регистрация / вход

A Civil Rebuttal Essay Research Paper A

СОДЕРЖАНИЕ: A Civil Rebuttal Essay, Research Paper A Civil Rebuttal Philosophy — a:pursuit of wisdom. b:a search for a general understanding of values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than

A Civil Rebuttal Essay, Research Paper

A Civil Rebuttal

Philosophy — a:pursuit of wisdom. b:a search for a general

understanding of values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than

observational means.

Through this most specific definition given to us respectively by Sir

Webster’s dictionary, I choose in my best interest to refrain to you just what

the meaning of philosophy is. I implore you to try and comprehend this matter

in what exactly this word brought abrupt to us is about. The word philosophy

has two definitive definitions. The first simply means to pursue, or strive for,

wisdom. I beg to differ in the understanding of the fault I make in trying to

gain this unprecedented ?knowledge.’ The knowledge that we as a unity try to

strive for have made us, again as a unity, divides. I asked myself exactly how

we have achieved ?civilized chaos’ in the search for our solutions and

resolutions of the very ?virus’ it seems we have caused. I would not of course

go so far as to say a civil war between the generations within this house, but

moreover to express that simply by me using philosophy, it becomes not only my

benefit, but a mutualism between us.

Please feel more than obliged to correct me if I am incorrect (morally

or politically) but are we not all philosophers ourselves? As a baker’s

vocation is to bake, a philosopher’s vocation is to think. Is it not that we

all think? I was deeply saddened at your comments in the oppression and

restriction to what I may or may not strive to think. As a pacifist and non-

sadist, I call what you believe in as ?ingraining or indoctrination’, whereas

our own society may call it ?brainwashing’. Our human nature gives us freedom,

as does the Constitution. It guarantees us the right to ?life, liberty, and the

pursuit of happiness?. Within the refines of this home, I find it a task to see

those liberties granted. Here is a few of the world’s greatest oppressors: Jim

Jones, Adolph Hitler, Napoleon Bonaparte, Julius Caesar, David Koresh, and Anton

Szandor LaVey. I know, as well as you, that these notorious six are among the

world’s most hated. However here are a few oppressors from another standpoint:

Sigmund Freud, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Jesus Christ, Mahatma Ghandi, and

Siddharta Guatama the Buddha. These are the exact opposite of the previously

mentioned, who put an oppression into a good morality. It’s not about who uses

the gift, it’s the entirety of the user’s ethics.

The second definition of the word philosophy aptly states that it is the

desire to learn more through speculation rather than observation. Without

speculation, we as a planet would be at loss. There would never have been

discoveries of planets, medicinal uses, genetic finds, and behavioral studies.

Lets face it, without philosophy, we would still get leeched at the doctors for

the common cold. These fine discoveries were all made by philosophers. Now

these philosophers were brave enough to challenge science, the government, and

even the Church. Now, I am not one to stand here and say that I will believe in

unholy blasphemy, but rather I feel I should receive the liberty to speak freely

as long as I hold myself in a civil and adult manner.

In conclusion to this essay, I must tell you that this in itself is my

philosophy. I believe it was the great reformist Voltaire who says, ?I do not

agree with a single word you say, but will fight to the death your right to say

it.? In some respects, I feel non-indifferent to his theory. So I beseech you

to help yourselves as well as others in this house to let me speak freely of my

philosophy, for the word is simply a synonym to the word think. The famous

quote, ?I think, therefore I am.? supports my belief and should support yours.

Furthermore, if we do not philosophize, we do not think. Scholars have made it

known that the only relics of others are within their philosophy. For instance,

GOD, Elshadai, or Adanai, is known exclusively through his philosophies. The

Bible refers to creation as, ?. . . and GOD saw it was good. . .? GOD

philosophized that things were good. I know you cannot disagree with me on this

reasoning, for you would be one to doubt GOD. I am trying my best to not make

this about theology, but to simply keep it within one field. In short: the only

people that choose to who speaks of philosophy are the speaker themselves.


ДОБАВИТЬ КОММЕНТАРИЙ  [можно без регистрации]

Ваше имя: