This is seen when Ea is stating, “I caused the exceedingly devout one to see dreams, he heard the decision of the gods' than as 'the exceedingly wise one” (11. 187). Compassion then seems to be the only logical explanation for his survival. Utnapishtim also proposes to be a favorable person because of his submissive attitude towards his gods. However, Utnapishtim is obedient to the gods in immoral ways.
As mortals, Greeks were most likely afraid to question anything the gods did, and specifically not Zeus. The Greeks could have been punished by a natural disaster or an unleashed evil from the underworld. Zeus’s power was so influential as described by Hesiod, “for easily he makes them strong and easily he brings them low” (Works and Days lines 3-7). The fear of Zeus’s strong authority and ability to induce these terrors on the Greeks must have played a strong role in how they responded to Zeus’s sexual escapades. In addition, aside from their religion the Greeks, as humans, recognize the realistic quality of their lives and are aware of the uncertainty they endure.
They have no difference from poultries that are well-fed and then are killed for human consumption. Kantianism implies that we have strict duties of beneficence towards other persons, for example, we should promote the welfare of others and respect their rights and avoid harming them (lecture notes, week 3). Hence, this act is immoral. The sponsors can gain happiness because they will become healthy again, but the lives of human clones are taken away. The happiness of the sponsors is based on the suffering of the human clones.
(pg 17) Because of this the Egyptians viewed their gods as reliable beings who wanted to help them. People of Ancient Mesopotamia viewed their gods as being unreliable like their rivers. Life was likely better for Egyptians during this period because they did not have to worry as much about survival, whereas peoples
Such a moral code would only be applicable to the followers of that religion. If another religion is forced on a population, their moral codes will have to change with it. For example, the Aztecs were famous for many things, but possibly most famous for their practice of human sacrifice. This was a religious practice that they believed pleased their gods and ensured a good harvest (Kramer, 2013). To the Aztecs, this was therefore an ethical act as it ensured the survival of their society.
The ancient Mesopotamians believed that the primary function of their existence on the Earth was to serve the ruling Gods. It is for this reason that ancient Mesopotamian ritual was aimed primarily at keeping the Gods happy and content. The ancient Mesopotamians believed that the satisfaction of the Gods was of utmost importance to the welfare of Mesopotamian civilization. They believed that if the Gods were happy, humankind would thrive and be protected. Alternatively, if the Gods were unhappy, humankind would suffer evils such as plagues and earthquakes (Clark 2012).
They both concur heavily that humankind displeased God’s honor by not obeying his predetermined boundaries. The arrogant approach Beatrice takes is enough to convince Dante of her theory. She formats her argument beautifully including a well described creation story depicting the humans as rational creatures God created to love and worship him. Her explanation after reading Dante’s mind in regards to earth, fire and water is superior to Anselm. Both preach humans were crafted to live forever originally, but the trespassing demanded compensation to reinstate God’s dignity as the greatest conceivable being.
It is a convenient and comforting respond to unfortunate and even devastating ‘fate’. The pain becomes bearable to those who suffer because it is all part of a bigger plan, it is more than ‘you’. This concept is also built upon an irrational fundamental attitude, “the surrender of self to the ordering power of society.” (54) The problem of theodicy does not end at that. The use of God as a shield works on believers, but not on nonbelievers. The question “why bad things happening to good people” still cannot be answered for the nonbelievers, a common critique of religion itself.
By proving himself to be loyal he can have an easier way of influencing the other characters. He also has another advantage of being “loyal”, it means that the characters will let him do what he pleases without suspicion because they trust him so much. In the beginning of Othello, Iago protests against Othello to Roderigo “I follow him to serve my turn upon him” proving that Iago clearly does not want to honestly follow Othello. Roderigo is affected by this, because he believes him and keeps letting Iago use him unknowingly, leading to his death. Although Roderigo is misled by Iago’s he still keeps his mental and emotional state normal with little doubt, until the end.
Gods & Goddesses Gods and goddesses play a huge role in the Odysseus and Telemachus lives. They both honor the lives and power they have upon the human life. The human value the gods and goddesses because without then they will be lost. The humans believed that if you were kind to strangers that good will come their way because they thought it was a god or goddesses in disguise. The humans always thought every little thing that happened was because of the gods or goddesses.
Adeimantus rejoined and claimed that no one wanted to be justice for its own sake, but for the reward they could get from it to have better lives. As Socrates had chosen from Glaucon’s classes, “second class of good, such as knowledge, sight, health, which are desirable not only in themselves, but also for their results”. Adeimantus forced Socrates to prove why he chose that. Socrates proved with example about a State, the Republic. To create the Republic people worked together.
We should love others like God loves us, just like the Golden Rule treat others like you would like to be treated. If you told your class that when they were fighting you say "Be like Aphrodite" and they would watch there actions. In addition, Aphrodite should be the mascot is because she is beautiful. People think that it is not a good reason to have
Rachels looks at the utilitarian argument which states that if an action increases happiness or decreases unhappiness it is morally acceptable, therefore killing a suffering patients, who requests to die, decreases their unhappiness and can be morally acceptable However, Rachels doesn’t see this argument as sound because happiness and unhappiness are not the only things to consider morally. To argue this Rachels uses the example that limiting religion may increase happiness, but that doesn’t make is morally acceptable because it denies people the ability to make their own decisions. Rachel then goes to create his argument, which uses both a mercy and utilitarian approach. The mercy argument justifies euthanasia when it puts an end to a patient’s agony and suffering. Rachels uses an example of a twenty eight year old man named Jack who suffers from terminal cancer.
Even in Eshu’s story it is implied that Eshu started the fight amongst the Gods, and most likely went on a journey to appease more to his own ego than for the sake of others (Hyde 112). These instances show that tricksters might be the creators of chaos, but when it favors to their agenda then they can quickly remedy the problem. This backs up the claim that the trickster is not the villain in mythology stories. This is what I feel is the most significant about the tricksters, and also the reason why I feel drawn to these three particular figures. The gods also recognize how the trickster can remedy problems, albeit the fact that the problems might not even be caused by them.
Hick, however, might relate higher morality back to the hedonistic world mentioned in the argument above. There is a reason for our world to have suffering since it is built into the structure of the world. That reason, Hick argues, is for “soul-making”, or character building (129). Without having some suffering, then there would be no characters, such as courage. The higher morality of God relates back to that because He has a legitimacy for that suffering.