Louise M. Antony argues an important ethical concern in her article, “Good minus God”. Can a person do good deeds without God? Arguing from an atheistic point of view, Antony believes that a person does not need to depend on God in order to complete good deeds. I agree, whether Christian or Atheist, all can perform good deeds, but who ultimately defines good versus evil? Antony subjectively defines morality and uses nature as her source.
Kant places “the main point of enlightenment… chiefly in matters of religion because our rulers have no interest in playing guardian with respect to the arts and sciences” (109). Kant explains that religion is one of the greatest threats to enlightenment because, unlike other fields, there is significant incentive to spread the way of a certain religion. The unchecked power of the church and of religious members is one of the results of this, as seen in Candide. Kant goes on to write that “religious incompetence is not only the most harmful but also the most degrading of all” (109). He recognizes too the downsides that result from not questioning the higher institutions
Hick concludes that the suffering and heartache does not have a purpose of pleasure, but the purpose of growth and “soul making”. The reason that there even is pleasure is for humanity to know what pain feels like and to be able to recognize that it is because humanity is imperfect and so we must learn from it (Hick,
“Although one should not reason about Moses, as he was a mere executor of things that had been ordered for him by God, nonetheless he should be admired if only for that grace which made him so deserving of speaking with God” (22). In the context of The Prince, this statement proves to be duplicitous because Machiavelli claims that he will not reason about Moses, but then uses the following pages to do precisely that. Furthermore, Machiavelli draws extensively from the actions of Moses and the Old Testament God, although Machiavelli is often regarded as an antagonist of the Church. Machiavelli’s handbook for princes consists of concrete advice for rulers that directly reflect the more abstracted stories in Exodus. For instance, Machiavelli’s description of human nature in The Prince mirrors Moses’ experiences as the leader of the Israelites in Exodus.
Despite education for women being an emotional and personal topic for Wollstonecraft, she balances her writing with reason (Volkova 896). She provides details and logic that back up her statements. She gives relatable examples and alarming possible outcomes. One of Wollstonecraft’s point is that, women are dependent on men because of the way society views marriage. Women from before based their survival on the approval on men, instead of furthering on their educational needs (Poonacha 427).
Further he explained that neither alternative is true and therefore the Divine command theory is false. So is Plato suggesting that there is no such thing as a definition of holiness, that there is no one feature that all holy deeds have in
However, some viewed Darwin’s theories as a call for change, and used his racists and sexists remarks to bring forth positive change in society. Thus, Darwin made racists and sexists remarks in his works that were read by many causing some people to either agree with his radical ideas of inequality and others to bring forth a change. In Darwin’s “ The Descent of Man,” he argued many ideas that went against the norm for what people believed in the mid- nineteenth century.
Steinbeck calls this moral choice that each person has in his or her life timshel, a reference to the original Hebrew translation of the Book of Genesis. Steinbeck defines timshel as meaning “thou mayest”, neither a command nor a suggestion, but a choice given from God to man to either do good or evil. It is timshel that transcends all bounds placed upon a person and their thinking that leads them not to their choices, but to their ability to make them. While it would seem logical that knowing that ethically good choices bring about true happiness, that people would always choose the virtuous over the vice, however, because of the existence of timshel and the vast and complex pros and cons of each possible choice that even the most virtuous of humans often fall from morality, continuing a never-ending search for true
Antigone’s efforts to execute her will on Creon and his men resulted in her being viewed as weak. Creon asks Haimon, “Is a woman stronger than we?”(Sophocles 218). His question clearly implies the sexist and patriarchal values and beliefs ingrained in him just like plenty of men at that time, which is that women are subservient to men and that’s the way it should be. Creon goes on to call Haimon an “adolescent fool!”(Sophocles 221), all because he defended Antigone’s actions. Ironically, Haimon admits to finding Creon’s wisdom more valuable than his marriage; even the nicest of men have their biased perceptions of superiority.
What he is saying is that it is a waste of time to value capitalistic ideologies, for example, wealth and fame. He implies that we are so wrapped up in our unnecessary desires that it just clouds our minds with things that really aren't important. By giving into temptations one has lost the ability to have self control. Epicurus tells us that when it comes down to it we will always pick things that bring us pleasure. He says what we don't think about is that a lot of our decisions we have made in hopes of the pleasure we were looking for only caused us pain in the end.
Karl Marx believed that religion arose out of oppressive conditions and supported the status quo by justifying inequality, consoling the downtrodden, and dulling the pains of daily life. To Marx, religion was fundamentally conservative in that it confirms and reinforces existing social arrangements. It justifies laws that limit people’s freedoms, it validates the rule of the powerful and oppression of the weak and it makes sense of economic inequality and other forms of social disparity. In so doing, religion also suppresses people’s resistance to oppressive systems. To serve these purposes, religion need not take any specific form, posit a god or supernatural beings or embody particular practices.
Immanuel Kant and Blaise Pascal offer contrasting opinions concerning reason, or man’s ability to come to conclusions on his own. In Metaphysics of Morals, Kant provides an optimistic view of reason, depicting that reason can attain certain conclusions. Pascal argues in Pensees that man is inherently flawed and can’t be certain from reasoning while faith, or belief in the supernatural, is the only thing that can create certainty. Kant’s positive outlook on human reason is a sound assertion, although it doesn’t necessarily create a rupture between faith and reason because despite reason’s capabilities of reaching universal truths, faith compensates for potential mishaps made by reason and provides a more in depth knowledge when combined with reason.
What makes the book worth reading, however, is not to revel in the action, nor to mock the seemingly haughty narrator, but to analyze the author’s portrayals of human nature. Wells riddled the plot with examples of the moralistic slump that may occur in the worst of circumstances. To think that “life is an incessant struggle for existence,” is void of all morals and emotion, a raw notion that reveals our most basic purpose in life, simply existing, rather than feeling (Wells 208). His startling displays lead me to wonder whether he is pessimistic or realistic about the human race. This aspect of the text is the only reason the book managed to keep my
The Treatment of Women in Literature Since the beginning of time, women have always been considered less than or inferior to men. Although, the treatment of women has improved tremendously and women are seeing more opportunities than ever before, we still have a long way to go. Until recently, the majority of published writers were men and the depiction of women in literature was mainly one sided. No matter what time period or culture, women in literature usually take the back seat to men. The once popular TV drama series, Twin Peaks, which was created in 1990, and Joyce Carol Oates’s short story “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?,” which was published in 1970, but was probably written in the 50s or 60s, are perfect examples of this.
Despite the human form that mankind takes, monstrous qualities thrive throughout the natures of humanity, creating creatures full of spite and savagery. This malformation in mankind is proved dominant in Elie Wiesel’s autobiography Night, William Shakespeare’s “The Tempest”, and the painting searching for humanity by John Wentz. The theme of all these pieces is referring to the hermetical aspects that rely within each individual. The evil that lurks abaft the mask exhibited in the world to optically discern, Wentz’s painting represents those factors within society holistically.