or not is entirely up to them. The compatibility also has a similar thought. They still believe that the choice to press the button is entirely up to the volunteers which in this case make them unethical but they still believe in universal casualty. But how can there be free will in universal casualty. The compatibility believe that as long as the actions come from within you, it is free.

Zomibeee Utilitarian

The guy is infected with zombie virus so the community decides to kill him so that the community is safe.

Utilitarianism on my cost and benefit

http://prezi.com/bqrta1op5qyo/utilitarian-view/

Cost-going to school- tangible cost =

1. Oil money
2. car 
3. highway fee
4. taxi
5. lunch
6. break food
7. sweetyshop snack
8. school fee
9. sport trips 

Cost- going to school- intangible cost =

1. waking up early
2. mind tiredness
3. sleeping late 
4. physical tiredness 
5. Hungry ( missing breakfast)
6. Seeing Mr. Gary

Benefit-going to school- tangible cost =

1. Prize- snack
2. sell stuff for the senior council
3. Eat friends' food (potatoes)
4. Parent gives money to come to school
5. Get diploma ( can go and apply for university)

Benefit-going to school- intangible cost =

1. fun 
2. making new friends
3. knowledge
4. find something to do
5. Experience
6. Get to play organize sports
7. Follow the laws
8. Monzon

Moral dilemma

For all 3 cases i justify the killing. The reason that i justify the killing is because it is clearly for the greater goods. In all 3 cases the person who is the sacrifice will die shorty. The kid on the ship is about to die, the Jewish kids are about to be send to the concentration camp and hypothetically i can't live more than a week. It is justify to kill us because it save other people lives without significantly shortening other people lives. They say that i believe in logic and that i would have to make tough decision in the future. I think they are quite accurate because i think i am a man of logic, making decision without too much emotion.

The incomplete knowledge

We can never know that anything is complete. It is impossible to say that you know everything about certain subject because we can never proof that, anyway something are consider more incomplete than others. The best field that matches the Plato cave theory is the future. We can never know what the future holds; we can only speculate from the present. Even someone from the future travels back though time, we wouldn't understand what he or she is talking about because it a different world

The true man show

For your blog post, discuss at least three things that you see in Truman’s life that are unusual and that, if they happened in your life, would make you question what was happening.

Then predict what will happen in the end of the movie. (No googling it.) If you think Truman will escape, how do you think he will come to realize that he’s living on a set? If he does not escape, why not?

The strange thing i see in Truman's life is that he never see a plan or bird, the wild animals. Though out the story Truman never see a single bird or fish. I would be very curious where are all the wild animals. The second loop hole in the set is that he never search for his lover. She suddenly disappear telling him that everything is fake and he never pursue. If it was me, i would start to question everything. The third strange thing in Truman life is that he was never in an accident that almost kill him. I have near life accident all the times so it would be really strange to never experience that.

I think Truman will realize that he is living on a set by discovering a camera. He would accidentally stumble upon something and break the camera camouflage. Then he would start searching his house and find more cameras. After that he would start to question whether anything is real. Once he find out that nothing is real he would try to escape to find his lover.

Flannery O’Connor

Flannery talks about the idea of truth. She mentions that there are many truths: your truth, my truth, some random guys on the street truth but in the end there is no truth. To me, her idea of truth is an agreement. Different people have their own perspectives so each have different truth so something can be true to others while being viewed as false for another. Since the 2 groups don't hold the same thing as truth, there is no truth. I would like to think of this as a graph, 2 different lines rest on different spot on the x value.