1. Anthony Appiah argues that race is less central to our (Western) ethical identities than gender. Explain this claim and Appiah’s argument for it. Do you think he is right? Why or why not?
There is no good reason to treat racial identity differently than ethnic identity. Ethnic identity is totally something you are free to identify with your parents backgrounds and claims that racial identities are different from ethnic ones are based on false belief. Appiah’s critique of these large views as identities is not designed to deny their reality but to expose their threat to freedom and society. Appiah recognizes the importance, for the sake of unity in a cruel world, of combined identities based on race or gender, but is uncomfortable with the…show more content… and Malcolm X are very important African American individuals throughout history. They fought for what they stood for but in a lot different ways. Since we all know in history there are no two great men that are alike. Their many beliefs that have blossomed from the households they came from and how they grew up. Martin Luther King grew up in a middle class family and was very educated. While, Malcolm X grew up in an underprivileged environment that was very hostile with barely any education. Martin Luther King Jr. was always against violence and supportive of nonviolence, throughout his entire ministry. King always stood his ground, and he stood out because even though he may have been physically attacked, he never reacted with violence. Martin Luther King Jr. followed the Christian faith. Malcolm X was a Muslim, and believed in Muslim principles. Malcolm most famous line was “By any Means Necessary”. Malcolm believed in fighting back with violence. Malcolm believed do you had to do whatever freedom he was all for it whether it be nonviolence or violence. Later in life Malcolm went to Jerusalem, and met other people with the same faith. Malcolm changed his mindset, and became nonviolent. MLK’s approach to civil rights/equality was non-violent protesting, speaking out for non-violence, passive resistance. Nevertheless, Malcolm tactic to civil rights/equality was very different. Malcolm was suspicious of whites, Malcolm was willing to use “by any means…show more content… Descartes evokes the evil Demon so that he has something to question things like why does a square have four sides, maybe the demon is creating a illusion for him. Descartes starts by doubting things perceived by the senses. Since dreams can be virtually indistinguishable from "reality" in wakefulness in terms of sights, sounds, etc., how can he trust his senses? Instead of assuming that God is the source of our deceptions, let’s assume that there exists an evil demon, who is capable of deceiving us in the same way we supposed God to be able. Since the source of our knowledge cannot lie in the sense, Descartes must find a way to rebuild the order of knowledge upon material he can find within the contents of his own mind. The first thing he can be sure of on the basis of this alone is his own life. By doubting everything, he can at least be sure not to be misled into falsehood by this demon. The evil demon presents a complete illusion of an external world, including other minds, to Descartes' senses, where there is no such external world in existence. The evil genius also presents to Descartes' senses a complete illusion of his own body, including all bodily sensations, when Descartes has no body. Descartes suggests that, for all he knows, he may be under the control of an all-powerful Demon that plans on deceiving him. In that case, he does not have a
