Martin Heidigger's Response To Modernity Analysis

Simon defines relational modernity as being, “offered to describe expectations for modern-day relationships” (11). From his description, I then formulated my own interpretation of relational modernity. In the criminal justice system, a lot of studies have shown significant relationships between criminal behavior and the way in which one was raised during childhood. In terms of general morals, a lot of who a person turns out to be in adulthood, is due to their childhood and the way in which they were raised.

To understand the connection between the occasion for Heidegger’s speech and its content, the setting needs to be clarified. Heidegger’s speech takes place during a memorial of the 175th birthday of famous

In the book Discourses on the Method and the Meditations, author Rene Descartes famously questions the existence of humanity. His most famous quotation, the one for whom he is most remembered is "I think therefore I am" (Descartes 11). According to this idea, so long as a being has the ability to think then they existed. Animals have brains and therefore they must exist. In order to truly, exist, to be a thinking entity, a person or organism must utilize the ability granted to them by their mind. This is the focus of much of this text, the nature of existence and the line between what is true and what we only imagine or perceive to be true. For the majority of the text, the philosopher asks questions in trying to formulate his own identity and indeed whether or not he existed as all. It would be assumed that the end of the book would be a conclusion of this internal dialogue where Descartes definitively states his position on human existence. However, Descartes instead devotes the end of the text to a wholly new concept: namely he applies the question of existence to a being above humanity. At the end of the text, instead of continuing on with these questions Descartes instead discusses the idea of God and whether or not He exists.

In the meditations, Descartes evaluates whether or not everything we know is a reality or a dream. Descartes claims that we can only be sure that our beliefs are true when we clearly and distinctively perceive them to be true. As the reader analyzes the third meditation, Descartes has confirmed that some of his beliefs are in fact true. The first is that Descartes himself exists. This is expressed in what has now become a popular quote known as the “Cogito” which says, “I think therefore I am. His second conclusion is that God exist and that he is not a deceiver. Descartes then presents his arguments to prove the existence of God. He argues that by nature humans are imperfect beings. Furthermore, humankind could not possibly be able to comprehend perfection or infinite things on their own. He writes, “By the name of God I understand a substance that is infinite, independent, all-knowing, all powerful, and which myself and everything else…have been created.”(16) Descartes uses this description of God to display the distinction between God and man.

The two theories which shall be compared are the modernisation theory and Neo Liberalism. The modernisation theory is a market oriented development theory which states that low income countries can develop economically if they give up their traditional ways which often can be dated back centuries and take on more modern economic principles, technologies and cultural values which comprise of an emphasis on productive investment and savings.

My initial approach to René Descartes, in Meditations on First Philosophy, views the third meditation’s attempts to prove the existence of God as a way of establishing a foundation for the existence of truth, falsity, corporeal things and eventually the establishment of the sciences. When viewed in this light, Descartes is accused of drawing himself into a ‘Cartesian circle,’ ultimately forcing this cosmological proof of God to defy Cartesian method, thus precipitating the failure of the third, fourth, fifth and sixth meditations. This approach to the meditations, in the order with which they are presented, allows me to state that a proof of the existence of God cannot hold

So existent belongs to the essence of God. Descartes can no more think of God as not existing than he can think of mountain without a valley(550).

Descartes answers his seemingly hopeless skepticism from the first meditation with the Cogito. The basic point of his Cogito argument is that for me to either perceive awry, or even to doubt my own existence, I must exist. It is, as Descartes says, “’I am, I exist’ is necessarily true every time it is uttered by me or conceived in my mind (Med2, par3).” He makes two arguments for the Cogito in his second meditation. Descartes arrives at the Cogito through the notion of an omnipotent deceiver actually. He starts to question his own

Descartes' meditations are created in pursuit of certainty, or true knowledge. He cannot assume that what he has learned is necessarily true, because he is unsure of the accuracy of its initial source. In order to purge himself of all information that is possibly wrong, he subjects his knowledge to methodic doubt. This results in a (theoretical) doubt of everything he knows. Anything, he reasons, that can sustain such serious doubt must be unquestionable truth, and knowledge can then be built from that base. Eventually, Descartes doubts everything. But by doubting, he must exist, hence his "Cogito ergo sum".

Aristotle and Heidegger have conflicting views on what a human or beings are. Although, there are some similarities to each of their set of ideas. Aristotle has a clear hierarchical framework classifying the differences between humans, animals, and plants. Heidegger opposes this strict definitions by discussing this idea of “Dasein” which states of being there. Although, their approaches to this topic are different with the types of question one asks and how they theorize about what is a being. There is key similarities that they discuss almost two thousand years apart. Aristotle and Heidegger are two philosophers that have tackled the enormous question, what is it to be a being? This paper discusses the two different approaches to defining this long standing question.

Rene Descartes is a modern French philosopher, who is famous for his line, “I think, therefore I am.” The meaning of this quote is that he must exist because he has the ability to think. In Descartes most famous work, The Meditations, he starts off by doubting everything, which is known as the Method of Doubt. He believes that our senses are always deceiving us in some way and so our senses are unreliable in proving anything. By this, he means that when we use our senses, such as our vision, to look at something, the way that the object looks from afar is different from the way it looks upfront, thus, deceiving us. However, Descartes

He had assumed this for in his search of finding that something which is certain, he had a “eureka” moment of realization that the one thinking for the certain is that something which is the certain. Cogito is the mind. So if we use our definition of certainty, “that something which is a hundred percent not doubtful, and is upheld and assured with information that is acquired from this world,” the ‘cogito’ is still fit to have that definition. We could say that it is a hundred percent not doubtful, for if we doubt the self, it just strengthens the claim, that the self, is the one doubting. I believe Rene had use the term, ‘indubitable.’ The ‘cogito’ is the indubitable

He came to the conclusion, that to doubt is to think; and to think is to exist. An example in Russell's "Western philosophical thought" is that "anything, which doubts, understands, affirms, conceives, wills, denies, imagines and feels is something, which is thinking. And feeling, when it occurs in dreams, is thought". So therefore anything which thinks, also too exists.

Being and Time, by Martin Heidegger, represents an attempt at fundamental ontology. Moreover, Being and Time is an inquiry into the fundamental question of being via employing a method known as phenomenology, which involves reflecting upon and interpreting every day experiences to reveal its latent meaning and structure. For Heidegger, inquiring into the nature of being this way is vitally important because the question of being implicitly subtends all other lines of intellectual inquiry, such as those of the social and physical sciences. This is because those types of sciences are always concerned with beings of one kind or another, and so humans can conduct those kinds of inquiry only on the implicit basis of their understanding of what it is to be. However, in Heidegger’s view, the question of being has not been posed in any thorough and rigorous way, which for him means a phenomenological way, since the time of the Pre-Socratic philosophers. Consequently, from Heidegger’s perspective, since its inception in antiquity, the entire edifice of Western intellectuality, along with the technological world that has grown out of it, has been without any real foundation in the reality of human being’s existential condition. As a result, human being’s intellectual way of understanding things is proceeding without any deep comprehension of the true nature of being. As a result, underneath it all, the world is not guided by any thoughtful understanding of the nature of the human

To define exactly what a modern person is, can be a very difficult task. When it comes to a person being ¨up to date¨, that could change in a matter of minutes. New things are constantly coming out and it makes it hard to keep up. But that is only questioning one person, what about a whole society? How does one judge a town or even country to say it is modern. A major key to deciding that, is the technology they have. In this day in age, technology has becoming a huge part in our lives, and one could say it´s the main component that has separated us from older times. Another separator is a person´s goals. These days most of society would enjoy some type of technology. Whether it be a phone, or camera, or computer, or television. Long ago, a man wouldn´t strive to save money for an iPhone 6 or a Mac computer. Times have changed, and so has our ambitions. The last piece to what separates us from the old would be our clothing. Fashion has