Therefore, Socrates would rather abide by the Laws than go against the people and escape. In his eyes, the rule of law is always “just” and citizens should always follow it. Every one of Socrates’ friends disagree with him but ultimately, Socrates decides to listen to himself and goes with what he truly believes to be the “right thing to do”. Based off this logic, citizens should follow laws that are also deemed to be “unjust laws” just because it is a law. Socrates believes that if one isn’t living a “just” life, then there is no reason to be living at all, and that one must never do
For instance, when lying is the only option to save someone’s life, still we shall not lie for it is morally wrong to lie. Kant introduced categorical imperative which states that people ought to do something regardless of the consequences. Moreover, categorical imperative is a formal principle that provides a framework for deriving moral maxims, such as ‘honor your parents’, ‘do not steal’ or ‘do not lie’. However, there is another class of philosophers called rule deontologists who differ from Kant in denying that moral rules can be deduced from higher principle. These rule deontologists believe that rules must be known directly by intuition.
McNamara believes that is because of the human nature that war can’t end any time soon even taking in conceteration that we are all rational creatures, by our actions and decissions we show that rationality has limits. McNamara says he believes his words would appear powerless especially to othose who donot understand the concept of war and also misunderstand him since human are naturaly war-like. He futher tells us that he knew that if at that time he had spoken of it, he would have been damned and if he didnot he would have still been damned but he will prefer to be damned if he does not. In conclusion we can say that the Fog of War is a set of lessons that McNamara has experience toward his working period and its shows us that when it comes to war human are not rational in any aspect and that the list mistake or wrong decission might lead to a nuclear war or a global war
This essay shows that Hume believes that suicide can be defined as the killing of self that is intended to remove misery and which may or may not be morally justified. On the other hand, it also shows that Aquinas defines suicide as the intentional killing of self that is “contrary to self love, self perpetuation[, and] natural law” and which is morally impermissible. Simply all that Hume attempts to accomplish in his essay “Of Suicide” is to show that Aquinas is wrong and that suicide may be morally permissible in certain circumstances. Various philosophers over the past two
Some suggested him to just let the issue go but, he was really pursued to know the truth. He was not destructed by what he did but, his efforts to find the truth behind all of that. Here I thought you can’t escape your fate, it is still accountable on your part on how you would respond to your fate. In the case of Oedipus, he chose to search for the truth and that is the reason why he was destroyed. In this story full of ups and downs, I came to realize that no matter how great you are or no matter what you do, you will always be subjected to your fate.
The message of the book was to convey the audience to always tell the truth. Although, Beatrice didn 't tell the truth, in the beginning, it showed that keeping secrets in will not benefit either party. This supports the idea that people should be honest to everyone around them including
Yet, ‘Human-beings’ will always tend to be like Amir. Humans surrender in front of fear. No one can blame Amir because if we were Amir, we all would have done the same thing. Who could ever stand up in that situation? However, because the author recapitulates the guilt inside him, this causes not
He starts by analyzing the past, saying that if any mistakes were made, they “have none to blame but ourselves” (IN TEXT). However, he counters this with the idea that they cannot change the past, but embrace its effects and move on. Next, he appeals to the logic of his Puritan beliefs. Paine says that he believes that “God Almighty will not give up a people to military destruction” (IN TEXT). This gives the reader a sturdy base to place their hope, which he later increases by calling the king out for his murderous and unethical actions, and claims that the king has no grounds to seek support or solace from
Conclusion : It is difficult for an individual to disobey an authority figure or not comply with the morality of the group or society because they are afraid of the consequences they will face from the authority or the power that is above them. In addition, humans are so programmed by authority and the government to obey in order to avoid the punishment that people don 't even give any thought to disobey. Support 1 : Foremost of all, people do not have enough courage to disobey. Fromm said that disobedience is "the first step into independence and freedom”. He means that disobedience sets individuals free and opens their eyes.
Rule number six – be honest with yourself, Not only with opinions; with your morals and your health, The world is full of lies, but to yourself you must be true, The person you should lie to least is no-one else but you, If you’re upset, admit it – don’t wipe your cheeks of tears, Your emotions are what make you, they’re not something to be feared, Question your authority, critique your own beliefs, The only way to grow your mind is to be taught as well as teach. Finally, rule number seven – nothing lasts forever, Although it doesn’t always seem like it, time is meant to be spent together, Turn your moments into memories, smile and joke and laugh, Because by the time you reach the end, they’ll matter more than they ever have. You’ll meet many people in your life, some enemies, some friends, Some stay there for a little bit, some right until the end, Some impact your life greatly, whilst others just pass
1) “Without God, there would be no universally valid morality.” ( Pojman, pg. 356) “He is the creator of the moral law, and defines its very nature.” ( Pojman, Pg.356) “‘If God doesn’t exist, everything is permissible’ nothing is forbidden or require. Without God we have moral nihilism” (Pojman, Pg.356) “We are against torturing the innocent because it is cruel and unjust, just as God is against torturing the innocent because it is cruel and unjust. If there is no God, on this account, nothing is changed. Morality is left intact, and both theists and nontheists have the same moral duties” ( Pojman, Pg.357) 2) From my understanding of what this quote trying to say is that without God, there will never be morality and they are saying that he
18). By commanding anything He pleases, citizens become stymie from the actual truth. Since individuals do not formulate their own opinions, where “men should, without shame or fear, confidently and serenely, break a rule which they could not but evidently know that God had set up, and would certainly punish the breach of” (Locke 1. 3. 13).
Ayn Rand said "The policy of always pronouncing moral judgment does not mean that one must regard oneself as a missionary charged with the responsibility of "saving everyone 's soul". If Equality were to read the short essay that Ayn Rand wrote, Equality would have a different opinion on his plan to take over the council. "No matter how hard the struggle, there is only one choice that a rational man can make in the face of such an alternative." If equality were to read this he would have to really think, something he would agree with others maybe not so much. With his intention of taking down the structured walls of the society, Equality 7-2521 has to put a long thought process into the action he wants to take If He doesn’t the wall will crumble
He warns the council that although a proposition may seem appealing they must not be fooled by it for a man will do anything to be believed and even though they may not notice the deception the state will not be fooled. However, Diodotus understand that the Mytilenians should not be left unchecked, he agrees with Cleon in concern of the future but not the death sentence of the Mytilenians. For if they do impose the death penalty it would only cost the country instead, he suggest something else, “we should be looking for a method by which, empowering moderation in our punishments, we can in the future secure ourselves the full use of those cities which bring us important contributions” (p.221). He brings up the error in which led them to the revolt for by forcefully subduing a free country it lead its populace to assert its dominance, so the country at this point must care for them to avoid having the same thing happen. And if they choose to continue with the death