The Advantages Of Stupidity Essays (931 words) - Intelligence

The Advantages of Stupidity Most people say being stupid will lead no where. They claim that it is the worst possible condition in which to spend one's life, and if possible, it should be completely avoided. They would even suggest if the symptoms of stupidity are caught in the early stages, it could easily be treated by a surgeon. The most effective method used to do this is the chainsaw technique, later described in volume two. Yet, perhaps if people took a closer look at some of the advantages stupidity had to offer, they wouldn't have such a negative attitude toward it. After reading this paper, one will underezd the advantages of stupidity. Admittedly, stupidity has certain disadvantages. Life isn't a bowl of cherries. And being stupid doesn't make it any fruitier. Being stupid can annoy even the most sensitive people. If one acts stupid, and does it in the wrong crowd, like a group of adults, it will seem more immature than funny. If one is forced to act stupid while dealing with lower life forms, for example, high school teachers, one may encounter barriers such as cruelty and insensitivity, with the utterance of statements like, "Think with your head straight!" or, "You have a brain, use it." Yet these are all true, there are still many advantages to stupidity. The first advantage is very easy to underezd. Stupid people are never asked to do a lot. Many have noticed that people tend to steer away from someone they feel may be stupid. This is for a very good reason. The stupidity which they posses makes a name for themselves, a name which can be very difficult to shake. Possibly, it is a word which describes the working habits of the person, such as "crappy". Yet, this creates a positive situation for the stupid person. They will have a lot of free time on their hands for more of lifes truly meaningful pleasures. Some of these activities are combing facial hair, and counting the pixels on a Sony TV. Now, there has been a rumour going around that suggests that stupid people have low expectations. This is true. They are so stupid that they don't realize great from O.K. They could have a Sanyo cordless phone, but would probably choose instead a Pierre Cardin alarm clock telephone, because it comes free with their sensamatic folding bed. And someone with the "advantage" of stupidity might have a hard time doing certain tasks, or setting things up. Yet this isn't all bad. For example, if a stupid person leaves the chore, and comes back to it later, no one will be able to underezd it. Would they get fired from their job? No. For the very simple reason that no one would underezd their work except for them. The job would have to be given back to the stupid person, perhaps with a higher salary, or someone would do it for them, leaving them with even more free time! Free time is great for brainstorming (Admittedly this seems to be a bad choice of words!). Yet the ideas stupid people create tend to be original. For example, when was the last time someone stupid said something, and made one think about it? It seems that people are always talking about someone elses dumb idea. An example of such an idea would be, "How many stories will that english teacher drop before having a stroke?" This would suggest that stupid people may have the upper hand when it comes to thinking up original ideas. In fact, the next time someone wants an original idea for something, they should try talking to their local, community stupid person. The reason for this is that while a stupid person thinks with his head, he does not do so an organized manner. This is why they have so much creativity. By thinking in this fashion, their ideas have a natural tendency to flow more easily, without the interruptions which occur from the editing of thoughts that logical people would have normally. Thus if someone else should say to one, "That was a stupid idea!" one should merely look that person straight in the eye, and say, "Thank-you!" This also means that the claim, "Stupid

Writing an Argumentative Essay With Ethos Pathos and Logos

Writing an Argumentative Essay With Ethos Pathos and LogosIf you're going to write a writing sample, you should choose a sample argumentative essay with ethos pathos and logos, instead of choosing a sample philosophy of writing. For starters, it's more likely that students will pick up your writing style if they read something that they're familiar with. Students are less likely to pick up your philosophy of writing from just reading your article. On the other hand, it's very hard to say if your article has bad philosophical content when you don't know what the articles' authors like to write about.Take the same look at your article as you would on a nice website. A good website will have some nice photos, or some nice colors. But if the text is black and white, it's hard to tell what the authors' feelings are. And this is the main thing: do you know what you're writing about? Or do you write to amuse yourself?If you want to write an argumentative essay with ethos pathos and logos, y ou need to be clear about what you write about. Of course, in most cases, the things you write about aren't actually anything you feel strongly about. In fact, it's a lot more common for us to write about things that make us happy. Happiness is a good feeling, so it's okay to write about it.For example, think about two main types of social justice. One is compassion for the helpless. The other is compassion for the successful. If you choose to write a case study where the success of a certain group is under attack, you should do so from a philosophical point of view.But you shouldn't ever write from a personal point of view. Not only is this not the right way to write, but it's not the most effective way to write either. You should use good examples to illustrate points. And you should never try to get your point across by using someone else's words, but rather your own words.If you can provide good examples and write from a philosophical point of view, then you won't have to worry about people picking up your philosophy of writing. It won't matter how poor the article is, people are going to pick up your writing style, and that's all you really need.So, if you want to write an argumentative essay with ethos pathos and logos, the next thing you should do is to find some examples of something that you care about. For example, write down three things that you really like about something that's happening today. Think about things that interest you. If you want to write a case study, this might help you.But the most important thing is to write about things that you like. This will get people interested in your article, because people will see that you care about something. And when they care about something, they'll like to read your article. You don't have to write an article that's entirely shallow, you just have to write one that has something worth caring about.

Psychological egoism Essay Example

Psychological egoism Essay Example Psychological egoism Paper Psychological egoism Paper Psychological egoism claims that human nature is such that we cannot help but pursue our self-interest, we are biologically and psychologically disposed to behave in this way. It is a fact that we automatically act to promote our own interest and we cannot do otherwise. This theory highlights a strength of egoism as a whole, and it also explains ethical motivation. I act morally because it benefits me, and furthers my own life. It places human actions firmly and consistently within the natural world: like all plants and creatures, we seek or own good. This is a convincing answer to the question why be moral? , and this theory also agreements with the statement expressed in the question. Psychological egoism claims that even if something is morally right, we have no motive to perform it unless it benefits us and furthers our own life. However, it could be argued that being moral simply requires us to conform with moral rules or be a virtuous character and there is nothing to specifically say that following moral rules or being virtuous will not be of benefit for us. An example could be used is the moral rule that it is wrong for us to steal a psychological egoist may claim that it is in our best interest to steal as it enables us to have anything whenever we want, but then it could be said that it is in our interest not to steal (therefore conforming with moral rules) so we do not go to prison if we are caught. As an illustration in relation to being virtuous, imagine a soldier on the front line who gives his life in order to save others although this would be seen by the majority of people as a good or virtuous action, it does not help him to be happy or flourish. In order for psychological egoism to maintain its theory regarding an incident like the soldier, the situation and circumstances would have to be stretched so far as to say in the spur of the moment, the soldier was in fact not thinking about the welfare of others, but instead something along the lines of if I give my life, then I might be in the newspaper tomorrow this is undeniably absurd, why would the soldier even consider what the newspapers might say about him if he would be dead anyway? This is where virtue ethics comes into play, however opponents of virtue ethics may argue that the soldier could have already flourished or reached eudaimonia (a theory made famous by Aristotle, which I will mention later) when he made the decision, although this may also be countered by saying that there is no way of knowing when you have become virtuous, and that all of your choices are moral. On the other hand, it could be said that virtue ethics provides a better and more true-to-life way of looking at the situation of the soldier giving his life for others, and virtue ethics as opposed to egoism disagrees with the statement that is put forward in the question, and famous philosophers like Plato and Aristotle believe that something being morally right does give us motive to perform it. They believe this because virtue ethics claims that our main aim in life is to be truly happy, but we will only be able to do this if we are completely balanced. Our true happiness comes with the conviction that by being moral we will achieve a flouring and fulfilling life, as well as the knowledge that we are contributing to a flourishing community. They believe we are happier around positive and supportive people but an egoist would not be able to do this. For Aristotle, there is an aim (or telos in Greek) for everything that we do. Like by me writing this essay, my telos is that you will gain a clear understanding of whether something being moral gives you a motive to perform it. According to Aristotle, we have two types of aims: superior aims and subordinate aims. An illustration that could be used is that attending my lessons at college (which is my subordinate aim) will get me good A-level results and those results will help me to get into the university of my choice which will help me to be happy, and for Aristotle everyones final, superior aim is happiness. However the word we should use for happiness in Aristotles theory is eudaimonia, which could be described as living well or flourishing, not just for yourself but for society. He also believed in moral virtues such as courage, temperance, ambition, truthfulness and modesty. He believed that for all of these virtues, that if you had too much or too little of them then you had a problem. For example, having too much courage could be linked back to the soldier situation from earlier on although it could be said the soldier had too much courage anyway to join the army, he also had too much courage (therefore being rash) in the situation and did not think before he decided to give his life for others and did not think about what impact it may have on himself or e. . his family. Aristotle uses the term The Golden Mean to suggest the idea we should follow some kind of middle way between too much and too little of the virtues. Aristotle also believes in intellectual virtues, which are: technical skill, scientific knowledge, practical wisdom (how we actually do things), intelligence and wisdom (which is like the finished intellectual virtue where great experience combines with understanding). What he is saying is, if we try to practise the moral virtues and we learn the intellectual virtues, we will become virtuous (good) people who make the right decisions for ourselves and the community that we live in, and we will achieve eudaimonia for ourselves and others in our community, which is why virtue ethics may give a better explanation as to why the soldier may give his life for others, he may truly believe he has become virtuous although again, it could be argued there is no way of truly knowing when you have reached eudaimonia, there is nothing such as a criteria to determine whether you have reached it or not, which is a critique of virtue ethics. Virtue ethics states that we should act morally to balance out or harmonize our inner self, however if you dont have the correct balance of character (such as honesty), arent you just doing things to benefit yourself regardless of any possible benefit to your balance? It could be argued that nothing within virtue ethics can be truly altruistic although it is said being altruistic helps you to balance, surely balancing yourself is benefiting yourself as well? Egoism provides a better theory as to explaining why we are motivated to do things. Although virtue ethics provides a better explanation as to why the soldier may give up his life for others, it seems more plausible that we do things to benefit ourselves as opposed to others in most other situations. It cannot be denied that at that specific moment, the soldier was put in to a position where he could not think properly about the situation and the implications it may have although technically he could have been being virtuous or altruistic, in another way you could say he was not being altruistic at all as his family and friends back home would be affected negatively by the decision he made. It appears that a large majority of people would not act morally just because it is the right thing to do, when put in the situation that the soldier was put in it is most likely that a majority of people who still had something to live for (e. g. family, wealth etc. ) would allow somebody else to give up their life rather than them giving up theirs. As stated earlier, egoism provides a better theory as to explaining why we are motivated to do things) it is human nature that we will do things to benefit ourselves and allow ourselves to carry on living.

Critique Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 7

Critique - Essay Example for her whereby she is treated by her stepmother like a servant in her own home when her father dies, she endures so that she can fulfil her mothers wish. That is before she died she told her to be kind to everyone. Cinderella who is Ella is one of the characters who shows kindness humility and respect to her stepmother and her step sister, despite them mistreating her. She does all the house chores. One day as she is in the woods, she meets a stranger who is the prince charming, whoever she does not know whether he is a prince instead she thinks that he is a servant in the palace. When the king calls for all maidens to the ball, she becomes happy, for she knows she will see the stranger again who is the prince. Unfortunately, her plans begin to fall apart when she is forbidden by her stepmother to go to the palace, and to make the matters even worse she rips off her dress. Cinderella dreams fall into doom place. However a Godmother fairy who is despised and be referred to as the kindly beggar appears with a pumpkin and several mice whereby she transforms them into a carriage and horses respectively. She even dresses Cinderella in a most beautiful dress and changes her forever. Due to this Cind erella dream of seeing the stranger again are arisen and she is able to meet the prince. The prince charming who is a loving character and a humble prince. He was so excellent in sword skills. Though he appears elegant both mentally and appearance wise, he is also swashbuckler. For instance, he challenges his father in a friendly sword fight. He also races his horse in order to go and save Cinderella. Surprisingly, despite his position as a prince and the royal status, he is shallow and accepts every person around her without judging by their background or their position instead he judges them by their personality. According to (Variety), prince charming meets Cinderella in the woods where he falls in love. He persuaded his father to welcome maidens to the ball with the

The Usefulness of Motivation Theory for Managers Essay

The Usefulness of Motivation Theory for Managers - Essay Example According to the research findings, managers can use motivation theory to understand and address the training and development needs of an employee. For example, McGregor’s theory can guide managers to provide generic training or facilitate further studies for employees in order to make them feel valued and capable. This way, managers can retain talent or confidently delegate some duties to employees because they can handle them with ease. The knowledge of motivation theory enables managers to set specific achievable goals. Using Herzberg’s theory, for example, managers can establish good communication and allow employees to work with convenience in order to meet their department or unit’s goals. The lack of communication and convenience, which are examples of Herzberg’s hygiene factors, can cause employees to be de-motivated in working towards the set goals. Finally, managers with the knowledge of motivation theory acknowledge the importance of involving employees in the goal-setting process. For example, McClelland’s acquired needs theory will help managers to allow employees contribute to goal setting because this will help craft these goals in a way that appeals to the employees’ need for achievement. It is easy for employees to commit themselves to the goals that they consider achievable.  

Ethical dilemma involving a dying patient Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Ethical dilemma involving a dying patient - Essay Example re faced with an ethical dilemma as to whether to save the patient or not and not only save the patient but the baby that the patient was carrying as the patient had refused any sort of medical treatment that involved the use of blood. The doctors were left to questions whether to help the patient or respect her beliefs and not do anything to save her life. The ethical dilemmas face by the doctors in this case was that the patient was a Jehovah’s witness and did not want to be treated with bloid transfusion. The doctors faced four basic principles of ethics; respect for autonomy where in the doctor has to respect the decision made by the patient, beneficence where in the doctor has to assess the risk to benefit ration. Thirdly non-maleficence where the doctors do not want to cause any harm to the patient and lastly justice which balances the benefits, risk and costs equally and uniformly (Van Norman, 2011). The patient was a Jehovahs’s witness which made it difficult to carry out the prescribed treatment for her, Jehovah’s witness, they do not salute to military flags and do not take part in military or city government voting. The Jehovah’s witnesses are banned from blood transfusions or any medical treatment that involves the use of blood or blood products. In cases like these it is necessary to first consider the condition of the patient whether they should be talked to or counseled regarding the decisions being made. If the patient is awake and well aware of what is happening or what has happened, the patient’s caretaker or guardian should also be asked regarding the decision being made. It is important to check the documents as to confirm that the patient is actually a Jehovah ’s Witness. The patient and her caretaker should be informed of alternative blood products and if they still do not agree for no treatment then he/ should sign a document of consent (Van Norman, 2011). In this case when the nurse is faced with a critical situation which

Its Time to Stop the Commerce in Death :: Euthanasia Physician Assisted Suicide

It's Time to Stop the Commerce in Death    One of the symptoms of a society in the grips of moral crisis is a tendency to refer to reprehensible acts by soft-sounding euphemisms, by names that do not directly excite human qualms or agitate scruples and that evade precise reflection on the reality of certain situations. For example, in our modern lexicon, abortion is called "freedom of choice," sexual libertinage is dubbed "alternative lifestyles," and certain forms of genocide-in-slow-motion can be made to seem more acceptable under the name "family planning."    Such are the mental tricks and the "word magic" employed to quiet the normal functioning of our consciences. Sadly, they work on a great many people for long periods of time. Like certain narcotics, they dull the moral senses and can eventually blot out such feelings completely.    This being so, let us examine a concept that is very old, that disappeared from civilized life for almost two millennia, and that has now begun its return, lifting itself ever higher on the distant horizon, like a huge, menacing, black cloud. That concept is known as euthanasia.    "Good Death"    The English word euthanasia is derived from the Greek and means, literally, "good death." According to its oldest meaning, it signifies merely the relatively painless, gentle passage of someone from this life to the next, without necessarily any human inference or intervention.   Even in the Christian tradition, we sometimes hear the term "good death" used in the sense that the departed person died at peace with himself, with his family, and with God.    However, an alternative definition, more in accord with contemporary usages, generally suggests something quite different: It indicates the bringing about of the death of a human being, either by suicide or killing, ostensibly to prevent extreme physical pain or mental anguish. Euthanasia, according to the teaching of every traditional Christian group, is looked upon as suicide or murder, plain and simple, and, until recently, was universally condemned in all societies whose roots grew out of Christianity. This teaching holds that a supposedly worthy end, in this case the termination of pain and suffering, never, according to traditional moral norms, justifies immoral or unethical means.    With the rise of revolutionary ideologies in the late 18th century, Darwinistic philosophies in the following century, and the concomitant decline in fidelity to Christian teaching, especially among educated