This essay focus on Jean-Jacques Rousseau and David Hume and how they in their writings describe the doctrine of the original sin, and what they replace it with. The theoretical framework this essay work form, is Peter. L Bergers theories concerning society and religion as a social construction, were religious systems purpose is to establish order and previewed a meaning for people. From a history point of view religious system and institutions have had a significant role in establish system that will provide people with explanations about the world. In the eighteenth century, during the period in Europe often named as the enlightenment a new sort of criticism took place against religion.

What drove me to write this paper is the will to  examine if there is a philosophically and scientifically viable  alternative foundation for an objective morality other than what we like to refer to as "God". The  American philosopher and neuroscientist Sam Harris presents in his book The Moral Landscape a thesis for an objective morality based on science in which he states that  science can determine human values. The purpose of this paper is to perform a theoretical trial of The Moral Landscape, examining Harris' thesis and it's relations to the philosophical obstacles that stands in its way, these being mainly the famous philosophical principle "Hume's Law" and G.E. Moore's "Naturalistic Fallacy and Open Question Argument" and thus will serve as my main theoretical foundation. The results of my study was not conclusive since Harris in fact doesn't succeed in bridging the gap between facts and values on a scientific ground.

This work is meant to contribute to the research of adaptation studies by focusing on a special case: the transformation of a fictional diary into a movie. In order to sustain the form of the literary source the adaptation to movie requires certain strategies. Först of all, the diary genre is characterized by a one-dimensional narration. Second, diaries only supply a few written dialogues, hence this "void" has to be compensated and filled by media specific measures. Third, the investigated diary is a story of individualization and emancipation of a single woman.

Denna essä är en ontologisk och epistemologisk undersökning av bland annat etiska och medvetandefilosofiska implikationer av en konsekvent fysikalistisk hållning. I detta kontrasteras mot en transcendentalistisk hållning, som den av T. M. Scanlon, den skeptiska empirismen av David Hume, reciprokt baserade moraliska system (e.g. J. L.

What drove me to write this paper is the will to  examine if there is a philosophically and scientifically viable  alternative foundation for an objective morality other than what we like to refer to as "God". The  American philosopher and neuroscientist Sam Harris presents in his book The Moral Landscape a thesis for an objective morality based on science in which he states that  science can determine human values. The purpose of this paper is to perform a theoretical trial of The Moral Landscape, examining Harris' thesis and it's relations to the philosophical obstacles that stands in its way, these being mainly the famous philosophical principle "Hume's Law" and G.E. Moore's "Naturalistic Fallacy and Open Question Argument" and thus will serve as my main theoretical foundation. The results of my study was not conclusive since Harris in fact doesn't succeed in bridging the gap between facts and values on a scientific ground.

This paper is a critique of an article in the Swedish magazine Filosofisk Tidskrift (Philosophical Magazine), in which professor Per Bauhn maintains that there is something wrong with having a group perspective in moral and political matters. In this article Bauhn makes three conclusions. The first one is that you violate Hume's law if you draw the conclusion that something is an oppression only from descriptive premises, which for example communitarians does according to Bauhn. He argues that ?oppression? is a normative term, and therefore it requires at least one normative premise.

I den här uppsatsen undersöker jag det rationella i att tro på Jesu uppståndelse. Då uppståndelsen är en central del i den kristna läran kan man tänka sig att det är viktigt för troende kristna att bevisa att det inte är irrationellt att tro på den. En sådan troende kristen är Stephen T Davis och det jag särskilt tittar på här är huruvida denne lyckas bevisa det rationella i att tro på uppståndelsen. I en debatt mellan honom och Michael Martin försöker Davis visa att uppståndelsen är sannolik. Martin kommer i sitt svar med invändningar, där han förklarar att uppståndelsen är osannolik.