Zhuangzi's Argument Analysis

In conclusion, not only does she effectively contribute to the conversation regarding the decline of creativity and why it happens, but through her efficient usage of ethos, logos, pathos, and kairos, Manoush Zomorodi gives a thoroughly convincing presentation. Weaving these together creates a favorable argument for why taking time to set aside electronic devices boosts creativity. Overall, Zomorodi created a compelling argument that not only convinces her intended audience, but also those who may have initially disagreed with her.

Jan Rindfleisch support her argument by pointing out that minorities do in fact, make up half of the population in the state of California. She further backs her argument by expressing that it isn’t fair, nor does it make sense to have museums and galleries to specifically generate private clubs and exhibitions just to display an “ethnic-only” show. She hints that, that is whitewashing, ostracizing, and completely racist to the minority population. Rindfleisch then articulates that “Art is a visual communication,” and to isolate half of California’s population, it literally means that that visual communication is being impeded. The author finally then refers to how art illustrates one’s self, their values, and how it is reflected back to an

Norcross believe that one should not eat meat that is raised in a factory. He uses an argument about torturing puppies and eating their brains. Although his argument about Fred and his extreme cruelty to feel the sensation of eating chocolate is cruel, it puts one in a state of mind to pay close attention to his point. What is his point? Eating animals that are raised in factories are just is cruel as torturing puppies for one’s own pleasure.

Arguments 1. Zhuangzi’s skeptical relativism justifies his anti-authoritarian stance, so he is an anarchist. Attitude: for Argument: According to the historical records, Zhuangzi was addicted in nature scenes and the constant indulgence in lighthearted life made him sure that the highest-class government was more like an inaction government but not a hustle and bustle government.

First I analyse Pomeranz opinion, he is looking from a new perspective, matching a Chinese region to a European and comparing the living standards. According to him Europe first experienced the Smithian growth because the economy needed more supplies of food, workforce, and goods (Stokes pp523). He does not believe the development come from internal causes. He thinks China hunger for silver and the European elites’ greed for silk and porcelain urged the economic growth. He agrees than Europe expanded its power over the world, it would not happen without the greed for wealth.

Within the Ted Talk, “For Argument’s Sake,” Daniel H. Cohen does an effective job at proving his claim that arguments are thought of as war-like situations with winner and losers instead of as an opportunity to gain knowledge. For example, Cohen states, “But the war metaphor, the war paradigm or model for thinking about arguments, has, I think, deforming effects on how we argue . . . It magnifies the us-versus them aspect of it” (TedTalk). In this assertion, he does a prominent job at explaining that the common thought of an argument is a battle in which one side wins which proves his point. The speaker continues to support his statement by expressing this idea: “Think about that one -- have you ever entered an argument thinking, ‘Let's see

This is the understanding that all people need; the understanding of both their own opinion and the arguments against their opinion

Language is made of words; words are made of metaphors; thus, the philosophers have fooled themselves and allowed the intellect to deceive

Using this technique, he posits one will eventually find the truth and be on the right path. This summarization can be likened to Conze’s assertion that Buddhist thinkers loved paradox and contradictions. With this, he associates Buddhist thought with

In Ben Robert-Smith’s opinion piece published in the Herald Sun on the 16th of January, 2017 “We Are One but We Are Many”, Robert- Smith addresses he Addresses the Australian public with the argument that is changing the date of Australia day from January 26th. He argues that the date should remain the same but should be undertaken in a manner that is “inclusive and respectful” of other Australian’s interpretation of the day. Comparatively, in Kevin V. Russell’s Letter to the Editor he presents the argument from an alternate perspective.

From the Book of Hiram, pp 443-444 we read: #18 “Born in a Protestant land, we are of that faith; if we had opened our eyes to the light under the shadows of St. Peter’s at Rome, we should have been devout Romanists; born in the Jewish quarter of Aleppo, we should have condemned Christ as an imposter; in Constantinople, we should have cried: ‘Allah il Allah – God is great, and Mahomet is his Prophet.’ Birthplace and education give us our faith. #19 …Not one in ten thousand knows anything about the proofs of his faith. We believe what we are taught; and those are most fanatical who know least of the evidences on which their creed is based.

Opinions of the world around us, opinions of others, and opinions of ourselves are all examples of this. Section 26 talks about the dangers of not expanding one’s view. Chuang Tzu makes a comparison between physically viewing things and how we mentally view them. He brings up how we often base our self-worth on things we see ourselves do and not the impact we have on others. Chuang Tzu writes, “Since I see my own smallness, what reason would I have to pride myself?”

It embodies the insight that there is a serious muddle at the centre of the whole of Descartes theory of knowledge. He says that we do not hold a clear idea of the mind to make out much. ‘He thinks that although we have knowledge through the idea of body, we know the mind “only through consciousness, and because of this, our knowledge of it is imperfect” (3–2.7, OCM 1:451; LO 237). Knowledge through ideas is superior because it involves direct access to the “blueprints” for creation in the divine understanding, whereas in consciousness we are employing our own weak cognitive resources that

One of the hottest concepts or a matter of discussion in the field of philosophy is that of “truth.” Several theories tried to explain it including the Pragmatic Theory and Correspondence theory; however they are all agree that talking about the truth is a very difficult topic to be discussed about. In this paper, I am going to explore the concept of truth in the light of the Correspondence Theory by identifying its major strengths and weaknesses. The correspondence theory is the one that most people would more likely rely on or agree about, but it contains plenty of problems or non-answered questions.

As said before, with perception we go to the ‘source’ and take our own conclusions of