Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Melchert, and Hum's Theories Essay - 1

Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Melchert, and Hum's Theories - Essay Example When we speak that there is particularly good in existence, for example, then â€Å"good† can be referred to as proper universal form (Melchert, 28). However, Aristotle challenged Plato’s argument that the nature of universals is instantiated.   He argued that all universals are attached to existing things. Aristotle believed that the nature of universal can be predicted. This is because universal only exist its relation must have occurred, is occurring or must occur in the future. Hence if a universal cannot be predicted to an object that occurred in a certain period, it cannot exist. He also maintained universal location exist within each thing on which it existed. So, according to him, the form of an orange exists within each orange, rather in the world of oranges (Melchert, 35).Teleology is a philosophical explanation that explains the fact that the final causes do exist in nature. This theory put across the assumption that human action and is existing factors in the nature of the environment (Melchert, 123).   Generally, this theory explains the purpose, end, aim, and goal of the existence of something. Aristotle explained this theory by arguing that without artificial interference, action will happen as stipulated by the natural forces affecting it. An example put across by Aristotle states that a seedling reaches to a level of the adult plant as its final cause.While explaining his metaphysics, Aristotle always argued that the final cause of an action or an object is already stipulated by nature and no force can change this outcome. Through teleology, his argument on final causes was further explained. Additionally, Aristotle has argued against many philosophers claims that all things revolve around the necessity. By this statement, Aristotle believed that the philosophers were against the purpose, end, aim and goal policy of teleology (Melchert, 112).

How children learn the sounds of their language Coursework - 1

How children learn the sounds of their language - Coursework Example From the outset children learn to speak as the result of being part of a social and cultural fabric. Halliday (1980) proposes that we ‘learn language, learn through language and learn about language simultaneously as we use language’. Language cannot be learned in isolation from others. As soon as children are born they enter the world they find themselves to be part of adult conversations. For the most part ‘motherese’ (see vialle, Lysaght & Verenkina 2000, p.74), is an extremely small part of the language children hear. The overwhelming majority of the language forms in the children’s immediate culture and environment is framed in adult conventions without any attempt to simplify. As parents and others care for the daily needs of children they chatter to the child, asking questions (‘who’s a pretty baby? Did you have a big sleep?’), they share family stories (‘Grandma’s coming today and we are going shopping’) and they use language that they neither expect the child to understand or respond to at this stage. Families include children in their language acts as they gather around their new offspring. And all this time there is myriad background talk emanating from radios, televisions, computers and often other siblings. While this language may often seem to be a jumble of noise and sounds, there is always one constant in play: meaning is being developed through social interaction. This is the driving force that will operate throughout the initial years in each child’s language development and beyond (vialle, Lysaght & Verenikina 2000, p.66). Language learning is a mutual process -- Children are not passive passengers in the language that surrounds them. Young children can understand a great deal a long time before they can actually vocalize any recognizable words. As active participants in the everyday interactions of life, gradually children realize that