In the discussion of “Individuality vs Conformity: a Healthy Middle,” one controversial issue has been is there a ¨Healthy Middle, where it is not too weird but at the same time not the same as others. The author of this passage states that it is simply human nature to want to be liked. In addition, she states that after we embrace this warm feeling of acceptance, another feeling bubbles to the surface. She uses imagery stating that, “at first the feeling is only a spark.” She believes it is our need to feel special, unique, extraordinary, and distinctive. I believe the author has mistaken, because she overlooks her opinion of human nature when she is only in high school.
Although this argument suggests the absence of equality produces a better friendship and life, I will defend Aristotle’s view by presenting textual evidence from of Nicomachean Ethics proving otherwise. One of the main themes of Book VII in Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s observations related to friendship, since he deemed life meaningless without it. While doing so, he identified and explained three kinds of friendship; friendships of pleasure, friendships of use, and true friendship. Aristotle states the former two are circumstantial and fleeting, particularly with friendships of pleasure. He points out that this type of friendship tends to form among young people since they live their lives under the same shortsighted circumstances,
But we have seen that the stories of Daniel and Jozef support the decision to act upon the desire for revenge and appear intended to discourage its mere expression. Diamond’s conclusion, though unsupported by his evidence, is not unreasonable. In fact, I agree that revenge is a natural emotion that needs to be expressed rather than repressed, but this can be done more efficiently and effectively through socially acceptable means, such as small comments and actions, rather than the large, virulent, melodramatic declarations Diamond seemingly recommends. This new conclusion can be applied to many other socially repugnant emotions like greed, envy, and sloth. Though Diamond’s evidence is independently enlightening, the conclusion he draws from it provides the reader with the broader opportunity to reconsider current philosophies about how we can best express common emotions within
Matchers are the ones that balance giving and taking. Matchers know when to give and when to take in order to promote self wellbeing. Matchers are equally as selfish as they are selfless which prevents them from being taken advantage of. This balance also allows them to keep taking from others without burning their peers out.Most are of a matchers principles are based off of the idea of fairness. Matchers feel that relationships should consist of equal effort of both spouses.
Annette Baier discusses justice and care in an interesting way and she does so by distinguishing between the justice perspective of people like Kant and Rawls as well as what Gillian’s perspective about care. Baier also touches on the justice perspective and discusses the “inadequate” as a moral theory. This shows inequalities between people, it has an unrealistic view of freedom of choice, and it ignores the importance of moral emotions such as love. However, she also says that the best moral theory, she claims, is one that harmonizes justice and care. She goes on to also explain the theory of moral development which has two dimensions.
While the former highlights such elements as argument analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, the latter refute ego-centrism in favor of fair-mindedness. In other words, the weak-sense critical thinker is a pseudo-intellectual in that although he is highly skilled, yet egoistically motivated to achieve his selfish goals without taking into account the moral consequences. On the other hand, strong-sense critical thinker employs logic to solve the problems. He does not include his selfish intentions in the way he sees problems. In fact, he fair-mindedly unravels the stumbling blocks in a reflective and systematic
Of Aristotle’s three rhetorical appeals,the author of ”Individuality vs conformity” uses pathos most effectively to get the reader to relate to her argument. the informational essay “Individuality vs Conformity” focuses on that fact that there is a healthy middle between individuality and conformity .The writer supports their focus by demonstrating that even though “we embrace this warm feeling of acceptance” humans have “This feeling is our need for individuality“ .The author’s purpose is to point out that there is a healthy middle between individuality and conformity in order to do that the author says “but that doesn’t mean we can’t try”.The author writes in a informal logical style for their audience teenagers and others interested in
Since, persuading someone to do something with your past experience can be impactful, your sharing, of your experience, is influencing someone 's decision making you have to make it persuasive. Making your experience honest as possible is helpful. “ It is impossible to persuade a man who does not disagree, but smiles”. This quote was said by Muriel Spark, a novelist. For example, you could say you hated your experience or you loved it.
She states “I am a cripple. I choose the word to name me.” She prefers to be deemed as a cripple showing her decisiveness to be associated with the word cripple, which creates a sense of self-worth , in turn giving her satisfaction. In addition, Mairs mentions, “I made the choice a number of years ago, but I recognize that they are complex and not entirely flattering.” Although she realizes that here are negative connotations associated with the being a “cripple”, she conveys acceptance of herself by wanting to identify as one. Moreover, she says, “As a cripple, I swagger.” This statement implies that she struts both literally and figuratively. Consequently, she likes the attention that being perceived as “tougher” than everyone else gives her; she is aware of how she’s recognized.
In the definition of the word forgive, it doesn't mention what I consider the most important part of forgiveness , which is the self empowerment it gives the person doing the forgiving. Holding onto anger and resentment gives the individual, who did someone wrong, the power. Forgiving someone leads to a peace within oneself that can't be obtained while holding a grudge. Forgiving an individual has more to do with oneself then the wrong doer. When one forgives someone they move on from the past; they close the door of the past mistakes and move on to the present.