Lars Phillips's Proseminar Research

From Alfino
Revision as of 21:33, 9 November 2010 by Lars (talk | contribs) (Created page with '== Paper based on Organized Browsing Exercise == : Environmental Ethics ::References :::Ivanhoe, P. (2010). Of Geese and Eggs: In What Sense Should We Value Nature As a System?…')
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Paper based on Organized Browsing Exercise

Environmental Ethics
References
Ivanhoe, P. (2010). Of Geese and Eggs: In What Sense Should We Value Nature As a System?.Environmental Ethics: An Interdisciplinary Journal Dedicated to the Philosophical Aspects of Environmental Problems, 32(1), 67-78. Retrieved from Philosopher's Index database.
Olkowski, D. (2010). Science and Human Nature: How to Go from Nature to Ethics. Metacide: In the Pursuit of Excellence Atlanta: Editions Rodopi. Retrieved from Philosopher's Index database.
Mills, S. (2008). Going Back to Nature When Nature's All But Gone. Environmental Philosophy, 5(1), 1-8. Retrieved from Philosopher's Index database.
Harvey, S. (2009). Environmental Problem-Solving and Heidegger's Phenomenology: Addressing Our Technical Relation to Nature. Environmental Philosophy, 6(2), 59-71. Retrieved from Philosopher's Index database.

Topic for Critical Analysis Paper

I chose the idea of error as the topic for my critical analysis paper... below is a brief overview of some of what I have written on it.

It seems that the majority of philosophical thinkers that I have come into contact with have treated, as their main goal, the search for an understanding of the ‘what is’ in some form or another. This seems to lead, inherently, to a search for what is ‘best’. Which in most cases seems to lead to various unending cycles of philosophical method, which is all well and good. It is my intention to try to address a different sort of philosophical idea.
In contrast to trying to understand what is ‘best’, I want to focus on the idea of error, more specifically the necessity of error.
Definition:
Good and Evil are philosophical distinctions that are impossible to define. The word error has a negative connotation in our culture, and so at first thought many people shy away from it for the same reason that they shy away from good and evil. Upon further investigation however, error seems to possess drastically different qualities than good, evil or any other measure of human actions or ideas. It is easier to start a description of error with a brief illustration.
A snowshoe hare is foraging for food in a meadow when a mountain lion discovers it. The hare, due to its physical quickness, avoids the initial attempt of the mountain lion to catch it. However, the hare misjudges the height of a large tree stump, and crashes into the top, halting its flight and resulting in a victory for the mountain lion.
That is a straightforward example of error. From this example, we can learn a few things about error. First, the error itself, the misjudgment of the height of the stump, has both a positive outcome (the lion gets nourishment) and a negative outcome (the hare dies). From this, we can determine that error itself is neither positive nor negative. Every instance of error must necessarily possess both sides of the spectrum, and because the essence of one idea cannot be both positive and negative at once, it must transcend this measurement.


As we are limited in our ideas of error, so are we limited in our ability to cause error.
The universe is infinitely larger then the scope of perception possible to the human mind
We have a perception of error
Our perception of the scope of error is as limited as our perception of the scope of the universe
As we are limited in our ideas of error, so are we limited in our ability to cause error.
Realms in which Error can exist.
Error in a system or technical machine
Human error in daily living
Error in nature