The Scientific Proof behind Marijuana Effects on Humans Essay

The Scientific Proof behind Marijuana Effects on Humans - Essay Example The debate on the legalization of marijuana to be used as a medical substance has lasted for a very long time whereby there are those who are for the legalization of marijuana for medical purposes, and there are others who strongly are against its legalization. The argument on either side is based on the benefits and risks associated with such a move whereby those who think that legalizing marijuana for medical use is beneficial to support its legalization, however, those who think that it would be riskier to legalize marijuana oppose the move. In order to understand the raging debate over legalization of marijuana, it is critical to understand the different views expressed by both sides and it is only after establishing the underlying points and issues that we can be able to have an insight into the debate surrounding marijuana in the USA. There are advantages of marijuana as espoused by the supporters of its legalization whereby the scientific studies have proved that marijuana has some medical value. This is not a new idea because marijuana has been used in the past for medical purposes in the treatment of various ailments classified under therapeutic and palliative groups. In addition to that, smoked cannabis is not only safe but is also effective in the treatment and management of diseases and conditions such as; nausea, pain, AIDs-related weight loss, and palliative care diseases. Nevertheless, marijuana usually makes a person feel high, or have a sense of well being that is why it is abused.

Philosophy paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Philosophy paper - Essay Example Their affiliation determines who they like and don't like. If Euthyphro says "What is dear to the gods is pious, what is not is impious" then it would be proven illogical in Socrates' counter argument that Athena and Ares consider the same group of people both pious and impious. These qualities should be universal but they are not. This is the principle of Euthyphro's Dilemma.(Round 3) The gods can agree and be universal in their choices. Definition Round 3 : "the pious is what all gods love.. and what all the gods hate, is the impious†¦" Socrates gives strenuous opposition because the answer is not straight forward. "Is the pious being loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is being loved by the gods?" Euthyphro agrees that it cannot be answered universally. The gods love some things because they are pious or good. This shows that that the god- loved and pious have to be different. The idea of right and wrong have to have an intrinsic anchor. Socrates goes ahead an explains cause and effect. Euthyphro's arguments cannot only be based on the same laws of the physical universe. He based his laws of piety on the same laws of the physical universe. The laws of piety are not rules and regulations which can been governed by gods or bodies of government. The best answer accepted by both Socrates and Euthyphro is to question one because the pious can be immaterial grammatically as it can be a person or an animal. The moment gods like it the "thing becomes pious. The Euthyphro Dilemma is presented by Socrates as showing that pious cannot be grammatically defined as it was done in ancient Greek. 2)If the Universe is like a watch the universe represents a complex organism of parts which function together . Paley never develops the analogy but compares the universe to a rock in the woods and a watch. He uses this comparison to develop his version of the Design argument which is later refuted by Hume's counter arguments. He knows that a rock would not be easily accepted as having a Designer as a creator. Using the watch as an analogy to the comparison to the world assumes that there is a designer to the universe who must be God. Functionality assumes a designer which assumes the existence of God. The watch analogy shows the complexity of natural order and thus an existence of a creator. The natural events in life cannot be contributed to happenstance. Yes a watch has problems as does nature. A watch has a maker though you don't see him. You cannot see the inner workings of the watch though they exist. They have been put together as the universe was put together. They were designed before they were created. The universe functions because of the work of the presence of an omnipotent designer. Even though the watch can have problems in working properly, it was designed in its inception. A perfect example would be the climatic problems we are having in the world. The weather system was designed but it is not working as it s hould. If the watch is missing a battery or needs to be taken to a watch maker because it is no longer keeping proper time, these are two conditions we would not be able to fix because of our lack of understanding. This does not assume that there was not a designer. The casing of the watch as well as all other items in the world have structure, otherwise there would be total chaos. The watch would not be able to hold together its parts. He uses a deductive argument if noticeable things were