2508 Shares

Help with clarifying 9/11 in a Philosophy essay?

Help with clarifying 9/11 in a Philosophy essay? Topic: Objective essays
June 20, 2019 / By Miracle
Question: I'm doing an essay where I need to say a bit about 9/11 and I seem to have gone on an anti-American rant. I am not American nor Arab therefore I have a pretty objective view of it. However, for fear of sounding like an Arab hater, I've swung the other way and not included anything about the American side of the story. My tutor said I have a 'one sided justification for the attack'. Could anyone help me clarify the American point of view, please? Thanks!
Best Answer

Best Answers: Help with clarifying 9/11 in a Philosophy essay?

Lilly Lilly | 4 days ago
Drop everything you know, do not take anything as fact and then look at it again. Find evidence and come to your own conclusion of what happen upon that evidence. There are always two sides of a story.
👍 236 | 👎 4
Did you like the answer? Help with clarifying 9/11 in a Philosophy essay? Share with your friends

We found more questions related to the topic: Objective essays


Lilly Originally Answered: Help with clarifying 9/11 in a Philosophy essay?
Drop everything you know, do not take anything as fact and then look at it again. Find evidence and come to your own conclusion of what happen upon that evidence. There are always two sides of a story.
Lilly Originally Answered: Help with clarifying 9/11 in a Philosophy essay?
They're teaching you how to justify 9/11 in school?! That's pathetic and pretty sad... Just search WTC Building 7 on YouTube and go from there, don't be afraid to sound "anti-american", as an American you have a right to question things. In fact, something like that should make you Pro-American.. :)

Kaety Kaety
They're teaching you how to justify 9/11 in school?! That's pathetic and pretty sad... Just search WTC Building 7 on YouTube and go from there, don't be afraid to sound "anti-american", as an American you have a right to question things. In fact, something like that should make you Pro-American.. :)
👍 100 | 👎 2

Kaety Originally Answered: Philosophy opinions?
Moral values certainly do not allow wrong means for right ends. For instance, no one is allowed to steal money in order to serve a charitable purpose. Philosophy is, however, not bound by moral values. Yet, even philosophically speaking, it is difficult to justify means by the end. At the time the means are chosen, the end is a mere intent or purpose which may or may not be eventually achieved. Therefore, if at all, end can be a justification only as a post-mortem. In that case the word 'justify' is inappropriate. A post-mortem would simply prove whether the means were effective or not. It can not prove whether they were right or wrong. A counter argument here is the concept of greater good or a sum total of good being positive. I think, even that argument is flawed. Would it not imply that killing Bush can be justified by someone to make millions of Muslims feel safer? I believe that the concept of greater good or larger interests is nothing but camouflage. In most practical situations, what is greater good or larger interests for a group, is the other way around for another group. The most compelling logic against end justifying the means is this - that wrong means can only produce apparently good results for the time being or in the short term. For sustainability of the desirable end, the means too have to be desirable (justifiable by itself). A simple example is when a student passes an exam through cheating rather than learning or knowledge. Because it is ultimately the sustainability logic that shows that ends can not justify means, today's fast moving world has no time to buy the argument. It merrily keeps justifying means by perceived immediate objectives and in the process, it is jeopardizing the future rather irreparably.
Kaety Originally Answered: Philosophy opinions?
There are 8 Dynamics or 8 parts of life thro' which each individual is striving to exist and survive. These are urges towards existence in 8 different spheres: Dynamic 1 Self Dynamic 2 creativity,sex, family unit, rearing of children Dynamic 3 Groups or as a group, race, etc Dynamic 4 Mankind Dynamic 5 Life forms, plants, animals, birds etc Dynamic 6 Physical or Material Universe(Matter Energy Space & Time) Dynamic 7 Spiritual Universe, spiritual beings, life source. Dynamic 8 God, Supreme Being, the infinite,or as infinity. No one Dynamic from 1 to 7 is more important than any other. The optimum solution is always that solution which benefits, or causes the greatest good for the greater number of an individual's Dynamics as defined above. So if the "end" achieves this greatest good for the greater number the "means" will also be optimum. There is no absolute good or absolute bad, but actions which harm the greater number of dynamics can be defined as "bad", Either way the result can be evaluated using the above formula, good or bad. Sometimes it is necessary to hurt another in a just cause, but only if it benefits the greater number of dynamics.

If you have your own answer to the question objective essays, then you can write your own version, using the form below for an extended answer.