duty essay

Share full article

Supported by

Should Work Be Passion, or Duty?

Too many of us expect our jobs to give meaning to our lives. There is a better way.

By Firmin DeBrabander

Mr. DeBrabander is professor of philosophy and an author.

It’s worth noting on a national holiday extolling the value and dignity of labor that Americans are uniquely obsessed with work. Could any other nation come up with a product like Soylent , a meal substitute, not for the elderly, the poor or the malnourished, but for software engineers, Wall Street brokers, tech entrepreneurs and others who don’t want to be diverted from their work by the time consuming intricacies of a meal? Could you imagine the French conceiving such a thing?

While other wealthy nations have shortened the workweek, given their citizens more free time and schemed to make their lives more pleasant, stress-free and enjoyable, the United States offers a curious paradox: Though the standard of living has risen, and creature comforts are more readily and easily available — and though technological innovations have made it easier to work efficiently — people work more, not less.

Why is this?

One theory is that Americans have come to expect work to be a source of meaning in their lives. Our “conception of work has shifted from jobs to careers , to callings ,” explains Derek Thompson, in a recent article in The Atlantic. There is a growing expectation, if not insistence, that work is to be your passion, your obsession — a veritable religion that Thompson dubs “Workism.” This is especially pronounced among the upper classes — precisely those people who do not need to obsess over work, at least for material concerns.

A recent study of priorities among young people found that achieving one’s career passion ranks highest of all — more than making money or getting married. Finding a fulfilling job is almost three times more important than having a family, teenagers in the study reported.

It is daunting to contemplate. Most people are certainly guaranteed to fail in this pursuit. Even people who love their jobs will report they must do thankless tasks from time to time. Few, if any, experience nonstop bliss, where sheer passion sustains them through long hours on the job.

Whether or not you accept the work as worship analogy — perhaps “meaning” and “fulfillment” in this context are really just the usual raw ambition disguised as virtue — there is plenty of evidence that our high-octane work culture has serious consequences. It is at least partly responsible for high levels of burnout among millennials. Many young people report having lost the ability to enjoy free time; they have fewer hobbies. Americans overall today engage in fewer extracurricular social activities than they did in previous generations. More time spent on the job or at the office means less time with family — and with children who crave our attention. There are also links between long work hours and increased consumption, and a larger carbon footprint.

It seems clear that we need a new approach to work, a different motivation for selecting and performing one’s job, and making space for it in life. We might begin by rejecting the notion that work should consume our lives, define and give meaning to them, and seeing it rather as an opportunity to fulfill something larger, namely our duty.

In a well-known essay called “On the Tranquility of the Mind,” the first-century Stoic philosopher Seneca offers advice to his friend Serenus, a Roman official who complains that his high post is not fulfilling because it does not allow for glory. Serenus does not see the impact of his grand position, and finds it hard to do his job. He constantly casts about looking for something more captivating and consequential, where his renown may be secured — to no avail. Ultimately, he complains to Seneca, he feels seasick from it all; he is unsettled, unmoored, empty.

Seneca’s advice to Serenus is to focus on doing his duty . He must perform the job he is best disposed and able to perform, as determined by his nature, and the needs of those around him. And he must forget about glory or thrill or personal fulfillment — at least in the near term. If he performs his duty, Seneca explains, fulfillment will come as a matter of course.

When the Stoics invoke duty, they have something special in mind. Yes, it involves performing your obligations, but there is more to it. For one thing, the Stoics see duty everywhere — or rather, they see life as a collection of duties, including but not limited to your job.

Duty is rooted in self understanding. What are you able to do well, the Stoics ask? What service is required? Throw yourself into that. Each of us has undeniable talents and abilities, whether they are physical, emotional or intellectual. More controversially, your natural makeup and disposition suggest there are things you should not do — you will never do them well, and they will offer perennial frustration. Hopefully, or ideally, your natural abilities will be cultivated and deployed most effectively and fruitfully. This makes for joy.

In essence, Seneca calls for a change of focus: Instead of straining to discover your one true passion, and devote your life and soul to it, study yourself and the needs of those around you. Frankly assess what you can do, how you are best equipped to serve, and work. Also: identify the several jobs you are called to do — inside and outside the home — and do them well.

Seneca also urges Serenus to avoid pinning his hopes on perceived results; we may not see any. Too often, we throw up our hands in despair when we think our efforts have no impact. Too often, we misjudge the nature and standard of success. But human perception is prone to error, philosophers have long pointed out. We are often ill equipped to measure, much less detect the fruits of our labor. We must, Seneca says, “just act” — just do your duty, and think of little else.

To illustrate, Seneca tells the story of the ill-fated Julius Canus, who was condemned to death by the emperor Caligula. In prison, Canus played a game of draughts while awaiting his execution. When the centurion came to lead him to his doom, “he counted the pieces and said to his companion, ‘Mind you don’t pretend you won after I’m dead,’ then with a nod to the centurion he added ‘You will testify that I was one piece ahead.’ Do you suppose that Canus played a game at that board?”

Life is a game, or a play, the Stoics contend, where we have roles to act out. These are our duties. I, for example, am a professor, sometimes a writer; but also a father, a husband, and son; a colleague, citizen, neighbor and friend. There are certain things I must do in these roles. There are expectations of me and duties to perform beyond my career, as stipulated by my nature and place in society, and they require my attention. And my duties will change with time and age.

Play the role you are given, Seneca urges. Play it seriously, and diligently. But recognize that it is only a role, one among many — and not of your design or choice. When you see your duties as various roles you must play, and your life as a collection of these roles, this will alleviate the urgency and anxiety that burden any given task — including, or especially, your career.

Work can be therapeutic, Seneca contends, when we take our will and wants out of the equation, and devote ourselves instead to the job at hand — and recognize that we have many callings. There is not only one path to fulfillment, but many.

In America, we fancy ourselves eminently free. We tell our children they can be anything they want, that they can achieve their grandest dreams. We mean this as encouragement, but Seneca would say it is secretly oppressive. In truth, we can’t be anything we want, nor should we try, because dreams are imprecise, and wants are insatiable. It is far better to focus on what we can do, where we can help. Our duties are a surer guide in life — and we are happier for embracing them.

Firmin DeBrabander is professor of philosophy at the Maryland Institute College of Art, and the author of “ Do Guns Make us Free? ” and is at work on a book on the loss of privacy.

Now in print : “ Modern Ethics in 77 Arguments ,” and “ The Stone Reader: Modern Philosophy in 133 Arguments ,” with essays from the series, edited by Peter Catapano and Simon Critchley, published by Liveright Books.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram .

Essay on Duties of a Student

Students are often asked to write an essay on Duties of a Student in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Duties of a Student

Introduction.

Students play a significant role in society. They are the future leaders, and their actions shape tomorrow’s world. They have several duties which if fulfilled, can lead to their personal growth and societal development.

Academic Responsibilities

The primary duty of a student is to learn and acquire knowledge. They should attend classes regularly, respect teachers, and strive for academic excellence. Homework and assignments should be completed on time.

Moral Duties

Students should practice honesty, discipline, and respect for others. They should help their peers, respect elders, and uphold moral values.

Social Responsibilities

Students should actively participate in societal activities. They should be aware of social issues and contribute to their resolution. They have a duty to serve the community and promote peace.

Also check:

Paragraph on Duties of a Student

250 Words Essay on Duties of a Student

The role of a student.

Students are the future architects of any nation and their duties are not confined to academics alone. They are the torchbearers of change, and their responsibilities extend beyond the walls of classrooms.

Primarily, a student’s duty is to learn and acquire knowledge. This involves regular attendance in lectures, diligent studying, and active participation in class discussions. They need to respect their teachers, listen attentively, and complete assignments on time. The pursuit of excellence in academics is a vital duty of every student.

Students should also be aware of their social responsibilities. They are expected to respect diversity, promote equality, and uphold the values of honesty and integrity. They can also contribute to society by participating in community service and environmental conservation efforts.

Civic Duties

As future citizens, students have a duty to understand the political, economic, and social issues affecting their country. They should be aware of their rights and responsibilities, and participate in democratic processes like voting.

Personal Growth and Development

Students should strive for holistic development, nurturing their physical, emotional, and intellectual capabilities. This involves maintaining a healthy lifestyle, developing critical thinking skills, and fostering emotional intelligence.

In conclusion, the duties of a student encompass not only academic achievements but also social, civic, and personal growth. By fulfilling these duties, students can contribute significantly to their personal development, and the progress of their society and nation.

500 Words Essay on Duties of a Student

Students are the future of a nation, holding the potential to shape the course of society. Their primary duty is to learn and acquire knowledge, but their responsibilities go beyond the confines of their classrooms. They are the torchbearers of change and progress, and their duties extend to themselves, their families, society, and the nation at large.

Personal Duties

The first duty of a student is self-improvement. This involves not only academic pursuits but also the development of character and personality. Students must strive for physical fitness, emotional maturity, and intellectual growth. They should cultivate good habits, such as punctuality, respect for others, and a love for learning. They must also develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills to navigate the complexities of the modern world.

Academic Duties

Academic duties are an integral part of a student’s life. They must be diligent in their studies, aiming for a deep understanding of their chosen subjects. They should also develop a research-oriented mindset to explore new ideas and knowledge. Balancing academic workload with extracurricular activities is another important duty, as it fosters a well-rounded development.

Duties towards Family

Students also have responsibilities towards their families. They should respect their parents and elders, and value the sacrifices made for their education. They should also contribute to household tasks, sharing the workload and learning essential life skills in the process.

Duties towards Society

As members of society, students have a responsibility to contribute positively to their communities. This can be achieved through volunteer work, participating in community events, or simply by being good citizens. They should stand against social evils and work towards creating an inclusive, tolerant society.

Duties towards Nation

Students are the backbone of a nation’s future. They have a duty to understand and appreciate the history and culture of their country, and to contribute to its progress. They should be aware of their rights and responsibilities as citizens, and should be ready to serve their nation when needed.

In conclusion, the duties of a student are multifaceted. They are not just learners but also contributors to family, society, and nation. The fulfillment of these duties is essential for their personal growth and for the development of society and the nation. As the future leaders, innovators, and citizens, students must embrace these responsibilities with dedication and integrity.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Essay on Cell Phones Distraction for Students
Essay on An Ideal Student
Essay on Senior Citizen

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Immanuel Kant’s – Duty Theory of Ethics Essay

Immanuel Kant’s duty theory can be considered as an element of the deontological ethics. It is the duty that every person has to follow according to moral ethics. All the right or wrong actions of the individuals are not depended on possible consequences of these actions, but rather serve to fulfill the duty. However, it is impossible to insist on the good motives of something without providing any convincing facts.

A good reasoning should be a performance of our duty and demonstrate a will of goodness. Kant indicates that some good issues do not necessarily contain a meaning of the consequences and results, it is good in itself.

Performing of our duty has to be based on the understanding of its major parts and significance. A duty is a necessity to act taking into consideration law issues. In order to get a better understanding of a duty, it is important to investigate two notions of Kant, such as the categorical imperative and hypothetical imperative. An imperative is the statement that indicates the individual the way of behavior.

The hypothetical imperative includes a form of the conditional statement; thereby this position provides the instructions for a specific goal’s achievement, while the categorical imperative gives the instructions which have to be followed regardless of one’s goals (Meerbote and Walford 15).

The categorical imperative is a fundamental principle of Kant’s theory related to the individual moral ethics. For Kant, it is the absolute rule which cannot be overridden by other moral considerations. Therefore, according to Kant, morality has to be a basis of the categorical imperative. An individual is usually controlled by his morality and behaves according to one’s moral principles.

Kant provides several definitions of this principle. The first definition says that an action is permissible only in case it is performed from the position of a maximum. For Kant, a maximum is the universal law that should be followed by everyone (Meerbote and Walford 15). A maximum is the basis for every action including the voluntary one. It is the principle which everyone has to follow.

For instance, the time one spends on charity has to be equal to the time he/she spends on eating. All maximums have a particular format that has to be followed in every circumstance. The universal law provides everyone with the opportunity to perform actions given under certain circumstances and motives. In other words, you have to act more carefully and in accordance with the particular circumstances.

It will be an example for other persons and lead to the similar behaviors of the ones who are facing the same situation. For instance, if I decided to lie in order to get some benefits, it would lead to the situation when everyone can easily lie to each other. So, what consequences will we have?

Nobody will believe me and I will also have doubts about other people’s words. According to Solomon, in case the maximum of lying becomes universal there is no point to lie anymore. It is absolutely impermissible within the first categorical imperative notion (Solomon 5). Kant emphasizes that the notion of maximum contains several flaws in its application. Therefore, the philosopher provides the second notion.

This formulation is based on the same moral principle, but it is more comprehensible and easier in the use. This notion indicates that action is permissible only in case the rational being is not treated. The philosopher believes that only humans are the rational creatures.

Due to their intrinsic value, no one can be treated as an instrument of the desires fulfillment. People involved in this action should accept it voluntarily (Meerbote and Walford 15).

According to Kant’s theory, lying is always a wrong action and, therefore, people should not get involved in it. However, due to the different life positions and moral principles of people, it is difficult to achieve the positions of this statement. There are always some specific circumstances which require the particular exclusions.

For instance, if I have to lie in order to save someone’s life, isn’t it an exception to the rules? The present universal law can be considered from position of contradiction. As the result, people would not stop believing each other because they lie to save lives.

Kant explores his theory with the relation to lying only. The maximums and other universal laws should be specified in the ways that could demonstrate the relevant features of any situation given. For instance, in this case, the situation of committing a murder in order to protect oneself can be considered as an exception.

The understanding of the universal maximum of lie is not an answer which helps choosing the right method of behavior in a situation when someone has to save the other person’s life. Therefore, Kant’s theory of ethics cannot be considered as the universal conception of the human behavior. However, comparing with the utilitarian system of ethics, Kant’s theory seems more applicable due to its objectives (Gregor 46).

According to Kant’s theory, the system of ethics is very useful in guiding principle of human morality. However, this theory cannot be relevant in the complicated and vague situations. Immanuel Kant’s duty theory contains a good definition of morality and its particular elements, such as lying or stealing. Kant indicates that the goodness has not to contain a meaning of the consequences and results, it is good in itself.

Works Cited

Gregor, Mary. The Metaphysics of Morals. New York: Cambridge University Press,1975. Print.

Meerbote, Ralf & Walford, David. Theoretical Philosophy .Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992. Print.

Solomon, Robert. Introducing Philosophy. Boston: Sage, 1997.Print.

"What Is Enlightenment?" by Immanuel Kant
Immanuel Kant’s Ethics - Philosophy
Immanuel Kant's Argument that Ethics is Based on Reason
Epicureanism and Stoicism
Epistemological Approaches of Empiricism and Postmodernism
“The last Days of Socrates” by Plato
Michel Foucault’s Subject of Power
Presentation on John Locke’s A Letter Concerning Toleration
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, May 30). Immanuel Kant’s - Duty Theory of Ethics. https://ivypanda.com/essays/immanuel-kants-duty-theory-of-ethics/

"Immanuel Kant’s - Duty Theory of Ethics." IvyPanda , 30 May 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/immanuel-kants-duty-theory-of-ethics/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Immanuel Kant’s - Duty Theory of Ethics'. 30 May.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Immanuel Kant’s - Duty Theory of Ethics." May 30, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/immanuel-kants-duty-theory-of-ethics/.

1. IvyPanda . "Immanuel Kant’s - Duty Theory of Ethics." May 30, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/immanuel-kants-duty-theory-of-ethics/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Immanuel Kant’s - Duty Theory of Ethics." May 30, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/immanuel-kants-duty-theory-of-ethics/.

Home — Essay Samples — Life — Professions & Career — Duty

Essays Examples on Duty

What duty, honor, country means to me, overview of principles and concepts of assessments, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Aeneid, a Poem by Homer and The Theme of Individual Struggle Between Love and Duty

Personal values vs. public duties in the job of attorney, two unique perspectives of social duty, for milton friedman and for archie carroll, let us write you an essay from scratch.

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Relevant topics

Career Goals
Dream Career
Community Service
Work Experience
Social Work
Dental Assistant
Labor Union

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

University of Notre Dame

Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews

Home ›
Reviews ›

Knowledge, Truth, and Duty: Essays on Epistemic Justification, Responsibility, and Virtue

Steup, Matthias (ed.), Knowledge, Truth, and Duty: Essays on Epistemic Justification, Responsibility, and Virtue , Oxford University Press, 2001, 272 pp, $49.95 (hbk), ISBN 0-195-12892-3.

Reviewed by Thomas D. Senor, The University of Arkansas

Knowledge, Truth, and Duty is a collection of fourteen essays by fourteen different authors. As the title indicates, the central topic is epistemic normativity and its relationship to the concepts of knowledge and justification, and to the twin goals of truth-seeking and error avoidance. The contributors are (in order of appearance): Susan Haack, Bruce Russell, Richard Fumerton, Carl Ginet, Richard Feldman, Robert Audi, Alvin Goldman, Matthias Steup, Marian David, Michael DePaul, Ernest Sosa, Noah Lemos, Vrinda Dalmiya, and Linda Zagzebski. With the exception of the papers of Haack, Goldman, and Sosa, these essays are making their print debut here. There is not space to adequately discuss each essay, so we will have to content ourselves with a quick description of each. After that I’ll take a closer look at one of the book’s central essays.

In her paper, “’The Ethics of Belief’ Reconsidered,” Susan Haack considers the relationship between epistemic and moral appraisal. After distinguishing five possible relationships between the two, Haack argues that the view that epistemic appraisal is but a subspecies of moral appraisal is false. For, Haack claims, if one’s evidence for p isn’t good enough, then one will be unjustified in believing that p. But a person “can’t be morally at fault in believing that p unless his belief is willfully induced” (p. 23). Yet that might not be the case; perhaps the person is intellectually deficient and cannot help but believe p even though his evidence does not support it—then his belief is epistemically unjustified but not morally permissible. Haack’s perspective on the relationship between epistemic and moral justification is captured in what she calls the “overlap thesis,” which says that there is a “partial overlap” and that “positive/negative epistemic appraisal is associated with positive/negative ethical appraisal” (p. 21). Her idea is that there are certain ways of being unjustified that bring along with them moral unjustifiedness. So a belief about, say, the current safety of my children that is formed on the basis of hasty generalization might well be both epistemically and morally unjustified. Believing in this way is a form of culpable ignorance.

Bruce Russell’s paper, “Epistemic and Moral Duty,” explores the same topic in a different way. Russell is concerned with the distinction between subjective and objective duty—moral and epistemic. Russell argues that knowledge requires the completion of both one’s objective and subjective epistemic duties. Borrowing from the work of Richard Feldman, Russell takes objective justification to require that the subject have good reason to believe the proposition in question; a subjectively justified belief is a belief that the person is blameless in holding. Russell uses this distinction to reply to examples of Alvin Plantinga’s in which a person has epistemically blameless true belief that is nevertheless not knowledge. These examples crucially involve a person’s holding a belief for which the subject lacks good reason. Russell takes these examples to show that objective justification is also necessary for knowledge. It is similar for beliefs for which the person allegedly has objective justification but lacks subjective justification.

Both Haack’s and Russell’s papers assume that epistemic appraisals are in some sense “normative.” But what is it for an appraisal to merit this appellation? This is the topic of Richard Fumerton’s paper, “Epistemic Justification and Normativity.” In the end, Fumerton can find no good sense of the term according to which epistemic judgments are normative. What’s the result of this? Fumerton claims that one potential implication is that epistemic internalists who criticize externalists for failing to fully appreciate epistemic normativity are off the mark (although Fumerton is sympathetic to other criticisms of internalists).

Part II of the book is entitled “Epistemic Deontology and Doxastic Voluntarism.” Carl Ginet’s fascinating paper, “Deciding to Believe,” kicks off this section. Ginet argues that while we lack direct control over a great many of our beliefs (i.e., that doxastic voluntarism is false regarding much of what we believe), there is a class of propositions that we can, in the right circumstances, come to believe “just by deciding to believe” them. The kind of case Ginet has in mind occurs when some doubt with respect to p comes up and one considers whether to believe that p, thinks that it would be better to believe p in these circumstances than to withhold p, and so decides to believe that p. To illustrate, Ginet offers the example of leaving home for vacation and then wondering whether the front door has been locked at the house. One might seem to remember doing it but not being completely sure. Nevertheless, given the hassle of driving the 50 miles back to one’s house, the good reason to think the door is locked, and the undesirability of worrying about it for the rest of the trip, one simply decides to believe the door is locked. Simultaneous with the decision is the forming of a disposition to “count on” p in deciding how to act in relevantly similar situations. Ginet recognizes that our having direct voluntary control in cases of this sort does little to motivate a general voluntarism of the sort that, for example, William Alston has argued against. Nevertheless, his article is noteworthy as a defense of even a rather restricted version of doxastic voluntarism.

No one has done more to defend the significance of epistemic deontologism against recent attacks than Richard Feldman. Here, in his paper, “Voluntary Belief and Epistemic Evaluation,” Feldman argues that a recent defense of doxastic voluntarism is flawed and that we lack the kind of control over our beliefs that we have over our actions, control that arguably is necessary for our actions to admit of deontological evaluation. However, Feldman argues that, as in the financial and legal domains, the “ought” of epistemology does not entail “can.” Just was we ought to repay our debt even if we are broke when the payment is due, so we ought to believe according to our evidence.

In “Doxastic Voluntarism and the Ethics of belief,” Robert Audi considers and then rejects arguments for two versions of doxastic voluntarism. Audi then considers the place for the ethics of belief in light of the failure of voluntarism. It turns out that there is a place for such an ethic but that the beliefs themselves are not the targets.

Alvin Goldman’s reprinted essay, “Internalism Exposed,” is the first paper of Part III, “Epistemic Deontology and the Internality of Justification.” Goldman is here interested in the motivation of internalism. The first rationale for internalism Goldman considers comes from what he calls the “guidance deontology” conception of justification. This is a long and rich essay that resists quick summarization. The bottom line is that Goldman finds internalism problematic because any way of construing “internal” that is sufficiently robust to guarantee that reliabilism is “external” has problems accounting for the justification of a whole range of beliefs—from stored beliefs, to beliefs originally justified by now-forgotten evidence, to beliefs about logical and probabilistic relations.

Editor Matthias Steup’s paper, “Epistemic Duty, Evidence, and Internality,” is a response to Goldman’s essay. Steup grants that the accessibility motivation for internalism leads to difficulties but argues one can motivate internalism by appeal to evidentialist principles. I shall have more to say about Steup’s defense of internalism at the end of this review.

Marian David’s paper, “Truth as the Epistemic Goal,” kicks off the fourth section, “Justification and Truth.” David’s paper is a thorough discussion of the relationship between justification and truth. In particular, David considers many possible variations on how to make explicit the “truth goal” (the goal of believing truth while avoiding error) spoken of by epistemologists of all stripes. In the end, David suggests a version of reliabilism that employs a subjunctive truth-goal (for every p, if S were to believe p, then p would be true, and if p were true, S would believe p) as the leading contender.

In “Value Monism in Epistemology,” Michael DePaul argues against the monism of his essay’s title. While some have claimed that truth is the only epistemic goal, DePaul claims that this can be seen to be wrong by considering that knowledge is better than mere true belief; true belief is be valued but not as much as knowledge is. There are, according to DePaul, a number of epistemic values—knowledge, truth, and justification to name a few.

Section V is “Epistemic Virtue and Criteria of Justified Belief.” These two papers seem somewhat thematically distant from their comrades. The first, Ernest Sosa’s reprinted “Reflective Knowledge in the Best Circles,” is concerned with, for example, how Descartes can noncircularly use what he clearly and distinctly perceives to show that God exists and thereby legitimize what is clearly and distinctly perceived. Sosa’s answer is the answer of the externalist: as long as the beliefs used in the proof arise from reliable (or “apt”) faculties they provide Descartes with non-reflective, animal knowledge. By using what we learn from our apt or virtuous faculties, we can achieve reflective knowledge by using our animal knowledge to construct explanations of how we know.

In “Commonsensism in Ethics and Epistemology,” Noah Lemos defends so-called “common sense” in both domains. He argues that beginning the epistemological enterprise with Moorean beliefs such as “I have two hands” is not objectionably parochial; furthermore, Lemos follows Sosa’s lead and argues that as long as these starter beliefs indeed have a positive epistemic status, they can ground our further beliefs—including our beliefs in epistemic principles.

The book’s final section focuses on virtue epistemology. Vrinda Dalmiya’s paper, “Knowing People,” takes its cue from virtue ethics and the method of care. While the notion of epistemic responsibility has a role to play, it is not simply the responsibility of standard deontological theories of justification. Rather the method of care centers the epistemic discussion on cultivating and reinforcing attitudes that are regarded as positive in the wider epistemic community.

Linda Zagzebski’s essay, “Recovering Understanding,” is an example of the way a virtue epistemologist evaluates and analyses an epistemic virtue. Citing the work of Plato and Aristotle on understanding, Zagzebski offers an account that takes understanding’s object to be structures of reality—that is, objects like pieces of art or buildings—rather than propositions that are the objects of knowledge. To understand is to comprehend these structures. Virtue epistemology, Zagzebski argues, is in a better position than non-virtue epistemology to give us workable accounts of subjects like understanding because the former but not the latter is able to accommodate both proposition and nonpropositional subjects.

If one is going to critically discuss a collection of essays in a short review, one will have to do so either by talking only abstractly about the collection as a whole or else by focusing on one particular essay. I shall do the latter. The remainder of this essay is a raises an objection to Steup’s reply to Goldman.

As mentioned above, Steup believes that one aspect of Goldman’s critique of internalism is correct: if the internalist starts with the accessibility constraint, she’ll run into problems. However, not all is lost for the internalist. She can instead motivate her view by adopting an evidentialist account of justification. Moreover, Steup argues, she can motivate her evidentialism by deontology. Steup notes that the relationship between the two is “complex” (p. 137) and that an adequate defense of it would be beyond the scope of his essay. He then gives a sketch of an argument that is prima facie problematic, but since Steup recognizes the sketchiness of his remarks on this score, I’ll not stop here to comment further.

What do we know about the sort of evidentialism that Steup prefers? Although he says rather little about the details, he makes two important theoretical points and then tells us a bit more when he responds to Goldman. Let’s look at these in turn.

Steup tells us that deontology leads to evidentialism. This is because no item can be that in virtue of which S is justified in holding a belief unless S is in “cognitive possession” of that item (p. 137), and the kinds of states that S possesses in the relevant sense are evidential states. So nothing is evidence for S that S does not possess.

The second theoretical point is that one need not have beliefs about what one’s duties are, still less beliefs about how one determines what one’s duty is. Saying he is taking a page from the externalist’s book, Steup maintains that justification requires only that a person has done her duty, not that she know she has done her duty or even be in a position to know it. “[A]ccording to evidentialism, having (undefeated) evidence for p is sufficient for being justified in believing that p. No further condition must be met” (p. 138). Now as it stands, this version of evidentialism would seem to have little to do with deontology. For as we learn a page later, Steup is willing to allow both stored and conscious beliefs to count as evidence. But then it looks as though if I have fifty beliefs that together entail p (and no set of 49 does), and I never put these beliefs together to see the entailment and am not being derelict in my failing to do this, I am nevertheless justified in believing p because I have undefeated (let us suppose) evidence for it. And this might be true even if my reason for believing p has nothing to do with my good evidence.

Let’s now take a look at how Steup’s internalism handles the problems that Goldman raises. The first Steup discusses is the problem of forgotten evidence. Suppose that Sally, an epistemically responsible person, believes that broccoli is good for her by reading it in the New York Times Science section. However, she later forgets where she read it and now only knows she believes it. Goldman claims that the person lacks an internal justification for her belief even though the belief is clearly justified and, if true, even counts as knowledge.

Steup replies that the evidentialist will argue that Sally does have evidence in this case: a memorial seeming. She seems to remember that broccoli is healthy; she also has a background belief that what she seems to remember is usually true. These comprise, Steup assures us, a good evidentialist justification for her broccoli belief. One point to raise here, it seems to me, concerns the epistemic status of stored beliefs. Steup allows these beliefs to play an evidentiary role in the justification of other beliefs. But in order for those beliefs to be justifiers, one would suppose, they must be justified themselves. So that should mean that stored beliefs, even when stored, are justified or unjustified. But then consider Sally’s broccoli belief before she remembers it, when there is no memorial seeming associated with it. One would suppose that if this belief will be justified when it becomes occurrent, it must be justified just before then. But then the justification of the belief doesn’t depend on the memorial seeming.

Be this as it may, Goldman foresees the move Steup makes and says that what this shows is that the kind of justification the internalist can get is not the sort that is crucial for knowledge. To see this, we should reconfigure the Sally case so that she initially forms the belief on the basis of what is known to be a bad source. So suppose also that she acquired this belief in a very unreliable way (and in a way she would take to be unreliable) and that she has not had the belief corroborated in the meantime by trustworthy sources. As with the original case, she doesn’t now remember where she came by the belief; she’s forgotten her source. Yet she has a memorial seeming and knows that she is a responsible believer who generally comes to her beliefs via reliable sources. Goldman claims that Sally is unjustified in her belief in the sense of justification that “carries a true belief a good distance toward knowledge” (Goldman, p 121). Steup rightly takes Goldman’s point here to signal a significant theoretical divide between them. Indeed, I think that this gulf generally exists between internalists and externalists about justification. The externalist and internalist will agree that knowledge requires justified true belief that also satisfies a fourth anti-Gettier condition. They will disagree, however, about how much work the fourth condition does. Traditionally, it has been the condition called on to show why Gettier cases are not instances of knowledge. Consider the following: suppose this were a world in which the demon is very effective at leading you into falsity but in which he screws up once and, quite fortuitously, you believe something true. Let this be a belief that we would typically count as justified—perhaps it is a standard perceptual belief. Is this a Gettier case? If you think it is, then you are likely an internalist who thinks that the fourth condition of knowledge has a lot of work to do. On the other hand, the externalist will typically say that there are no Gettier cases at demon worlds. Getting back to Sally, Goldman believes that the kind of justification that “carries true belief a good distance toward knowledge” is not had in a demon world; Steup and other internalists deny this. Is there any way of adjudicating this dispute without undertaking a general evaluation of the internalism/externalism controversy?

I believe there is. I think there is a rather sizable problem for Steup here; a problem that indicates that deontology and his brand of evidentialism might not rest together as well as he thinks. First, let’s consider the second Sally case from the perspective of deontology; and to do this, let’s consider a point in moral theory. As St. Anselm showed in Cur Deus Homo , the “ought implies can” principle fails when one is culpable for one’s inability to do what one ought. I promise to pay you back tomorrow the $100 I borrowed last week. In the meantime I’ve spent my entire paycheck on CDs, books, and beer; I have only $10 until my next paycheck in two weeks. I now cannot pay you tomorrow. Does that mean that I’m no longer have an obligation and hence will not be culpable for failing to pay? Of course not. My inability to pay today is explained by my earlier misdeed. There may a synchronic notion of doing one’s duty according to which as long as I’m doing the best I can now I am justified in acting as I do, but this is surely not the currency that standard moral evaluations trade in. We expect better of each other. Now I think that the epistemic deontologist should say the same regarding Sally. Sure, given that she believed irresponsibly in the first place and has since forgotten the ground of her belief, there is a synchronic sense of doing one’s epistemic duty in which her current believing is nonculpable. Yet since were it not for her earlier misdeed (believing irresponsibly) Sally wouldn’t now have the broccoli belief, and since all that has happened in the meantime is that Sally has forgotten the source of her belief (hardly an off-setting epistemic virtue), Sally must be judged to not have done her (diachronic) duty in believing as she does.

This result is doubly problematic for Steup. First, these considerations suggest that even if we are thinking of a deontological, internalist sense of justification, we should side with Goldman and say that Sally is unjustified. Second, and more significantly, the above considerations suggest that deontological considerations get on rather poorly with evidentialism. For what I’ve been arguing about the deontological evaluation of Sally’s belief is independent of considerations of the quality of her evidence. What seems clear from Steup’s sketch of evidentialism is that it is a synchronic theory: whether or not one is justified at t depends upon one’s evidence at t; and one’s evidence at t depends only on what’s happening at t. Here then is the big problem: deontological considerations generate a diachronic concept of justification but evidentialist considerations of the sort highlighted by Steup lead to a synchronic notion.

Despite its problems, Steup’s paper is a good read; it advances the internalism/externalism debate by showing that there are conceptual resources for resisting at least some of Goldman’s conclusions. (If evidentialism is unshackled from deontology there might well be sufficient resources for responding to Goldman). In addition to the Steup essay, of the previously unpublished essays, I found those of Ginet, David, Fumerton, and Feldman to be particularly thought provoking and insightful; but the overall quality of the papers is high. Knowledge, Truth, and Duty is well worth the time of any epistemologist.

Essays On Duty

Many students are faced with the problem of finding ideas for writing their essays. This website contains a database with more than 50 000 essay examples, using which you can easily find inspiration for creating your own essay on Duty.

Here you will find many different essay topics on Duty. You will be able to confidently write your own paper on the influence of Duty on various aspects of life, reflect on the importance of Duty, and much more. Keep on reading!

People could not live without desires for their life. To have a happy life, first of all it has to be desired. There is another aspect of life that opposite desire, duty. Both of them create life. Jasmine is the main character of the same name novel of Bharati Mukherjee who struggle about what she […]

Concentric lines versus grid circles In this paper, we will describe the ethical dilemma between concentric line and grid circle thinking, in what I believe the Japanese warrior tradition, bushido, terms as the dilemma between “giri” and “ninjo”, or loosely translated, duty and compassion. Let us first begin by describing examples of these ethical dilemmas. […]

Case Study DUBAI DUTY FREE Discuss the economics of duty free shops. Elaborate the history of Dubai and the reasons for the strategic shift from trade to tourism. Analyse the prerequisites for establishing duty free shops. Dubai was a colonization of fishing originally. A branch of Bani Yas’s tribe of the oasis of Liwa directed […]

During the Cold War, I had the responsibility of handling and transporting nuclear warheads which posed a lethal range of twenty miles. Beyond this range, there was a burn zone and subsequently a sickness zone. I was responsible for carrying out guard duty and embodying the power to eliminate spies in the Baden Wurttemberg State […]

The author argues that the approach to the duty of care in New Zealand, as seen in the decision in South Pacific Manufacturing Co Ltd v New Zealand Security Consultants and Investigations Ltd, is just as uncertain as the approach in Australia and Canada prior to recent decisions. Thus, the appellate courts of New Zealand […]

Classification of Modern Taxes In today’s world, taxes can be classified into two main types: direct taxes and indirect taxes. Direct Taxes: These are the taxes that individuals pay directly from their income. Indirect Taxes: These are the taxes that are imposed indirectly on goods and services. The government collects direct taxes, such as Income […]

The purpose of this document is to explain the six essential components that can aid a supervisor in implementing their best strategy within the business domain. The application of optimal supervisory methodologies aligns with fundamental ethical principles in business. Supervisors are vital in overseeing the work of lower-ranking employees within an organization, especially in the […]

In his book Ninety Three, Victor Hugo presents a grand narrative of devotion and obligation. Hugo skillfully combines entertainment, education, and enlightenment in his novel, which centers on the three main characters of Lantenac, Gauvain, and Cimourdain. These significant male figures are interconnected, and their conflict embodies Hugo’s political […]

Emily Grierson is the rubric character in the short narrative “A Rose for Emily. ” The storyteller portrays Emily as a “tradition. a responsibility. and a attention. ” ( Faulkner. 79 ) but in her actions. it is obvious that Emily is a true foreigner. She shuts out the townsfolk. merely leting them to see […]

Collins English Dictionaries (2013) states that “duty of care” is defined as “the legal obligation to safeguard others from harm while they are in your care, using your services, or exposed to your activities”. In plain terms it is clear to see that there is a direct link between safeguarding and the duty of care […]

In Virgil’s great epic poem Aeneid, the adventures of Aeneas are registered to create a powerful human drama that still retains its force two millennia past. Aeneas, the hero of the epic, is born of a divine union between the mortal Anchises and the goddess Venus. Believed to have been written circa 20 BC, this […]

Principles for Implementing Duty of Care in Health, Social Care or Children’s and Young People’s Settings Explain what it means to have a duty of care in own work roleI work in adult residential care for individuals with learning disabilities and mental illnesses. All residents should be supported and enabled to live in an environment […]

Was Rob’s choice justified? Why or why not? No, I don’t think Rob’s choice was justified. Rob did not hire this person because she was a smoker nor because she was less qualified. His reason for hiring her was, “Rob had to go with soft reasons. Cathy was a smoker. Rob didn’t like smoking – […]

Risk Assessments – carrying out and reviewing risk assessments for all of the activities we do and places we visit ensures that thought and concern is given to how we do things every day, this way I ensure risks concerning equipment, venues and activities are minimised and therefore reducing the risk of injury or harm […]

Essays on Duty

The Nature of Patriotism: Duty, Honor and Country

This essay about the essence of patriotism explores the timeless values of duty, honor, and country. It emphasizes the importance of selflessness and collective responsibility in serving one’s nation and community. Duty signifies the obligation to contribute to the greater good, while honor underscores the significance of integrity and ethical conduct. Country represents shared heritage and values, fostering a sense of belonging and unity. Through embracing these principles, individuals can cultivate a deeper appreciation for their roles in society and work towards building a brighter future for all.

How it works

In a world where individualism often takes precedence, the principles of duty, honor, and country stand as timeless pillars of patriotism and service. These values, deeply ingrained in the fabric of societies across the globe, transcend mere nationalism, offering a profound sense of purpose and belonging to those who uphold them. From soldiers on the front lines to everyday citizens contributing to their communities, the essence of patriotism lies in a commitment to something greater than oneself.

At its core, duty encapsulates the obligation to serve one’s nation, community, or fellow human beings.

It is a call to action, a recognition of the responsibilities that come with the privileges of citizenship. Whether it be through military service, volunteerism, or simply fulfilling one’s civic duties, embracing a sense of duty fosters a culture of selflessness and collective advancement. It is a recognition that we are all interconnected, and that our actions, no matter how small, can have a ripple effect on the world around us.

Honor, closely intertwined with duty, speaks to the importance of integrity, respect, and ethical conduct. It is not merely about adhering to a set of rules or societal norms, but about upholding a moral compass that guides our interactions and decisions. In the context of patriotism, honor is exemplified by the sacrifices made by those who have served and continue to serve their countries with courage and dignity. It is a testament to the values we hold dear, even in the face of adversity, and a source of inspiration for future generations.

Country represents more than just geographical boundaries; it embodies a shared heritage, history, and identity. It is the land we call home, the communities we belong to, and the values we collectively uphold. Patriotism, therefore, is not blind allegiance to a flag or government, but a deep-seated love and appreciation for the ideals and principles that unite us as a nation. It is a celebration of diversity and inclusivity, recognizing that our differences enrich the tapestry of society and strengthen the bonds that bind us together.

In conclusion, the foundations of patriotism and service rest upon the timeless virtues of duty, honor, and country. These values serve as a guiding light in an ever-changing world, reminding us of our interconnectedness and shared humanity. As we navigate the complexities of modern society, let us not forget the sacrifices of those who have come before us, nor the responsibilities we bear towards future generations. For it is through our collective efforts, fueled by a sense of duty, honor, and love for our country, that we can build a brighter and more inclusive future for all.

Cite this page

The Nature of Patriotism: Duty, Honor and Country. (2024, Mar 12). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-nature-of-patriotism-duty-honor-and-country/

"The Nature of Patriotism: Duty, Honor and Country." PapersOwl.com , 12 Mar 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-nature-of-patriotism-duty-honor-and-country/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Nature of Patriotism: Duty, Honor and Country . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-nature-of-patriotism-duty-honor-and-country/ [Accessed: 28 May. 2024]

"The Nature of Patriotism: Duty, Honor and Country." PapersOwl.com, Mar 12, 2024. Accessed May 28, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-nature-of-patriotism-duty-honor-and-country/

"The Nature of Patriotism: Duty, Honor and Country," PapersOwl.com , 12-Mar-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-nature-of-patriotism-duty-honor-and-country/. [Accessed: 28-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Home / Essay Samples / Life / Work / Duty

Duty Essay Examples

What duty, honor, and country means to me.

“This I Know” Duty, Honor, Country. An iconic farewell speech said by General Douglas MacArthur to the Corps of Cadets at U.S Military Academy At West Point in N.Y on May 12, 1962. Duty and Honor are the ideals of the United States Army. Sometimes...

Tort Law of Negligence Case Analysis

Negligence is a one of the torts law that describes how other people mistreatment other people or see them as inferior or labors. Negligence is a failure to exercise what they supposed to do rather than using them or ethical ruled care expected to be...

An Analysis of Kant’s Concepts of the Good Will, Duty and Morality

In Immanuel Kant’s Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals, Kant argues that we should focus on determining whether we are worthy of happiness before we concern ourselves with our happiness in the world. In the following short essay, I first describe his belief that the...

Mbti and Strong Interest Inventory Assessment Reflection

I have had an opportunity to know about MBTI and Strong Interest Inventory assessments through Counseling 116. These are two effective tools that can help people find their preferences by giving questions regarding their daily lives and basic differences in the way individuals prefer to...

The Completion of Duty in the Bhagavad Gita

From just societies to strict social classes, however, many religious texts influenced in shaping how society was run. Throughout the realms of Ancient India, social hierarchy reminded the people of India of isolation and categorization existing. The caste system is a prime example of the...

Deontology: the Right Things Regardless of the Consequences

Deontology can be defined as the study of the essence of duty. Deontology is derived from “deon”, a Greek word that means “duty”. Broadly, we can say that deontology is an ethical approach that concentrates on the rightness or the wrongness of an action, based...

Trying to find an excellent essay sample but no results?

Don’t waste your time and get a professional writer to help!