I’m gonna do all this stuff because I’m supposed to be alone.” Yet again Emerson has the same idea but he goes about being lonely differently. “I am not solitary while I read and write, but if a man would be alone, let him look at the stars.” They both favor the idea of freedom in nature but know that when being alone, you can become
I say let your affairs be two or three, and not a hundred or a thousand ...keep your accounts on your thumbnail” (“Walden”). I realize the accuracy in this statement after being introduced to nature once again; the complications and anxiety of society are quite unnecessary. Living a simple life in harmony with nature would allow the soul to truly rest in peace, because it relieves one of the burden of societal expectations. By simplifying life, one can target certain goals to achieve and make the most out of the short time we are all given on
How does one find that they are truly living their best possible life? Will their ultimate happiness be through chance? Or will it be through the effort that they put towards it? These are the types of questions that will more than likely roam through any individual 's mind at one point or another. In a fuss over whether or not it is up to us to make life worthwhile, or to just let fate take it’s course.
Therefore, good and evil are subjective qualities that everybody defines differently. The official definition of “good” is morally right. Consequently, everyone has a different set of morals that can change the definition of good. Man’s behaviors can sometimes be considered good, other times be considered evil, but man evolved behaviors that increase our chances of survival and reproduction, whether they be typically good or bad.
In Man’s Nature Is Good and Man’s Nature Is Evil, Mencius and Hsun Tzu argue about the true meaning of human nature. Mencius believed that humans are inherently good and Hsun Tzu believed that humans are naturally evil. Is it possible humans can be both good and evil? When it comes to whether human nature is good or evil, most people will choose one or the other.
In the article “Finding Flow” by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi he expresses that we have to pick from now to when our time is done whether to live life to the fullest or to die. He provides the idea of “flow” and how his past experiences, surveys, and evaluations have generally show that when a person is doing their favorite activity they are living life to the fullest and not worrying about anything else. By this he is explaining what he believes we need to do to fine happiness. and didn’t work, but Joe liked to take on the task and try to fix them. This example backs up his Csikzentmihalyi using the thesis “We cannot expect anyone to help us live; we must discover how to do it by ourselves” (432).
Hence, a person should live day by day because any day might be their last. When a person is older, they want to look back on what they accomplished and not on what they could have accomplished. People do not want to look back to the past and regret that they did not take the time to pursue an opportunity. They want to look back on the things they did and be proud to tell about the things they achieved. One should spend their day living, at all times.
This question has been asked for hundreds of years, are humans born inherently good or bad? Some might argue that as people mature, society’s influences ultimately determine whether or not that person will end up being good or bad. These people suggest that humans are naturally born of good intent. Many studies show that this may be true. In another case it can be argued that some people are born with a natural instinct to do bad things.
Minute by minute, day by day, people are running out of the time that they were given on this earth. Every step a person takes is a step closer to a time when he will be unable to walk, and yet he chooses to trudges instead of skip, rush instead of stroll. Millions of people walk blindly through life by following the same routine as the day before, taking for granted relationships that should be held dear, and wasting time as if it will go on forever. This lifestyle is a popular topic among philosophers and writers, and many have dedicated years of their life to convincing people of its negative effects. One of these writers was Thornton Wilder, author of Our Town.
Throughout the history, there have been heated discussions on what constitutes a good life. Philosophers have given different annotations on the meaning of good life based on their beliefs, perspectives or even scientific-based evidences. Some view a good life as an accumulation of material goods that brings “large amount” of pleasure to oneself. On the other hand, Mencius and Aristotle advocate good life as possessing of pleasure that incorporates ethical values and they believe that by doing so one will experience enduring happiness. There is no ultimate right or wrong for these interpretations since this is not a factual question.
Although both Confucius and Mencius have a lot in common with regards to governance, the two do have varying opinions on certain matters such as the legitimacy when rulers are overthrown, and the relationship between the ruler and his people. In precedence to coming up with policies and administrative measures, one has to first consider the issue of human nature as it plays an essential role in the development of a state 's political system. In the Confucian philosophy, the belief is that goodness is innate in humans and that everyone shares this same trait [子曰：“性相近也，习相远也。”] (Analects, 17.2). Mencius further elaborated on this doctrine by stating that it is mankind’s natural tendency to be kind to others, just as water would naturally flow downwards (Mencius, 6A2).
According to the Confucian scholar, Mencius, human nature is likened to that of water. "The goodness of the human nature is just like the downward tendency of water. Just as all water has a down going tendency, all people have a tendency toward goodness... you can push people into doing evil, but that is not their basic nature" (Bilhartz, 2006, p.287-288). Mencius continued to explain that human beings have an inherent goodness and the human nature should not be blamed for any evil act committed.
The Question of whether humans are inherently good and moral, or inherently selfish and immoral has been the centre of philosophical discussions for hundreds of years. Philosophers such as Thomas Hobbes argue that humans are egotistic, or selfish. Whereas Philosophers such as John Locke argue that humans are altruistic, or selfless. I, however, do not believe humans by nature are good nor evil. Humans are born as a Tabula Rasa (blank slate), they are unable to be moral or selfish as they are not born with this mental content.
The understanding that some people are good or bad widespread all over the world.” The evil comes from human history and continue until today” and even today this statement has existed. Moreover, when people want to explain why people do some evil acts, the discussion often end with words like “people initially are born evil”. However, some other people argued that people are born good. Because of these many critics has debates such as: are people born bad, good or just like naked board without any morality.
“Human nature is neither demonic nor angelic”, a statement by Mark Passio, is an expression which I do not quite agree, because to me, it seems that man is inherently good. Generally, there are 3 schools of thought with regards to the nature of men. These includes humanity is essentially good; humanity is essentially bad; and humanity is neither essentially good nor bad. According to the Oxford Dictionary, human nature can be defined as the core characteristics such as the ways of thinking, feeling and acting which humans tend to have naturally. Humanity is justified by how we perceived the world.