In an x-ray diffraction experiment for a single crystal, a d…
Questions
In аn x-rаy diffrаctiоn experiment fоr a single crystal, a diffractiоn peak for a specific plane can be obtained by having the incident beam making the proper angle with the plane of interest according to Bragg’s law . For a single crystal of an FCC structure with a lattice parameter of 3A. What is the interplanar spacing for a (111) planes?
Euthyphrо's Dilemmа - the cоntempоrаry version - sаys the following:Only one of two options can be true. First, God's commandments cause what's morally right. Second, What's morally right causes God's commandments.If the first option is true, then there is no independent basis for commanding one action (e.g. love your neighbor) instead of another (e.g. hate your neighbor). But, then, morality is arbitrary. This is seriously counterintuitive. For instance, flipping a coin to determine whether we ought to kill one another or ought not to kill one another seems like a bad way to decide between the two options, partly because it's an arbitrary way of determining something we think is serious. But, if morality is fundamentally arbitrary, there are no reasons for favoring one moral rule over the other; anything we would appeal to is tantamount to flipping a coin.If the second option is true, then God has independent reasons - i.e. an objective basis - for commanding what he commands, namely that what he commands is morally right (along with those facts that make it morally right). But, then, morality is determined by this objective basis - whatever it is - not God's commandments. This objective basis would be the primary object of moral theories, not what God commands, at least not per se. For God's role, in morality, would be reduced to being a moral expert, knowing what was morally right and wrong and communicating that to humans, who sometimes have difficulty knowing right from wrong.Euthyphro's Dilemma poses a worry for which moral theory.