Category Archives: Philosophy

The Key Differences between Attitude and Behavior

Attitude and behavior are two distinct psychological constructs that are often used interchangeably, but they have some key differences.

Attitude refers to a person’s overall evaluation of something, such as an object, person, or idea. It is a cognitive component that influences how a person thinks and feels about something. Attitudes are formed based on a person’s experiences, values, and beliefs, and they can be positive, negative, or neutral. Attitudes can also be changed or influenced through persuasion or exposure to new information.

Behavior, on the other hand, refers to the actions or responses that a person exhibits in a given situation. It is the observable aspect of a person’s thoughts, feelings, and attitudes. Behavior is shaped by a variety of factors, including personality, culture, social norms, and past experiences.

One key difference between attitude and behavior is that attitudes are internal and cognitive, while behavior is external and observable. This means that attitudes are subjective and can only be inferred by a person’s words or actions, while behavior is objective and can be directly observed by others.

Another key difference is that attitudes tend to be more stable over time, while behavior can vary depending on the situation. This is because attitudes are based on a person’s values and beliefs, which tend to be more enduring and less influenced by external factors. Behavior, on the other hand, is influenced by a variety of situational factors, such as social norms, expectations, and rewards, and can change accordingly.

There is also a relationship between attitude and behavior, known as the attitude-behavior consistency principle. This principle suggests that a person’s behavior is generally consistent with their attitudes, but there are exceptions to this rule. For example, a person may have a positive attitude towards exercise, but may not consistently engage in physical activity. This inconsistency may be due to a variety of factors, such as lack of motivation or time, competing priorities, or conflicting values.

Despite these differences, attitude and behavior are often related and can influence each other. For example, a person’s behavior can influence their attitudes, such as through the process of self-perception. When a person engages in a certain behavior, they may infer their own attitudes based on their actions. Similarly, a person’s attitudes can influence their behavior, as they are more likely to engage in actions that are consistent with their beliefs and values.

In conclusion, while attitude and behavior are two distinct psychological constructs, they are related and can influence each other. Attitude refers to a person’s overall evaluation of something, while behavior refers to the actions or responses that a person exhibits in a given situation. Attitudes are internal and cognitive, while behavior is external and observable. Attitudes tend to be more stable over time, while behavior can vary depending on the situation. There is also a relationship between attitude and behavior, known as the attitude-behavior consistency principle, but there are exceptions to this rule.

The end does not justify the means

The phrase “the end does not justify the means” refers to the idea that the goal or outcome of an action should not be used to justify the means by which it was achieved. In other words, the morality of an action should not be determined solely by its success or failure, but rather by the ethical principles and values that guided the decision-making process.

This concept is often applied in discussions about moral and ethical dilemmas, and has implications for many different fields, including construction.

In the construction industry, it is important to consider the ethical implications of decisions made during the planning, design, and execution of a project. This can be especially challenging when working on complex projects that involve a wide range of stakeholders, including owners, contractors, subcontractors, designers, and regulators.

One area where the “end does not justify the means” principle can be particularly relevant is in the procurement process. This process involves selecting the contractors and subcontractors who will work on a project, and it is critical to ensure that the selection process is fair, transparent, and unbiased.

If contractors are chosen based on factors other than their qualifications and capabilities, it could lead to poor quality work, cost overruns, and other problems that could compromise the success of the project.

Another area where this principle can be relevant is in the management of construction projects. It is important for project managers to make decisions that are in the best interests of the project, but they should also ensure that these decisions are made in a way that is ethical and responsible.

This could involve considering the impact of decisions on the environment, the safety and well-being of workers, and the overall sustainability of the project.

In addition to these specific considerations, it is important for all stakeholders in the construction industry to remember that the end does not justify the means in a broader sense.

This means that the success of a project should not be achieved at the expense of ethical principles and values. For example, it would be wrong to cut corners or engage in unethical behavior in order to meet a deadline or achieve a certain level of profitability.

In conclusion, the end does not justify the means is an important principle to consider in the construction industry. By ensuring that decisions are made in a way that is ethical and responsible, construction professionals can help to build a more sustainable and equitable industry.

Objective Opinion

The philosopher is in love with truth, that is, not with the changing world of sensation, which is the object of opinion, but with the unchanging reality which is the object of knowledge. (Plato)

Nowadays, people base their chosen action only on opinions. As a matter of fact, they have their own opinions in all aspects of their life. But the question is? How can we know that our opinion is right…or let’s say true? What a philosophical question isn’t it?

All individuals are entitled for their own opinions but the problem is, not all opinions are correct…philosophically speaking.

An opinion based on one’s feelings or emotions maybe true or correct…subjectively… for an opinion nowadays lies on one’s subjectivity. But how can we say that their opinions are correct or let’s say true (truth)?

Here, it questions the basis of truthfulness of one’s opinion. If the opinion is based on mere emotions, it is true only for the subjective individual and not for all persons. That’s why opinion must be based on the universality of the truth and not on the mere subjective person.

The problem with the people nowadays is that, they based their opinions on what they have felt…on their feelings and emotions and not on the knowledge based on truths…on the power of the intellect that will tell us through the process of critical thinking.

If your opinion would be acceptable to everybody…or would pass to the criterion of the universality of truth, there we can claim that our opinion is correct…true (truth).

People do possess a freedom to express their opinions but it does not follow that their opinions are true…

For some, it is possible but for everybody, it is a big question. Our opinion must be based on the objective reality so that it maybe become (true) truth.

Our opinion is therefore, an objective opinion.

What Makes a Student, a Student?

I wonder why students are always complaining about their studies…They always say that, there are lots of pressures…lots of assignments…projects…subjects…

My goodness, try to go back to the etymology of the word student. But wait!, I would prefer to use morphology, this is intended for those who are not familiar with etymology…(Etymology refers to the origin of the word while morphology refers to the root of the word, [salitang ugat].

In morphology, you may trace the root of the word “student” from its infinitive; to study. From the very word itself you can observe that as students you may legitimately call yourselves as students, if and only if you are studying your lessons in school…

This is very basic, isn’t it…no philosophical explanation is needed to prove this fact. If all your subjects…assignments…projects…and of course exams are stripped out from your “student-ness”, you can no longer be called yourselves as students.

The problem with you is therefore…the development of your habit…specifically your study habit… If you already possess that habit of studying, you will no longer experience pressures, in spite of ample stuffs to do.

No extra effort is needed when examination days come…

Now, call yourselves students and be responsible to accomplish your task, i.e., to study.

A Friend

Friend is someone who can sing your song in your heart when every time you forget the lyrics.

How can you really know that your friend is a true friend? It appears as an ordinary question of teens…right? But somehow, it is deeply related to us “twenteens” (now, thirteens) hehehe .

Friend is someone whom we can share our whole beings…our inmost thoughts…our memories and experiences… The laughters and tears also play an important role in any amicable relationship. But the question is? What makes friend a friend?

Whew! Philosophical isn’t it? It is really hard to find out a true friend…a friend who can understand you despite your individual differences…a friend who is always there with you even in the poignant pangs of grief in your life…

A friend who is sincere with you…who will appreciate you if you have done good things…A friend who will uplifts your heart when you are in trouble… a friend who will tell honestly if you are doing something wrong or if your act is against the moral principles… and a friend whom you can lean on…no matter what…without conditions…and a friend who keeps his/her promises…

A true friend won’t hurt you but sometimes, s/he may appear hurting you, if your friend is trying to help you and s/he touches your proud ego.

Apparently, s/he is hurting you, but in reality, s/he is just being true and real to you as your beloved friend. If s/he is always ready to listen to your repetitive stories which are seemingly burned like pirated CD’s/DVD’s, s/he is a true friend.

Hey pals I can be your friend whom you can trust. But if you are not yet satisfied with my friendship and If your mind tells you that you have not yet found your true friend, just visit Him for once, He is just waiting…waiting for your profound appreciation…

Then, He will help you for He is your friend… Jesus.

God Does Not Exist

Ludwig Andreas Von Feuerbach, a humanist-atheist claims that God does not exist. He explains that God is merely a projection of human imagination.

He says that man, in his action, is experiencing limitations in this life. He is going through suffering and poignant pangs of grief in life. To make up for this limitation, he produced or made up the idea/concept of God who is greater than himself.

Man, in his limitation, made the idea of infinite, eternal and omnipotent God. Thus, Feuerbach claims that God is a simple product of human imagination.

To put into syllogism, he says that “If God is, so man is a slave. But man is free and intelligent, therefore God does not exist.”

Granted that Feuerbach was trying to prove the non-existence of God by saying that God is just a product of human imagination in order to satisfy his limitation. Though he was able to deny the existence of God, still, he was not able to explain where this man’s idea of God comes from.

The question now is that, if man was able to make his own idea of God who is greater than himself, where this idea/concept of God comes from?

Obviously, his idea/concept of God does not come from himself, for man cannot think or even create someone or something which is greater than himself.

This unsolved question in Feuerbach’s position is answered and explained by Rene Descartes.

Descartes’ Arguments on God’s Existence

Rene Descartes proves the existence of God using his argument of the “Cogito Ergo Sum” as the starting point. He claims that God exists because it is God Himself who implanted the idea God to his (Descartes) mind.

When Descartes thinks the idea of God, he proves his “thinking” by examining his own thinking of himself. Thus, he says, Cogito ergo sum, I think, therefore, I am.

In connection with this claim, when he grasped the idea of God who is greater than himself, the idea of God which is present in Descartes’ mind comes from God Himself. He (Descartes) said this simply because, he cannot think of a greater idea of God since he (Descartes) is less great than his own idea of God.

So, where does this idea of God come from? Logically, it comes from God Himself simply because (not that simple for some people); God Himself is the Cause of the Effect of the idea of God on him (Descartes).

Thus, there would be no greater effect than the cause. Since, God is the cause of the idea of God, it follows that God exists. Descartes cannot think of the idea of God, if his idea of God comes solely from him.

In a nutshell, Descartes says that God exists because he has in his mind the idea of God, and this idea of God cannot come from him since this idea (of God) is greater than him. If that is the case, there is innate idea of God in his mind implanted by God Himself.

Therefore, God exists.

DEATH: Culminating Point in One’s Life

Death does not simply occur in man’s life. It is not simply an event that overtakes in his life. Death is a free act. It is an act of freedom, a highest act of freedom. And since it is the highest, it drives man to reach his wholeness/totality. In reaching his wholeness, man has logically lost his concupiscence which lessens his power to choose either good or evil.

Since death is a free act of man, then, man cannot do away himself with death. For death is not an isolated point in man’s life. In fact, man cannot but accept the reality of death. He should realize the fruit the death can give, because through death, man reaches his totality, his completeness, and his finality. Man is not man without death for it is in death that he would be completely man. And so death is the culminating point in man’s life and not an isolated one.