Atwood’s vague language exemplifies its power to arise conflicting interpretations. An incorrect term causes suspicion of disloyalty. By regulating the choice of language, the Handmaid’s are unable to express their condemning feelings and motives of the society, and is restricted to thought in a biblical sense. Their thought process is self-reinforcing as the Handmaids reciprocate their scepticism. Their lack of communication and inability to trust isolates them, and allows Gilead to prevail without upheaval.
A name that can be named is not enduring a name.” (1). This signifies that if one can decipher his or her way of life through the medium of language, then his or her lifestyle holds simplistic, materialistic qualities that do not follow the Way. Due to this statement, one can conclude that spoken or written language that has the ability to be easily described maintains mainstream characteristics, hence deeming a societal, constructed impact on one’s life; a fatal flaw to practicing Daoism. Though not directly stated, this establishes criticism to Western civilization, for those individuals place high esteem on their social standing, lexicon, and singular impact on society. This interpretation of language, in the eyes of Daoists, creates a sense of false wisdom, in that one who relies on the power of his or her words cannot achieve true knowledge via his or her actions.
Kate proves to be kind because she really puts other peoples’ feelings into consideration when saying or doing something. Although Kate cares about other peoples’ feelings she refuses to express her own. The traits that Kate possesses makes her the person she is; somebody who cannot express how they feel.
In “Heloise & Abelard: Love Hurts”, Cristina Nehring points out that people today do not value romanticism as an admirable element of love, but become more self-centered and try to avoid hurts that love is attached to. People think romanticism is archaic. Therefore, Nehring illustrates that, “The story of Abelard and Heloise hardly resonates with the spirit of our age.” However, I disagree with Nehring’s point. Love is an emotion which rationality can hardly control. Even if the importance of rationality and the one of emotion become a disproportion in the process of decision making, people still need to go through the process of choosing and the procedure hurts feelings.
This ideal of true altruism suggests that one performs tasks for others without seeking praise, reward, or acknowledgement. There in an emphasis on selflessness in the words of Fr. Arrupe, for he states that being a man or woman for others means believing that love of self or of God, which isn't based on justice for those most in need, is a mockery. It is a blessing to
It disrespects their human self, like saying it is not good enough and needs to be replaced by something better. What could be more sacred? Humans are not to be tampered with, they are precious being made the way they are for a
Moreover, humanism only approaches the good side on growth and the achievements of humans by simply denying and does not attempt to prevent or make clear of the psychotic disorder. When it comes to supporting humanistic theories claims, the empirical evidence lacks. Academics, for example Maslow has widely criticized the same way because of the absence of scientific empirical evidenc. Strengths: Humanism gives importance to responsibility and individual choice which is one of the greatest strength. It appreciates fulfilment and personal ideas, therefore it satiesfies many people's understandings of what it is to be human.
Self-Sacrifice and happiness are two topic that Ayn Rand argues about in a very objective and intellectual style, but because of the way she misinterpreted selfishness was wrong, the explanation of self-sacrifice was misleading. Rand fails to see the point of how society views happiness and fails to convey it. Rand argues that the society defines selfishness as it’s the “synonym of evil” or “brutes who tramples over piles of corpses to achieve their own ends.”(7). Even though this is not the case at all this is subjective and the interpretation is biased, one cannot disregard the part where she said “brutes who tramples over”. This is in fact a great way of to show how people in the society see the term selfishness but considering the fact
We create them about our jobs, finances, relationships, friendships, love and life in general to shield us from that which we view as undesired truths. We do not want to live in reality but are comfortable living in illusion and we believe that somehow the gain far outweighs the effort needed to eliminate
However, happiness does not consist in having those external goods: virtuous rational activity is really the core constitutive element of happiness. We don’t live well just by having external goods: we need to act according to virtue. Virtuous activity is really what