Free Essays on Platos Forms

The question of God’s existence has been debated through the history of man, with every philosopher from Socrates to Immanuel Kant weighing in on the debate. So great has this topic become that numerous proofs have been invented and utilized to prove or disprove God’s existence. Yet no answer still has been reached, leaving me to wonder if any answer at all is possible. So I will try in this paper to see if it is possible to philosophically prove God’s existence. Before I start the paper there are a few points that must be established. First is a clear definition of Philosophy of Religion, which is the area of philosophy that applies philosophical methods to study a wide variety of religious issues including the existence of God. The use of the philosophical method makes Philosophy of Religion distinct from theology, which is the study of God and any type of issues that relate to the divine. Now there are two types of theology, Revealed and Natural Theology. Revealed Theology claims that our knowledge of God comes through special revelations such as the Bible, the Holy Spirit, and the Koran. Saint Thomas Aquinas indicates that Revealed Theology provides what he calls â€Å"Saving Knowledge†, which is knowledge that will result in our salvation. Now Natural Theology is our knowledge of God that one ascertains through natural reasoning, or reasoning that is unaided by special revelations. Saint Thomas noted that this type of reasoning ca n provide knowledge of God’s nature, or even prove his existence, but can never result in the person attaining salvation for as he states, even demons know that God exists. A note must be made before we press on; as one might notice Natural Theology is akin to philosophy of religion in the sense that both use human reasoning in their attempts to explain the divine. The main difference between them of course is the range of the topics considered. Ontological Argument The Ontological Argument, w... Free Essays on Plato's Forms Free Essays on Plato's Forms The question of God’s existence has been debated through the history of man, with every philosopher from Socrates to Immanuel Kant weighing in on the debate. So great has this topic become that numerous proofs have been invented and utilized to prove or disprove God’s existence. Yet no answer still has been reached, leaving me to wonder if any answer at all is possible. So I will try in this paper to see if it is possible to philosophically prove God’s existence. Before I start the paper there are a few points that must be established. First is a clear definition of Philosophy of Religion, which is the area of philosophy that applies philosophical methods to study a wide variety of religious issues including the existence of God. The use of the philosophical method makes Philosophy of Religion distinct from theology, which is the study of God and any type of issues that relate to the divine. Now there are two types of theology, Revealed and Natural Theology. Revealed Theology claims that our knowledge of God comes through special revelations such as the Bible, the Holy Spirit, and the Koran. Saint Thomas Aquinas indicates that Revealed Theology provides what he calls â€Å"Saving Knowledge†, which is knowledge that will result in our salvation. Now Natural Theology is our knowledge of God that one ascertains through natural reasoning, or reasoning that is unaided by special revelations. Saint Thomas noted that this type of reasoning ca n provide knowledge of God’s nature, or even prove his existence, but can never result in the person attaining salvation for as he states, even demons know that God exists. A note must be made before we press on; as one might notice Natural Theology is akin to philosophy of religion in the sense that both use human reasoning in their attempts to explain the divine. The main difference between them of course is the range of the topics considered. Ontological Argument The Ontological Argument, w...

How Word Order Affects Spanish Adjectives

How Word Order Affects Spanish Adjectives Put an adjective before a noun or after the noun in Spanish, and usually it makes only a subtle difference, if any, in the meaning. But there are some cases where the placement of the adjective makes significant enough of a difference that we would translate it differently in English. For an example, take the following two sentences: Tengo un viejo amigo. Tengo un amigo viejo. A safe translation of these two sentences would be fairly easy to come up with: I have an old friend. But what does that mean? Does it mean that my friend is elderly? Or does it mean that the person has been a friend for a long time? Word Order Can Remove Ambiguity It may surprise you to find out that in Spanish the sentences arent so ambiguous, for viejo can be understood differently depending on where it is in relation to the noun that is described. Word order does make a difference. In this case, tengo un viejo amigo typically means I have a longtime friend, and tengo un amigo viejo typically means I have an elderly friend. Similarly, someone who has been a dentist for a long time is un viejo dentista, but a dentist who is old is un dentista viejo. Of course it is possible to be both - but in that case the word order will indicate what youre emphasizing. Viejo is far from the only adjective that functions that way, although the distinctions arent nearly always as strong as they are with viejo. Here are examples of some of the more common such adjectives. Context still matters, so you shouldnt consider the meanings to always be consistent with whats listed here, but these are guidelines to pay attention to: antiguo: la antigua silla, the old-fashioned chair; la silla antigua, the antique chairgrande: un gran hombre, a great man; un hombre grande, a big manmedio: una media galleta, half a cookie; una galleta media, an average-size or medium-size cookiemismo: el mismo atleta, the same athlete; el atleta mismo, the athlete himselfnuevo: el nuevo libro, the brand-new book, the newly acquired book; el libro nuevo, the newly made bookpobre: esa pobre mujer, that poor woman (in the sense of being pitiful); esa mujer pobre, that woman who is poorpropio: mis propios zapatos, my own shoes; mis zapatos propios, my appropriate shoessolo: un solo hombre, only one man; un hombre solo, a lonely mantriste: un triste viaje, a dreadful trip; un viaje triste, a sad tripà ºnico: la à ºnica estudiante, the only student; la estudiante à ºnica, the unique studentvaliente: una valiente persona, a great person (this is often used ironically); una persona valiente (a brave person) You may notice a pattern above: When placed after a noun, the adjective tends to add a somewhat objective meaning, while placed before it often provides an emotional or subjective meaning. These meanings arent always hard and fast and can depend to a certain extent on context. For example, antigua silla might also refer to a well-used chair or a chair with a long history. Some of the words also have other meanings; solo, for example, can also mean alone. And in some cases, as with nuevo, placement can also be a matter of emphasis rather than simply of meaning. But this list does provide a guide that should be useful in helping determine the meaning of some double-meaning adjectives. Sample Sentences and Placement of Adjectives El nuevo telà ©fono de Apple tiene una precio de entrada de US$999. (Apples brand-new phone has an entry price of $999 U.S. Nuevo here adds an element of emotion, suggesting that the phone offers desirable new features or is something otherwise fresh or innovative.) Siga las instrucciones para conectar el telà ©fono nuevo. (Follow the instructions in order to connect the new phone. Nuevo says only that the phone was recently purchased.) El mundo sabe que Venezuela hoy es un pobre paà ­s rico. (The world knows that Venezuela today is a poor rich country. Pobre suggests in part that Venezuela is poor in spirit despite the riches at its disposal. El economista chino dice que China ya no es un paà ­s pobre, aunque tenga millones de personas que viven en la pobreza. (The Chinese economist says that China still isnt a poor country, although its has millions of people living in poverty. Pobre here likely refers only to financial wealth.)