Summary Of Adorno's Minima Moralia

Here different kinds of opinions come from different people, because everyone takes the reality of suffering in a different way. But those who realize their own actions and takes efforts to change, suffering leads to betterment. “The fact of moral evil is basically explained as necessary for the greater good of free will. The range of moral evil is mainly explained by reference to the greater good of the responsibility.”

Stoppard uses imagery as well to show how Ros’ overthinking of an insignificant situation is a common trait of the human condition. The quality of over analyzing situations directly ties into the human emotion of retaining hope. Ros imagines that he is enough of a critical thinker to satisfy himself that his comments and reasoning are appropriate for the situation at hand. This opens the gateway to analyzing common themes within both books which examines the theme of human condition through a bigger picture.

As Jonathan Edward says in the “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” “ Sin is the ruin and misery of the soul; it is destructive in its nature; and if God should leave it without restraints, there would need nothing else to make the soul perfectly miserable” (432). That implies, if

In view of this personal narration I would expect more reference to Harry’s suffering and certainly more critical attention to his miserable circumstance, either by narrator, or by the adult characters. More signs of mental suffering, besides a willingness to comply with his destiny to fight Voldemort would not be excessive as well.

In Leviathan, Hobbes was the original author to suggest that humans are prepared to do terrible things, when there are no consequences. Hobbes paints the picture of a world in a “State of Nature,” which is referring to before governments controlled people, and before people had set customs and tradition. In saying this, he is implying that people are naturally evil, and that without a strong, central government to enforce rules, people are prepared to do horrendous things for their own personal gain. Thomas Hobbes doesn’t mean that people are evil directly, though. He means that several factors of human nature combine and mix to create something that is ignorant, arrogant and greedy.

The ideas concerning justice are so divergent and equivocal that any attempt to design the panacea within the rubric of justice would be nothing but a perfect disharmony. No matter how much one tries, every justice brings along with it an injustice. Hence, the justice system needs to be more dynamic owing to the changing needs of the society. One such step towards achieving dynamic justice system is the concept of restorative justice, which not only seeks to redress the harm or injury caused to the members of the society, but also reforms the relationship between a victim and an offender in order to uphold social justice as well. Restorative justice brings along with it the opportunities for forgiveness and empathy.

People of virtue go out of their way to put others first and think about how they can help others and the world around them. Conversely, evil is understood to be morally repugnant behavior or acts which intentionally cause harm to others. Someone who is bad only thinks about themselves and how they can use others to their own benefit. I think that good and evil is inherent in all of us, as humans, and has been within us since the beginning of our existence.

By referring to what can we interpret it as inhumane? Is it inhumane when their intension is just to strive for survival and even a good intension? Concluding all questions, a knowledge questions of this essay will “How can inhumanity and depravity be recognised and categorised?”. Despite the fact that “inhumanity” and “depravity” can hardly be quantified and explained in exact terms, numbers or theories, but it can be recognised by common sense which I argue it is bounded by our environment, our upbringing and our culture. The act of inhumane can also be categorised by the laws we which can varies in different places with different background.

The text is heartfelt, raw and compelling; a must read for people young AND old. Lee explores a variety

According to Dr. Dudely (1994:7-9) a positive and negative outcome is lies within the way individuals deal with conflict. Therefore a positive outcome is a direct result of a positive way of dealing with conflict; however this can only become a reality when one’s view of conflict is one that is positive rather than negative. Dr. Dudely Weeks also states that it is important for ones view of conflict to change; he believes that it is the negative assumptions that we hold of conflict that cause people to ineffectively manage

153). This passage explains Quinn’s focus on narrowing the Doctrine of Doing & Allowing to incorporate morality, as does Thomson. Both individuals are drawn to the idea of a more detailed or revised version of the traditional Doctrine of Doing & Allowing, yet there does not seem to be a distinct difference between their thoughts. Quinn is mainly concerned with this idea of a “Harmful positive agency,” which is “an agent’s most direct contribution to the harm…an action,” and a “Harmful negative agency,” which is “the most direction contribution in an inaction, a failure to prevent the harm.” (Quinn, pg. 163).

Tom Campbell’s proposal that poverty should be classified as a violation of human rights is morally justified by the case for including a principle of humanity. However the complexities of the phenomenon

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. Here, I agree with Hick.

C.S. Lewis argues for the retributive theory of punishment which states that the punishment is delivering justice that the criminal deserves. That way, a guilty person is “treated a s a human person made in God’s image” who “should have known

To begin, human nature is claimed as a set of characteristics given to all humans, it is therefore declared essentially historical to the extent of being unchangeable. However, human development is something that is true to an individual and unique to solely himself through their decisions. It is in our human nature to be vulnerable to imperfection, such as nefarious actions. The philosophy of existentialism states that we are the creators of our own nature.