Let's Talk About Philosophy!

 In multiple ways, the reparations of environmental damage and slavery are very similar. Caney explains how it is difficult to determine "who pays" for the damage that has been done to the environment. For instance, if the people that directly caused the damage are to pay, then there would be no reparation because they are all dead. The slave owners who treated African-Americans so poorly are long gone, but that does not mean that these descendents of slaves are not feeling the effects their ancestors did.  There is still racial discrimination in the United States and similar to Caney's view on climate change, as a society we still benefit from these injustices. If it were not for the Industrial Revolution and technological advances which have undoubtedly destroyed the environment, then we would not benefit nearly as much as we do today. We do things that harm the environment still that were happening back then, so aren't we equally as guilty from benefiting from thos...

After reading this article, it is safe to say that I am still formulating a thought process regarding time, and it's reality or unreality. The topic is so controversial and has so many factors that contribute to it, so it is leaning me towards that the whole topic is too advanced to be real. But for this assignment, we can talk about seconds, ticks, and standards clocks. From the year 1967 on, the second has been defined as "the duration of exactly 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to a hyperfine transition of caesium-133 in the ground state." However, because primary and secondary standards do not align at the same rate, the definition of a second is highly idealized and uncertain, much like time is. Over the course of two decades, technology has been able to help us discover that the universal time was actually off, and that seconds were actually beating slower than the clocks that kept time. Standard clocks measure more than simply time passing. Thes...

Can two events occur at the same time? According to Einstein's special relativity, the answer is not a simple yes or no. Two events happening simultaneously may not be happening during the same time, since it is dependent on the viewpoint of the observer. In a definition, relativity of simultaneity states that "inertial observers in relative motion disagree on the timing of events at different places" (Norton). To help understand this relativity of simultaneity, let's assume that there is an observer at the midpoint of Point A and B. If two flashes of light are sent from these points at the same time, they will be simultaneous to the observer since he is at the midpoint. However, once this observer is moving relative along the length of the platform with the lights, this changes. If light is shot at the same time from Points A and B, one side will be received quicker than the other depending on which way the observer is moving (Norton). Or, if they are received simult...

 Time is a concept that has many different viewpoints and opinions. Before reading McTaggart's article The Unreality of Time , I believed that time was something that is definite. For example today is October 1, 2020 and that is what it is. I never really questioned time as a reality, except for when I read A Wrinkle in Time, where time and space are bendable. I've always been fascinated with time travel and if it were to be possible how it would affect the future. But other than those sci-fi elements, I never really questioned if time was a reality.  Now, after reading McTaggart's article, it is clear to see that time is not simply a definite reality. Although my perception of time was different than that of McTaggart's, I do see some similarities in the scenarios he presents. For example he states, "An event can never cease to be an event. It can never get out of any time series in which it once is." I certainly agree with this statement because there is su...

      In my opinion, and after reading Caney's article, it certainly is everyone's duty to protect the planet for future generations. It is evident that we are feeling the effects of previous generations' destructive tendencies towards the planet. From the Industrial Revolution, World Wars, and litter in the oceans, the Earth has shown severe effects through climate change. It can be inferred that many are upset with the ways humans have previously treated the planet, and now it is our duty to fix it and leave it better for future generations. When talking about climate change, I believe that it is the duty of everyone to better the future. We all contribute to pollution, whether we throw litter on the ground or buy a product that was produced in a factory that pollutes the air.      So I disagree with the "polluter pays" principle explained in the article. Is there one institution/individual responsible to pay for the damage done? Yes, it is true that cert...

      When politicians sit down in Congress to debate over a new law, the question of how it will affect future generations is always brought up. It is the center for many movements and reforms, and in our daily lives we often think of the future. In attempt to protect future generations, we may feel obligated to conserve resources, control population growth, and reform social justice issues.      However, it is inevitable that at some point the world will cease to exist. The human species will die out. But when will that be? Tomorrow? In 20 years? 2000 years? It is impossible to know, but one day it will happen. It is natural to have the "survival" instinct, and to reproduce, continuing the the human race. Although when looking through a philosophical lens one asks the question "Would it be bad if there were no future peoples?"      After reading  "Energy Policy and the Further Future" by Derek Parfit, the Risky Policy would increa...

      When I think of my life when I was 10 years old, I barely recognize myself. I have grown up, and I am nowhere near done growing (is anyone ever done?). My childhood was filled with love and I was lucky enough to grow up with a supportive, well-off family. However, I had issues that I had to deal with by myself. Between the time I was 10 and 18, I went through things that changed me as a person. I am certainly not the same person that I was at 10 years old, and I am grateful for that.     Why did I change? I personally try not to point a finger at specific situations, but when people experience pain they always change. Throughout the years I have realized to accept these hardships as a blessing, because they make you stronger and better you as a person. They make up your identity.      But, this brings me to a problem with personal identity. If we change as a person, then are we responsible for our actions from the past? Are the "memories" th...