Danial Dennets Intentional Systems essays

Danial Dennet's Intentional Systems essays Daniel Dennetts Intentional Systems Before I begin summarizing the paper, I would like to, at least for myself, get my personal feelings toward the paper itself and to clear up what I think is meant by Daniel Dennetts term intentional. In my opinion, Dennett does a poor job of explaining the term, unless the entire paper is intended to be a definition, in which case it may be satisfactory; however in that event I will divulge that Dennetts style of writing is like that of some other authors that we have read: I can understand every single word in the paper, however the method used by these authors to string together words is unlike mine, and I find it difficult to fully comprehend the ideas he lays before me, not because I cannot grasp them, but because somewhere in between his thought process itself and me hearing his explanation of his thought process there is a loss of connection. Some authors we have read have not had this style; I found Tom Nagle to make perfect sense and I read the paper rather quickly and absorbed it all. I feel he writes in a manner similar to the scientific authors that I like to read in my free time. Most dictionaries I looked in for a definition of intentional did not give one that prompted me to think of it in any other way. They all said something along the lines of having the mind bent on an idea, thing, or person. None of the ones I had looked in made me think of intentional in any new way. However, Websters 1828 Dictionary did. It defines intentional as adj. Intended; designed; done with design or purpose. This definition finally achieved the click I had been looking for. There are many ways which people use to explain the world around them. Some use philosophy. Some use science (I know I fall into this category). Some use religion. Some use habit. Some use substances. Some people use art, and try to achieve beauty in all aspec ...

Arguments Against Horse Racing

Arguments Against Horse Racing Death and injuries are not uncommon occurrences in horse racing, and some animal welfare advocates argue that the sport can be humane if certain changes are made. To animal rights activists, the issue is not the cruelty and danger; its about whether we have a right to use horses for entertainment. The Horse Racing Industry Horse racing is not just a sport, but also an industry and unlike most other sports arenas, horse racetracks, with few exceptions, are directly supported by legal gambling. The form of gambling at horse racetracks is called parimutuel betting, which is explained as: The entire money bet on the event goes into a large pool. The holders of winning tickets divide the total amount of money bet on the race (the pool), after deductions for tax and racetrack expenses. The money take out is similar to the rake taken out by the pot in a poker game played in the card room. However unlike the small rake in poker, in the parimutuel pool this â€Å"rake† can amount to 15 – 25 percent of the total prize pool. In various U.S. states, bills have been considered and sometimes passed either allowing racetracks to have other forms of gambling or protecting racetracks from competition from casinos. As gambling has become more accessible in recent years through new casinos and online gambling websites, racetracks are losing customers. According to a 2010 article in the Star-Ledger in New Jersey: This year, the Meadowlands Racetrack and Monmouth Park will lose upwards of $20 million as fans and bettors have migrated to tracks in New York and Pennsylvania with slot machines and other casino games. Pressure from Atlantic City casinos have prevented the racino model from taking hold here, and the tracks have suffered. Daily attendance at the Meadowlands routinely hit 16,500 in its first year. Last year, the average daily crowd was below 3,000. To counter these losses, racetracks have been lobbying to be allowed to have slot machines or even full-blown casinos. In some cases, the slot machines are owned and operated by the government, with a cut going to the racetrack. One might wonder why a government body would be concerned about supporting racetracks instead of allowing them to perish like other outdated industries. Each racetrack is a multi-million dollar economy, supporting hundreds of jobs including everyone from breeders, jockeys, veterinarians, farmers who grow hay and feed, and blacksmiths who do the horseshoeing. The financial forces behind racetracks are the reason they continue to exist, despite concerns about animal cruelty, gambling addictions, and gambling morality. Animal Rights and Horse Racing The animal rights position is that animals have a right to be free of human use and exploitation, regardless of how well the animals are treated. Breeding, selling, buying and training horses or any animal violates that right. Cruelty, slaughter and accidental deaths and injuries are additional reasons to oppose horse racing. As an animal rights organization, PETA recognizes that certain precautions can reduce deaths and injuries, but categorically opposes horse racing. Animal Welfare and Horse Racing The animal welfare position is that there is nothing wrong with horse racing per se, but more should be done to protect the horses. The Humane Society of the United States does not oppose all horse racing but opposes certain cruel or dangerous practices. Cruel and Dangerous Horse Racing Practices According to PETA, One study on injuries at racetracks concluded that one horse in every 22 races suffered an injury that prevented him or her from finishing a race, while another estimated that 3 thoroughbreds die every day in North America because of catastrophic injuries during races. Pushing a horse to his physical limits and forcing him to run around a racetrack is enough to cause accidents and injuries, but other practices make the sport particularly cruel and dangerous. Horses are sometimes raced when they are under three years old and their bones are not strong enough, leading to fractures that can lead to euthanasia. Horses are also drugged to help them compete with injuries, or given prohibited performance-enhancing drugs. Jockeys often whip the horses as they approach the finish line for an extra burst of speed. Racetracks made of hard, packed dirt are more dangerous than those with grass. Perhaps the worst abuse is one that is hidden from the public: horse slaughter. As a 2004 article in the Orlando Sentinel explains: To some, horses are a pet; to others, a living piece of farm equipment. To the horse-racing industry, though, the thoroughbred is a lottery ticket. The racing industry breeds thousands of losing tickets while looking for its next champion. Just as farmers cannot afford to care for spent egg-laying hens when they get old, racehorse owners are not in the business of feeding and keeping losing horses. Even winning horses are not spared from the slaughterhouse: Decorated racers like Ferdinand, a Kentucky Derby winner, and Exceller, who won more than $1 million in purse money, were retired to stud. But after they failed to produce champion offspring, they were slaughtered. While there are rescue groups and sanctuaries for retired racehorses, there are not enough. Horse breeders argue that horse slaughter is a necessary evil, but it wouldnt be necessary if the breeders stopped breeding. From an animal rights perspective, money, jobs, and tradition are powerful forces keeping the horse racing industry alive, but they cannot justify the exploitation and suffering of the horses. And while animal advocates make the ethical arguments against horse racing, this dying sport may pass away on its own.