Ecstasis: The Price Of Truth

Customarily, popularized scientific sources purposes are for transferring objective knowledge to the masses, to ascertain communal civilization's apprehension of current medical, environmental, and technological advances and epidemics. These popular texts have a vital animus, for they must inform the public on composite scientific material while elucidating the data and exposition. Our daily lives are influenced to an eminent degree by scientific knowledge. In the article, Sense of Touch Recreated for Amputees in Their Prosthetics, Francie Diep explores the scientific strategy behind regenerating feeling within prosthetic limbs. She seeks the disparate contexts in which knowledge disseminates by taking into consideration not only scholarly learning mechanisms, but accent the presence of different voices in scientific texts especially through techniques linked to non-academic audiences. The collective

I analyzed the infographic “20 Scientific Benefits of Meditation,” from the Adrenal Fatigue Solution website and the infographic “Health Care Food Purchasing Power” created by Health Care Without Harm and Kaiser Permanente. Both of these infographics have elements of logos, pathos, and ethos incorporated in them. There are also details including colour and text which contribute to their overall efficacy. Furthermore, research from other sources was used to support and deny the validity of the infographics.

Uncertainties of pursuits that you may not return from, and living through constant life or death

When contemplating the relationship between the mind and body, most philosophers advocate either dualism, the view that the mind and body belong to the mental and physical categories respectively, or physicalism, the stance that there is only the physical. (Gertler 108) Brie Gertler aligns herself with the former perspective, and her essay In Defense of Mind-Body Dualism aims to disprove physicalism by establishing the possibility of experiencing pain without the firing of C-fibers, which physicalists believe is identical to pain. (110) She champions thought experiments as best for determining matters of possibility, but claims these “conceivability tests” are only effective when utilizing “sufficiently comprehensive” concepts. After an exposition of why Gertler thinks “sufficiently comprehensive” concepts are required and why she believes pain fits this classification, I will argue that her

College Athletes Why are professional athletes paid, but collegiate athletes are not? If they get paid, then collegiate athletes should get paid for playing the sport that they play too. Reasons being that if the athlete goes professional in his or her sport they will end up getting paid anyways. Also the National Collegiate Athletic Association or NCAA makes millions off of these players, and they get nothing. However, some people say that education should be the number one priority of a school.

Some have suggested that René Descartes argues that sense perception relies on the mind rather than on the body. Descartes asserts that we can know our mind more readily than we can know our body. In support of this idea he gives the example of a piece of wax which is observed in its solid form and its liquid form. After pointing out the difficulties of relying on the senses of the physical body to understand the nature of the wax he makes this claim: [P]erception ... is neither a seeing, nor a touching, nor an imagining. ... [R]ather it is an inspection on the part of the mind alone (Section 31). 1 This quote is perhaps the most direct statement of the author's thesis on this subject.

In a strange way, we may even come to better appreciate the value and significance of our normal bodily presence by exploring such alternatives. Not disembodiment, then, so much as a deeper understanding of why the body matters and of the space of possible bodies and perspectives. Not isolation so much as a wider and less geocentric kind of community. (Clark, 194)

Despite this problem, we believe it is the same piece of wax we see, touch, or imagine. But it is not our feelings or imagination that gives us the idea. If we had evaluated these abilities, and if the wax is distorted, we would not be able to agree that it is the same wax. This study enables us to recognize that the imagination, just like sensation, does not convey the true nature of wax; rather, this difficulty indicates that only understanding, exercising its powers of conception and judgment, performs the unifying function that constitutes the self-identity of the piece of wax: “our perception of the wax is neither a seeing, nor a touching, nor an imagining… but the mind alone” (68). Although the changing characteristics of the body has been transported through our senses and imagination, the identity of the matter is provided by the understanding of the wax itself. This analysis confirms Descartes’ view that “what we thought we had seen with our eyes, we actually grasped solely with the faculty of judgment, which is in our mind” (68). Therefore, any sense of the body is actually an introspection of our mind, not an external inspection.

I was incredibly excited for spring break; I could already see myself laying on the beach, jamming in the car with my friends and having fun. I was far from what I’ve really lived.

The mind is perhaps the most fascinating part of the human body due to its complexity and ability to rationalize. In essence, the mind-body problem studies the relation of the mind to the body, and states that each human being seems to embody two unique and somewhat contradictory natures. Each human contains both a nature of matter and physicality, just like any other object that contains atoms in the universe. However, mankind also is constituted of something beyond materialism, which includes its ability to rationalize and be self-aware. This would imply that mankind is not simply another member of the world of matter because some of its most distinctive features cannot be accounted for in this manner. There are obvious differences between physical and mental properties. Physical properties are publically accessible, and have weight, texture, and are made of matter. Mental properties are not publically accessible, and have phenomenological texture and intentionality (Stewart, Blocker, Petrik, 2013). This is challenging to philosophers, because man cannot be categorized as a material or immaterial object, but rather a combination of both mind and body (Stewart, Blocker, Petrik, 2013). Man embodies mind-body dualism, meaning he is a blend of both mind and matter (Stewart, Blocker, Petrick, 2013). The mind-body problem creates conflict among philosophers, especially when analyzing physicalism in its defense. This paper outlines sound

The experience of being literally heard and understood deeply, in some personally vital sphere, has its own kind of impact- whether of relief, of something at last making sense, a feeling or inner connection or

Aristotle presents a short analysis of the rational part of the soul, dividing it into two parts, a part that uses reason and a part that obeys reason. He sees life as supported by activity and not just the capacity to do something.

Armstrong begins his paper with a question for the reader of what it means to have a mind. It is well understood that man has the ability to perceive, to think, to feel, and so on, but what does it mean to perceive, to think, and to feel? The answer, he believes, lies in science. Seeing that science is constantly and rapidly gaining ground, he asserts that “...we can give a complete account of man in purely physico-chemical terms” (295?) Pointing out the fact that this view has been accepted by various scientists throughout time, he explains it is the most reliable way to approach the mind-body problem.

Even when "inner" and "outer" are construed as metaphors, the problem of how one's mind and body can influence one another is well-known charged with abstract difficulties.

Before these changes were apparent, Descartes pointed out the difficulties of relying on the senses, of the physical body. In section 31 of Meditation two, he says that the perception he has, "is a case not of vision or touch or imagination - nor has it ever been, despite previous appearances - but of purely mental scrutiny". Descartes shows that our senses cannot be used to have knowledge of things in the external world, and that knowledge of these things must come through the mind alone.