Papers that you are proud of.

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Mar 4, 2007
2,678
5
0
#1
I was going through old papers that i've wrote, and i was pretty impressed by myself at a pretty old paper, i was 17 at the time(i was in college).

San Jose State University

Paper 2: Immanuel Kant, Transcendental Aesthetics

By: Emily


The Transcendental Aesthetic is an argument by Immanuel Kant and is composed of several different ideas that are worshipped and praised by many societies of humans, those concepts being space and time and the perception of those concepts. I will not just yet delve into this argument and its different components, but rather explain parallel, new emerging ideas by scientist and other philosophers alike, that are very closely related to this argument and way of thinking.
In the popular movie, “What the Bleep Do We Know?” there are many new and different ideas that are presented to the masses. First, it explains the theory that we are physically able to change an object based on the fact that we are observing it closely. There has been many experiments done, and somehow one particle was able to do three different things all at the same time, since us, humans would observe it take one route, but the outcome of that particle was proven to take an alternate route, and therefore being in a state of a parallel universe within itself(the particle).
This movie continues to point out different aspect of life that are usually deemed as “uncontrollable” and usually appear to be that way, but that only exists in that reality. This movie further explains that we are able to create our own sense of reality, therefore, change how we perceive, react and ultimately feel about everything in life, ranging from anger, and outbreaks to love and ageless unions with others. Although this philosophy is perceived by the masses to be a new and innovative theory, in the reality of history, it isn’t. People are just not up to date on their recent philosophers and ideas of those.
Immanuel Kant has ultimately said the same ideas, but in a much broader sense. His words are different, instead of explaining the basic component of “make your own reality” with those words, he explains with the description of ‘a priori’ or the knowledge of something before it became an experience or sensation to the person.
In his book, The Critique of Pure Reason, Part One: Transcendental Aesthetic, he explains how matter is the combination and match up of an appearance corresponding to sensation. This idea best explains most things that humans perceive to be as our world around us. For example, a tree stays in one place during its entire life, and if we are to see a tree, but never feel one with our senses, then how are we to know it is truly living or not? Whether it needs that water and roots to survive, there is no way of knowing except basing it on the a priori knowledge that it is a living organism. But if a person was to touch the tree, and feel the moisture coming from it, then it would be proven to be alive, and therefore an object in reality.
Although matter is perceived to be an automatic idea and true to any sort of reality as there is, but with Kant’s argument, and the movie alike, matter itself, is up for questioning. The reason matter is able to be up for question, is because of the simple fact that our reality is based off of our own perception of things. For example, if our reality is what it is, then how do we know there could be another reality within this one itself. How come things are what they are? Kant explains this process of thought from his book, The Critique of Practical Reason, “If the object be taken as the determining principle of our desire” that being the physical object itself, for example, “it must first be known whether it is physically possible by the free use or our powers,” if someone is mentally capable to dissect the original perception that is in the normal base of reality, “before we decide whether it is an object of practical reason or not.” (Abbott 50) whether or not it can be perceived in a new idea of reality. The basis for this seems quite intricate, but with explanation it is simply an idea of self-will to think ‘outside of the box’ and the personal ability to throw away the sense of one reality.
“Rather, what we call external objects are nothing but mere presentations of our own capacity to be affected by objects and ideas.”(Cahn 931)
The next components that are argued by both Kant and the popular movie What the Bleep Do We Know, are the ideas of space and time. Space, is ever-existing and inseparable basis of our intuition for reality. In the movie, they simply explain space as ever-existing, and even in between molecules of those things we consider to be matter, there is space separating the atoms, and even at a sub-atomic level there is an infinite amount of space within it. This idea creates a head ache at times for complete understanding, but Kant better explains this idea with ease, “But no concept, as such, can be thought as containing an infinite multitude of presentations within itself. Yet that is how we think space.” (Cahn 930). He then concludes with “Therefore the original presentation of space is an a priori intuition, not a concept”, because of its infinite capabilities and realities that exist within it.
The idea of time is much the same with both the movie and Kant’s argument. Time is unable to be separate and it continuous the same as space with those qualities. But time has the ability to be sequential and is one dimensional in itself. Time is a true a priori because of our natural aging process and other tell-tale sign that humankind and many other animals can read and live by that is intuitively known.
It is quite interesting to see the arguments of both an older philosopher, and new age scientists live in harmony with one another, and continuously support one another’s argument. The basic ideas of both Kant and What the Bleep Do We Know, is the concept that we are in control of our own reality, we can dictate what we need to, and if we are strong enough with our own reality, then happiness will pursue, without a doubt.
Sources Cited
Kant, Immanuel. Abbott, Thomas Kingsmill. Critique of Practical Reason. Releigh, N.C.: Alex Catalogue, NetLibrary, 1990.
Kant, Immanuel. Meiklejohn, J.M.D. Critique of Pure Reason. Releigh, N.C.: Alex Catalogue, NetLibrary, 1990.
Cahn, Steven M. Classics of Western Philosophy, Seventh Edition.. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. 2006
Arntz, William. Chasse, Betsy. Vincente, Mark. Video: What the Bleep Do We Know? 2004. DVD/VHS. FOX.


i know its not THE best, but hey i was 17 and that was my first philosophy class and i never read any of the book, lol everyone in that class was so amazed that i didn't and it cracked me up.

damn i can't believe i'm gonna be 19 in 4 months!

Oh yeah and everyone post up a paper or two that your most proud of, i would love to read everyone's different papers and your feedback on mine.
 
Jul 10, 2002
2,180
18
0
45
#2
you're most proud of a 'paper' that your wrote for a book you didn't even read? (p.s. wouldn't the above better fall in the catergory of 'essay'?)

Anyway, to get back on topic
My top 3 papers (min. of 10 pages)
-Abolition of death penalty
-Sandinista Gov't and the Iran Contra Scandal
-'The Dirty War' in Argentina

If I could find my old 3.5" floppy disks (and a comp to read the info) I'd be happy to post the papers and the bibliography..... but,
 
Nov 24, 2003
6,307
3,639
113
#3
Man I wrote this like 25 page paper for an econ class back in like 2001 about growing online economies and the potential revenue oppertunities and associated risks.

This was the time that places were beginging to exchange online currencies for real money, and people were actually making a living completely within the confines of a game.

Anyways my fucking teacher gave me a C because he said that people could never make enough money in a game to warrant any concern or regulation or that no one would actually spend any decent amount of real money on items within a game.

I wish I could find that dude today and show him all the articles about 2nd life and others where thousands of people were making good money designing clothes etc entirely within the games.
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#4
I'm not posting my papers to be plagiarized (sell them that’s different). I’d post up bibliographies, but that’s it.

Top papers include:

Impact of the Black Panther Party on 1960’s politics and culture
Case for the dissolution of NATO
Race and the Cuban War for Independence from Spain
A Marxist Analysis of the works of Hans Christian Anderson
Che’s Unrealized Dream: The Socialist Man in Cuba
A Case Study: U.S. Intervention in Latin America 1954 – Present
Soviet International Relations: The Cuban Problem
Comparative Analysis: Why China and the U.S.S.R. Aren’t Communists


Craziest Grades on Great Papers:

I wrote a 2 line paper for my History of Western Civilization class and got an A+

I wrote a 10 page paper Fidel Castro: Archetype of a Charismatic Leader. I got a B++++ (no lie) and the reason given in the margin for the grade? "You didn't say anything about how Evil he is" :rolleyes:
 
Feb 1, 2006
3,864
6
0
#5
i wrote a research paper on medical marijuana two semesters ago and I got an A. i did it the day it was due in a couple of hours. and i didnt have to research shit lol.
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
43
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#6
Impact of the Black Panther Party on 1960’s politics and culture
Case for the dissolution of NATO
Race and the Cuban War for Independence from Spain
A Marxist Analysis of the works of Hans Christian Anderson
Che’s Unrealized Dream: The Socialist Man in Cuba
A Case Study: U.S. Intervention in Latin America 1954 – Present
Soviet International Relations: The Cuban Problem
Comparative Analysis: Why China and the U.S.S.R. Aren’t Communists
damn, I wish I had your classes. :angry: Unfortunately the schools I went to didn't offer classes nearly that tight. Some various political sci courses I took but none focuses specifically on communism, etc.

Most of my papers were on typical college bullshit, like abortion, gun laws, euthanasia, violence: human nature?, why christianity is gay, etc etc etc. It was always the easiest to pick a topic (if given the choice) you feel strongly about. Easy A's.
 
Mar 4, 2007
2,678
5
0
#7
naw jomodo i only read that section, and i looked up other books, i just never read from the main 'book'

im proud of this because of the grammar being so shitty but my ideas still being pretty clear(atleast to me) lol.
and the fact that i got an A.
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#8
damn, I wish I had your classes. :angry: Unfortunately the schools I went to didn't offer classes nearly that tight. Some various political sci courses I took but none focuses specifically on communism, etc.

Most of my papers were on typical college bullshit, like abortion, gun laws, euthanasia, violence: human nature?, why christianity is gay, etc etc etc. It was always the easiest to pick a topic (if given the choice) you feel strongly about. Easy A's.

Well I never had any classes specifically on Communism. They don't teach that.

I had two Soviet history classes. One Soviet History and one History of Soviet International Relations.

The others were in classes like Poli Sci - Comparative Politics, Poli Sci - Latin American Politics, Comparative Latin American History, Poli Sci - International Relations, History of 1960's America, International Political Economy, etc.

You just have to find a way to tie the subject you are studying to things you find important and/or that set you out from all the other papers the TA's are reading.

That Hans Christian Anderson paper was for an English class that all the lectures were on TV at like 3 am that I had to set a tape once a week to record.
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#9
15 page paper on the post 1991 Russian responce to NATO expansion

Excerpts:

When analyzing the recent expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe it is prudent to question the reasoning so many countries are jumping at the opportunity to join NATO. If the Russian imperial threat disappeared with communism, as has been asserted, then membership in a collective security organization that was founded on containing such a threat would be as pointless as the organization itself, “because its Cold War mission was now obsolete" (Crawford, 16). Yet, it is just such historical lessons that are at the foundation for this enthusiasm in NATO membership found amongst Eastern European countries.

. . .

The domestic political response within Russia has been unusually unified and staunchly opposed to NATO expansion. This unified opposition within the Russian political landscape is unusual in so much as it has been a rare occurrence, since the Soviet collapse, to find such broad support or opposition amongst the Russian people and their political leaders on any single foreign policy issue. The Russian political landscape, regarding foreign policy views, can be roughly divided amongst four main groups with varying viewpoints, motives, and goals. When approaching the issue of NATO expansion these four groups publicly oppose NATO expansion, to the delight of the body politic, though their reasoning and approaches to this problem vary.

. . .

The international crisis that developed over the civil wars and conflicts amongst the states of the former Yugoslavia became the proving ground for the “New NATO”. NATO moved forward in a manner it deemed in accordance with it's newly defined principles to secure democracies and to eliminate ethnic and civil confrontations that were quickly moving towards tearing a hole through Europe. NATO did not discuss its position before the UN nor consult with Russia before taking action. In a region of Europe with strong alliances and a history of deep Russian involvement, predating even the First World War, Russia began to see NATO as “intent on denying Russia a voice on important European security issues” (Light, 5). NATO's intervention in the former Yugoslavia proved once and for all in Russian eyes that NATO had “Ceased to be a defense alliance” (Light, 5).



Bibliography


Arbatov, Alexei. Russian Military Doctrine and Strategic Nuclear Forces to the Year 2000 and Beyond. Conference Russian Defense Policy Towards the Year 2000, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California, March 26-27, 1997.
Brown,Michael E. Minimalist NATO: A Wise Alliance Knows When to Retrench”, Foreign Affairs
May/June 1999, pp. (205-218).
Cohen, Ariel. A New Paradigm for U.S.-Russia Relations: Facing the Post-Cold War Reality. The Heritage Foundation, Backgrounder #1105 March 6, 1997
Crawford, Beverly. The Bosnian Road to NATO Enlargement Institute of European Studies International and Area Studies University of California, Berkeley http://ies.berkeley.edu/contact/crawfordarticles/Crawford%20NATO paper-1.pdf
Daniels, Robert V., The Danger of NATO Expansion: Another Cold War?, New Leader, 80:11-13 (July 14-28 1997.)
Garnett, Sherman W. Russia and its Borderlands: A Geography of Violence Parmeters, Spring 1997, pp 4-21.
Kuchins, Andrew C., Zagorsky, Alexei V. When Realism and Liberalism Coincide: Russian Views of U.S. Alliances in Asia. July, 1999
Light, Margot, Lowenhardt, John, White, Stephen. Russia and the Dual Expansion of Europe. ESRC ‘One Europe or Several?’ Policy Paper 02/00
McFaul, Michael. Russia’s Many Foreign Policies House Committee on International Relations hearing “What are Russian Foreign Policy Objectives?” May, 12 1999
 
Mar 4, 2007
2,678
5
0
#10
goddamn...
i wanna read those!

where's ThaG at? i wanna hear about what papers he's proud of...always interesting to see what paper you end gettin an A on...for me its when i least expect it.
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#11
Some other titles I found:

The Patriarchal Family in a Democratic Society

The Ineffectiveness of the Organization of American States as a Collective Security Organization: Non-Intervention and the Lack of a Democratic Peace
The Organization of American States a Failed Charter: Case Study of Chile and Nonintervention
The Lessons and Experiences in the Life of Ernesto Che Guevara
China’s Wartime Politics 1937-1944
The Mystification of Art
The Role of Masculinity in the Cuban Revolution Against Spain
The influence of Aids and Its Metaphors on Sigmund Freud’s Civilization and Its Discontents
Ways of seeing Hunger as an Ideology
Comparison of the Programs of Russian Political Parties
Ways of Seeing “The Gulf Stream”
 
Feb 9, 2003
8,398
58
48
50
#14
White People: Devils of friends?

For my social relations class at UCSF. Got an A from out white hippie professor who suffered from white man's guilt. Although it was a great paper I mostly focused on the devil part. I like my papers like I like my bigots; biased.
 
Nov 20, 2005
16,876
21
0
41
#17
i wrote a 14 page paper on the microsoft/usdoj antitrust suit in one night and got an A. i lost the paper when my hard drive crashed. i wish i had a back up somewhere.

~k.