Philosophy 1020 Lecture Notes - Lecture 6: Connor Mcdavid, How We Think

74 views2 pages

redsnail708

13 Oct 2018

School

Department

Course

Professor

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

Rule 1: the easy answer is not always the right answer. We can very easily mistake the easy answer for the right answer as most of the time it is, but not always. When we face some problems, our brains sometimes automatically assume an answer is correct without putting too much thought into it. This will lead your brain into tricking itself that an answer is correct, when it can be wrong. It is always a good idea if you have the time to think about seemingly easy problems a bit more to ensure you get to the right answer. Thoroughly think about the problem at hand and try to be as confident as possible before reporting an answer or solution. For example, there are hundreds of math problems that require extra thought, but many people will be drawn to an answer that is not correct.

Related Questions

Brief and detail

If relativism is true, can you ever judge something as being morally wrong? Consider some really horrible actions, genocide, murder, slavery, torture or add your own. If you feel a relativist could say that these things are actually wrong, what gives them this ability? If they can't, why not?

Agree or disagree

Similarly to what I said in the first discussion on what morality means to us, I think everyone has their own set of moral principles and obligations. So I do think that relativism is true, to a point however. I used Adolf Hitler and the Nazi empire as an example in the first discussion so I will use that here. Hitler knew in his brain that what he was doing was good for his nation and arguably the world. Now, as a modern day society we can agree that was wrong. For him, it was good. In his own mind, he is right. But it is relative to the person. Generally speaking we all have similar notions of what is right and what is wrong. Most people would say that going out of your way to help someone else is a morally good principle. Selflessness in society is seen a good thing by the vast majority of people. When I say that relativism is good to a point, I mean that there is a general basis in society that deems actions as good or bad. And since most of us would all agree that hitlers actions were bad, then we say that he had bad moral principles, even though to him, they were good. It’s a little confusing even for me to put into words. Basically, if you actions are generally viewed in society as good, then you have good moral principles even if they vary from person to person. No one will have the exact same moral standards, but generally they all are very similar in society. So relativism is true until the point where the majority of society would deem your actions and wrong. I hope this makes sense.

Agree or disagree

If relativism is true, I don't think judging something as morally wrong is possible. Because the definition of ethical relativism is the moral standard only being correctly relative to each person/society, this means that the moral standard is created by you and/or the society you identify with and therefore eliminate the existence of an absolute moral principle. Since the moral standard is different for every individual, we cannot say that someone is morally wrong. If relativism is applied, that is. If a relativist were to say that they could judge someone as morally wrong, then that would contradict the main component of being a relativist. That every moral argument of yours is correct, therefore everyone else's is also correct. Quite problematic but that is my understanding on the matter

ell25

CHARGING BY INDUCTION:

Conductor A (positively charged) is brought nearby to conductor B(initially uncharged). We will use object A to charge object B byinduction.

In order to successfully charge object B, all of the following mustbe done:

a.) Which object needs to be connected to ground (at some time inthe process) in order for this to work?

Choose one answer:
1. A only
2. B only
3. Both A and B
4. Neither A or B
5. Not enough info

b.) During this connection, electrons will flow:
Choose one answer:
1. From A into the ground
2. From the ground into A
3. From B into the ground
4. From the ground into B
5. From A onto B
6. From B onto A
7. Not enough info

c.) When should B be disconnected to the ground?
Choose one answer:
1. Before A is taken away
2. After A is taken away
3. B will be charged the same way regardless
4. B does not need to be connected to ground at all
5. Not enough info

d.) If A is brought closer to B during this process (rather thanfurther away), then the amount of charge that can be generated on Bis:

Choose one answer:
1. Larger
2. Smaller
3. The same
4. Not enough info

e.) More generally, when charging an object by induction, theinitially uncharged object will always end up:

Choose one answer:
1. Negatively charged
2. Positively charged
3. With the opposite charge as the object used to charge it
4. With the same charge as the object used to charge it
5. There is no general statement that can be made about this

POTENTIAL MISHAPS:
f.) If, during an otherwise correct procedure, A were accidentallytouched to B while B is connected to the ground, then:

*The net charge on A would end up:
Choose one answer:
1. Positive
2. Negative
3. Zero
4. Not enough info

*The net charge on B would end up:
Choose one answer:
1. Positive
2. Negative
3. Zero
4. Not enough info

(Can you see why our attempt to charge B has failed?)

g.) If, during an otherwise correct procedure, B was disconnectedfrom ground only after A was taken far away, then:

*the net charge on A would end up:
Choose one answer:
1. Positive
2. Negative
3. Zero
4. Not enough info

*the net charge on B would end up:
Choose one answer:
1. Positive
2. Negative
3. Zero
4. Not enough info

(Can you see why our attempt to charge B has failed?)

An important question to consider when thinking about globalwarming is, "If the ice sheets near the poles melt, how much willthe sea level rise?" This seems like a difficult question, giventhe odd shapes of both the ice sheets and the oceans. But there aresome accurate approximations that allow the answer to be estimatedfairly accurately with reasonably simple calculations.

The critical idea is that both the thickness of the ice sheets andthe amounts of the sea-level rise are extremely small compared tothe radius of the earth. The radius of the earth is about 2/p x 107m -- more than 6000 kilometers. The ice sheet thicknesses we willbe concerned with are single digit miles and the sea level riseswill be in dozens of feet. As a result, in thinking about them, wecan essentially ignore the curvature of the earth. We can imaginepeeling the map of the earth off a globe and flattening it out (bymaking cuts, not by stretching it, so that we preserve the area).Then, both the ice and the sea level rise can be treated as right(not tilted) cylinders (though with funny shaped bases and tops).Since we know that the volume of a right cylinder is the area ofthe base times the height, we can easily estimate all the volumeswe need. A schematic picture of this approximation (with the heightof the ice mass greatly exaggerated -- you couldn't see it if Ididn't) is shown below. The error in these approximations is on theorder of the height of the cylinder considered divided by theradius of the earth; a very small number.
a. Assume that (after flattening the surface of the earth in ourimaginations) the ice sheet to be considered covers an area, A, andhas a thickness, d. The oceans currently cover about 75% of theearth's surface, and note that the surface area of a sphere is 4pr2where r is the radius of the sphere.

Generate an equation that will allow you to calculate h, the heightthe ocean levels will rise due to the melting of a an ice sheet interms of A, d, and r

b. As shown in the combined satellite photo on the right (fromGoogle Earth), Greenland is covered by a sheet of ice. This ice hasbeen measured to have a mean thickness of about 2 km. Recentobservations indicate that this ice sheet is beginning to retreat-- that it is melting at an accelerating rate.

Using the depth of the ice sheet and the scale given on thepicture, estimate how much sea level rise would be produced by themelting of the entire ice sheet lying on Greenland. (Note: You caneasily look this information up on the web. But the goal of thisproblem is in part to develop your estimation skills for thepurpose of building your ability to decide for yourself whether anygiven piece of information you find on the web is reasonable orbogus.)

Philosophy 1020 Lecture Notes - Lecture 6: Connor Mcdavid, How We Think

Document Summary

Get access

Related Documents

Philosophy 1020 Lecture Notes - Lecture 7: How We Think, Laundry Detergent, Confabulation

Philosophy 1020 Lecture 1: 20.+Qualia.docx

Philosophy 1020 Lecture Notes - Lecture 8: Retina, Radiometric Dating, Peripheral Vision

Related Questions