Mouakong’s Blog

Blog Prompt 15:

• Leonard relies upon scribbled notes to connect him to his past. He says that eyewitness testimony is worthless: “Memory can change the shape of a room…” Is he right? Do you think our memories are more reliable than his notes? Hume says identity is just a habit we have. Do you think Hume would see Leonard’s condition as any different from our own?
• Do you agree with Leonard’s statement that we all need mirrors to remind us who we are? In the movie the mirrors were his notes, the photographs, and tattoos. What has he become by relying upon them? What would you become without your own mirrors? How does a view of self that relies upon mirrors fit with Hume’s theory?

Yes, I would agree that Leonard is correct in his assessment of the human memory. Eyewitness testimony has been proven time and time to be inaccurate especially in the court of law. DNA has proven that eyewitness testimony is unreliable as studies have shown that DNA has exonerated 3 out of the 4 cases. I wouldn’t say eyewitness testimony is completely worthless, but I do believe it is undependable. In my opinion notes could be represented as DNA, however in order for notes to represent DNA, it must have the correct information on the note.

I do feel that our memories are more reliable that his notes. My reasoning is that Leonard doesn’t remember anything, so if he is being told the incorrect information, he would make notes that include that incorrect information. If it were a normal human being that actually remember what they were doing in the present moment, then their notes would be more reliable. Leonard note’s has even cause him doubts and gotten him into trouble as well, which proves his notes aren’t reliable.

I don’t believe Hume would see Leonard’s condition any different from our own. He would likely base Leonard’s identity base off of his base that he has built through the course of his notes. He may very well view Leonard as a psychopathy as certain moments his personality and behaviors changes.

I do believe we all need mirror’s to remind us of who we are. Leonard relied on his notes and photographs to remind himself of what he was after. In his case, he wanted to purse the person that murdered his wife. He became consumed by it and was on a quest to kill the murderer. I feel without mirrors you would become a shell of yourself and you wouldn’t be living in the present. The mirror fits into Hume’s theory as we rely on their mirrors as of reminding us who we are and therefore as a collection of these mirrors, they become are identity.

(335 words)

Blog Prompt 11:

Tolstoy uses the test of infectiousness, not only as a descriptive measure for what should count as art, but also as a standard for good art (#28-32). What does he mean by this standard? How does he suggest we apply this test to evaluate art? Is this a useful proposal for evaluating the quality of art? If you disagree with this proposal, how would you challenge it?

Tolstoy’s defines art as having the ability to elicit emotions to its viewer as a direct message from the artist. The key term Tolstoy uses is infect as he believe he believes art must have the ability to infect its viewers with the feelings in which the artist intended. Therefore, he determines art by measuring the bond that the artwork has with the viewer, the better bond the better the art is at being art. In Tolstoy’s words, “The stronger the infection, the better is the art at art.” He believe art must fulfill three criteria’s, in which he evaluates the quality of the art by judging those three criteria’s. First would be the degree of individuality. He’s explains individuality as a feeling that the receiver gets from viewing the art. The more the receiver feels that the message is personalize for the receiver, the more joy that the receiver is able to obtain from the art. Secondly, would be the clarity of the message. If the emotions and feelings are easily conveyed to the viewer then they will get more satisfaction from art. Lastly, is the sincerity of the artist being depicted. This is the artist’s belief in the emotions that are being portrait through the artwork.

I feel the method of evaluation hold some merit, however I don’t agree with it as a whole. I like the fact that the artist is considering emotions and how to relay this to the viewer. While, I do believe a majority of artist encode messages and feelings into their work, I don’t believe that is the case every time. My opinion is that art does not need to include messages or invoke any emotions with its viewers. Artwork such as portrait or a scenery are still considered art, but they may have no intentions of intention of infecting its audience with emotions. In some case, art may just be done for the sear joy of it with no emotions attached.

(329 words)

Blog Prompt 5:

What is the difference between “beds in the world” and “the idea of a bed?” Where does “art” fit into his hierarchical scheme of reality? Plato criticizes art for being “deceptive.” How does art deceive us, according to Plato? Do you agree with this criticism?

In The Republic: Book X, Plato implies that there is a difference between the “beds in the world” and “the idea of a bed”. He states that the idea of a bed is original concept of God’s and the “beds in the world” are individual’s interpretation of the original idea. He brings forth a third phenomenon, which is the painter.

“Beds, then, are of three kinds, and there are three artists who superintend them: God, the maker of the bed, and the painter”

Base off of the excerpt above, Plato has God at the top of the hierarchy, followed by the maker of the bed and lastly, the painter. God role is creator of the idea of the bed. The carpenter which is also be refer to as the “maker” took God’s idea of the bed and recreated the form of the bed. The painter is viewed as an imitator as they are only able to replicate the form of the bed presented by the carpenter.

“He is thrice removed from the king and from the truth.”

“Then the imitator, I said, is a long way off the truth.”

Above, are two examples in which Plato criticizes that the painter as being far off from reality. Plato’s state to claim is that if the painter is imitating an image of what the carpenter “maker” made then thy have low understanding of reality and may have been deceived by other imitators. He goes on to say that a real artist should be seeking realities and not imitations. To sum it up, Plato believes the painter as being deceptive, because they are recreating an image of something that marker has copied from God’s idea. If the marker could not make the God’s original concept of a bed down to God’s exact specification, then the carpenter surely could not replicate it as they are going off of the carpenters interpretation of the bed.

I do agree with Plato’s philosophy as their are original ideas, recreations and imitations. However, I see a hole in Plato’s philosophy and it just really comes your personal beliefs on whether you believe in God. If God didn’t create the original idea then who did. In this case, I believe it would have to be the maker. For example, if a maker created a new invention from an original idea, the credit of the new invention would be attributed to the maker.

(403 words)

Blog Prompt 4:

Is there a parallel between the status of the prisoners in Plato’s cave and the spectators in a cinema? In other words, how are we deceived by movies and other media? Do we mistake fiction for reality? Is it possible that this physical world isn’t reality?

The parallel between the status of the prisoners in Allegory of the Cave and the spectators in a cinema is that an individual’s perception and reality can be molded. In Allegory of the Cave, the prisoners are shackled together, with their legs and necks fettered. This forced the prisoners to have no lateral movement and they are only able to see what was in front of them. This was reinforced by a fire that was burning behind them as they walked forward. The fire would illuminate the walls, creating imagine and shapes from the resulting shadows. The illusions that were made from the outside objects in the form of shadows would become what they perceived as reality. This is confirmed by the quote “Then in every way such prisoners would deem reality to be nothing else than the shadows of artificial objects.”

As a prison was set free, his experience and reaction was detailed. He was unshackled and able to turned around facing the light. However, the light filled his eyes with pain as he wasn’t able to perceived the objects as he only knew of their shadows. Even though, he was closer to reality, it was difficult considering the shadows were now his perception of reality. Once, he was freed from the cave the outside world was unfamiliar to him. He had a difficult accepting the physical objects as being real and the shadows as being nothing more than a mere reflection. It took time for him to adjust to his new reality. As he returned to the cave, to share his discovery, the remaining prisoners are unable to accepted his new found perspective. They believe that the journey to the outside word as blinded him and made him stupid.

There are many forms of media that may influence or manipulate what we perceived as reality. For instance, movies are able to put in a fictional reality such as scary movies. Scary movies are able to draw a reaction of fear even though we know what we are currently viewing isn’t what is really happening. Another example would be songs. Songs have the dual ability to shape us from the lyrics and music video. The lyrics and the music video of many song take us out of the present moment. Many of these song glamorize money, nice car and homes as being superficial. What they often lead out of the hard work and struggles that position them to have all of those luxuries. This often leads many of us to believe that these luxuries come easy when in reality that is far from the truth. Social media is gradually becoming a larger and larger influencer. Many of the social media platforms are filled with bias propaganda. These ads and popups may appear to be legitimate sources, often resulting in changed mindset. The presidential campaign is a good example on this type of propaganda. The false or bias information that you encounter on a candidate may influence who you decide to vote on.

(549 words)

Blog Prompt :

Reconstruct one of his arguments (not the examples) in standard form. Then evaluate that argument for soundness and validity. What practical significance does Clifford’s thesis have? Do you see any fallacies in Clifford’s reasoning?

Premise 1: Never become overconfident in your beliefs. Premise 2: Overconfidence without supporting evidence leads to narrow mindedness. Premise 3: Narrow minded actions results in unfavorable outcomes. Conclusion: Therefore, overconfidence leads to unfavorable outcomes.

For although they had sincerely and conscientiously believed in the charges they had made, yet they had no right to believe on such evidence as was before them. Their sincere convictions, instead of being honestly earned by patient inquiring, were stolen by listening to the voice of prejudice and passion. (Page 2)

It is admitted that he did sincerely believe in the soundness of his ship; but the sincerity of his conviction can in no wise help him, because he had no right to believe on such evidence as was before him. He had acquired his belief not by honestly earning it in patient investigation, but by stifling his doubts. (Page 4)

William Clifford’s thesis in his essay is that one shouldn’t become overconfident in our beliefs and not consider other possibilities. Our conviction in our beliefs could lead to a narrow minded mindset resulting in negative outcomes. He truly believed that the ship was safe because he had no reasons to doubt that the ship wasn’t. The came to this conclusion not because he believed the ship was safe, but because he kept reassuring himself that it was safe. “He had acquired this belief not by honestly earning it in patient investigation, but by stifling his doubts,” is proof of his actions. Above are two examples that demonstrate overconfidence that results in unfavorable outcomes. In the first example the agitators become overconfident in their cause however they don’t have enough supporting evidence which leads to the accused being determined as innocent. As a result, the agitators are now viewed as not being trustable and honorable. The second example portrays the shipowner as having too much conviction in one’s belief and abilities. The shipowner genuinely believes in his ship as it has safely made the voyage on many occasion. He understood that the ship was aging and could benefit from a maintenance, however his emotions clouded his decision. Even though he had an uneasy feeling, he convinced himself that she was safe for the voyage. “He said to himself that she had gone safely through so many voyages and weathered so many storms As a result,” is an example of him justifying that she is safe to sail. He watch the ship set sail only to never return.

Let us alter the case a little, and suppose that the ship was not unsound after all; that she made her voyage safely, and many others after it… The man would not have been innocent, he would only have been not found out. (Page 1) Let us vary this case also, and suppose, other things remaining as before, that a still more accurate investigation proved the accused to have been really guilty… They would not be innocent, they would only be not found out. (Page 2) In these two excerpts, Clifford flips the outcome of the situations. However, he explains that the shipowner and the agitator would are still in the wrong. His reasoning is that even if the outcome was favorable it would still be wrong due to the lack of supporting evidence.

The hasty generalization fallacy is present in Clifford’s two examples I mentioned. Both the shipowner and the agitator jumped to conclusion without analyzing all of the evidence and possible outcomes.

Clifford’s argument could also be seen categorized as the hasty generalization fallacy as well. He is able to formula a conclusion, however the evidence is rather limited. I believe his argument valid, however it may not necessarily sounded.

(579 words)

Blog Prompt 3: ((This particular blog will not be 300 words or follow the general checklist)

Give your own, original examples for the following ten fallacies, plus two additional fallacies of your own choice (for a total of 12): 

1) Begging the Question – Ex. I am always right. Because I said it, I must be correct.

2) Ad Hominem – Ex. You don’t know what you’re talking about you’re a moron.

3) Equivocation – Ex. Muhammad Ali is a goat, but since a goat is the greatest of all time Muhammad Ali must be the greatest of all time.

4) Slippery Slope – Ex. Bob: How did you do on the test? Tom: I cheated, so I got an A. Bob: How is that going to help you with the final exam? Tom: I’ll just cheat again. Bob: eventually, your cheating will lead to you cheating on your wife, work and mortgage. Eventually, you’ll end up divorce, jobless and homeless.

5) Straw Man – Ex. Luke: Salesmen are grimy and manipulative. They tell nothing but lies, so they should all be fired. Brittany: Ludicrous, not all salesmen lie. We should still buy from them, otherwise they’ll be jobless.

6) Tu Quoque – Ex. You say I shouldn’t smoke weed because I’ll become a pothead, but you’re smoking weed, so I don’t trust you.

7) Non-sequitur – Ex. Global warming doesn’t exist just like big foot. If you don’t believe in big foot you shouldn’t believe in global warming.

8) False Dichotomy – Ex. If you don’t do your homework, you might as well drop out.

9) Argument from ignorance – Ex. – No one has every proved that UFO are real, so they must not exist.

10) Red Herring – Ex. – Will Donald Trump win the election? Pete Buttigieg and Bernie Sanders are the Democratic favors. Pete won the Iowa caucuses. Bernie won the New Hampshire primary. Andrew Yang suspended his campaign. What does suspending his campaign mean?

11) Bandwagon – Ex. Everyone is switching from the Golden State Warriors to the Lakers, so you should, too.

12) Gambler’s – Ex. I lost the last few hands, but surely I’ll win by switching tables.

(336 words)

Blog Prompt 2: (This particular blog will not be 300 words or follow the general checklist)

1. Give your own, original example of a valid argument with a false conclusion.
   • If I am enrolled at Sac State then I am a student.
   • I am not enrolled at Sac State.
   • Therefore, I am not a student.
2. Give your own, original example of a sound argument.
   • Human are mammals.
   • Molly is human.
   • Therefore, Molly is mammal.
3. Give your own, original example of a weak inductive argument.
   • Bruce Lee was an actor.
   • Bruce Lee did his own stunts.
   • Therefore, most actors do their own stunts.
4. Give your own original example of a strong inductive argument.
   • Conor McGregor is a martial artist.
   • UFC signs martial artist.
   • Conor McGregor is signed with UFC.

(111 words)

Blog Prompt 1: If, and only if, you did the in-class justice exercise you may write it up as a blog. Just put your argument in standard form, with your conclusion saying something about justice. Then tell your own story and explain how it connects to the argument.

1. Ignorance is a factor of unfair outcomes.
2. Injustice can lead to insecurities, which can limit one’s personal freedom.
3. Limiting ones personal freedom leads to unfair outcomes.

Injustice can lead to insecurities, which can limit one’s personal freedom.

I purchase vip tickets for a concert. Upon arrival, I was appointed as the vip tickets included vip access for a meet and greet with the artist, however we weren’t able to meet the artists’ as promised. There also wasn’t a vip line either, another disappointment. I’m glad I arrived early and got inside swiftly. To my surprise, I wasn’t able to find my vip table. After speaking with management, they sorted things out. This are starting to look very unorganized.

I went to use the restroom and I witness an altercation at the entrance. I didn’t think much until I realized it was a friend my of mines. I see a security guard forcefully push him out of the venue. I overheard that the venue has reached max capacity and that there weren’t allowing anymore people inside. Another friend informs me that my friend that was kicked out had a vip table and that he was upset because his party couldn’t get in even though they had already prepaid for a vip table. It looks like the venue oversold their tickets.

I was leaving the concert where I happened to cross path with the same friend that just got kicked out. I noticed he was in a verbal dispute with a security guard that kicked him out earlier. I hear him asking for a refund, which was understandable. Words were exchanged, and the security guard followed him outside. I tell my friend lets just go home and figure it out tomorrow. I see the security grab his taser gun and aim it directly on my friend forehead. Before I know it, we both get pepper sprayed. Luckily I had friends in the coward. We walk off together with burning eyes. We get home and run milk through our eyes. Luckily, the milk worked and we’re fine by the morning.

Ignorance is a factor of unfair outcomes. I felt the venue and the security guards were both at fault. The host oversold tickets for the venue, which left many upset customers who already prepaid for tickets, set aside time to come and some even travel from out of town. I believe the security guard was already frustrated with my friend from the first encounter. I felt he had a power trip as when my friend came back for his refund and told the security guard to come outside. He didn’t and shouldn’t have come outside as he already know my friend was upset, so it appeared he wanted to enforce his authority. I believe I was an innocent bystander that was on the receiving end of unfair outcomes due to ignorance.

(477 words)