Unfortunately, personal attachment to beliefs isso much a part of our culture that we are often completely unaware of itand its negative impact, and unaware that there is an alternative to it.
This is important to understand when talking about your beliefs to have an open mind when talking to others hearing their side and use facts over personal opinions on some things.
There is a tendency in philosophical discussion to see beliefs as belongingto specific people
This sums up what I feel about philosophy that so many people believe that only one person can believe a such thing and that since they were the most popular it belongs to them only.
Apart from its utility in showing unsuspected possibilities, philosophy has a value
When the author state yes aside from being useful in showing us different possibilities, philosophy definitely has meaning.
Physical science, through the medium of inventions, is useful to innumerable people who are wholly ignorant of it;
When most people believe that science is the reasoning for advancement in society, the author clearly says yes to those ignorant enough to believe it's the reason we advance is because you don't know what it truly means.
what is the value of philosophy and why it ought to be studied.
Starting off with a strong question asking the value of such a vague subject that really has no true answer to. Then following it with the why "it ought" giving it that it should be or for certain have to study it.
nothing more is required than freedom,
Within this statement I see it as freedom being another word for openminded, because when you are free within your mind you are open to many different ideas without having a bias outlook.
For this enlightenment, however, nothing more is required than freedom, and to be sure the least dangerous sort of all that can be called freedom, namely, the freedom to make public use of one's reason on all issues.
reading this statement and breaking it down I see it as saying for this road/path/journey you must have freedom or what i take to be is a free mind. Sharing that if you are to endure a journey of enlightenment you must be free, free from negative thoughts and have a free mind about anything possible. In order for it to be a valid reasoning on an issue in the public.
it is difficult for an isolated individual to work himself out of a dependency that has become virtually second-nature to him.
In this message, the author is stating that it is pretty much hard to break habits after doing it for so long that it becomes like breathing. You just don't realize your doing it.
Even if you accept that the world and everything in it clearly shows evidence of having been designed, there is no rea-son to believe that it was all designed by one God
The author here captures everything that comes to mind when the subject comes up. It makes me think who made God, or who made this even after going to catholic school it stills open up that thought in the back of minds.
Any judge who supports capital punishment for juvenile offenders is an enemy of the Bill of Rights. Judge Simpson is definitely an enemy of the Bill of Rights.
When the author says things like this it can be portrayed in different ways. Just because one judge might agree with Judge Simpson on punishing juvenile offenders but might disagree with Judge Simpson on another thing not generally putting them all in the same boat.
Notice that the last sentence of the passage is not shown in this argument outline. That's because it is not part of the argument; it is not supporting the conclusion
The author is making a point to say from the start, look we will not show the last sentence because it has no point. To the author, which makes me think maybe this is one sided or does it make me think well if it has nothing to do with it then why need it.
Then I suppose he'd have to get accustomed
When reading this it gives the feeling that the author is tired of hearing the same thing but not seeing the actions followed through.
And what if the prison also had an echo from the side facing them?
When I read this I feel as tho author is playing the ok and what if game. Giving a hint of sarcasm
They're like us,
This shows the connection thats being said is we are just as human as us and that we aren't as human as we think.
When you read philosophy you should look for arguments, reasons, and conclusions, not facts, plot or character development, to help you reach your goal of evaluating the plausibility of various positions a person might take on some issue.
The author is clearly telling us that philosophy isnt suppose to be understood all the time or have an answer for it. Also stating that you can't treat philosophy as a regular novel looking for the protagonist and antagonist, but to find all the antagonist and question them why.
Don’t confuse these reactions with failure. Many students who have come before you have had the same initial reactions and succeeded, even your professor
This here the perfect pick me up coming from a person who deals in philosophy and knows the feelings and actions that comes along with knowing about it shows me, that i wasn't the only one who felt this and can get it done if they could.
Consequently, many students will take no steps to increase their un-derstanding
Seeing stuff like this just saddens me when they see no hope for our future and think this low of us.