Hobbes explains, “The final cause, end, or design of men (who naturally love liberty and dominion over others) in the introduction of that restraint upon themselves in which we see them live in commonwealths is the foresight of their on preservation...getting themselves out from that miserable condition of war, which is necessarily consequent...to the natural passions of men” (106). The commonwealth arises out of passion and reason. Once man identifies self-preservation as important through passion, reason guides him to the action of “restraint” to achieve it. Even though man is able to agree to restrain themselves for the sake of self-preservation, such a trade is motivated selfishly through fear. Hobbes says, “And the same are the bonds by which men are bound and obliged, bonds that have their strength not from their own nature...
Although he knows that others may have different lifestyles, however, follows his own. The opposite of despair when he sees rather a variation of fate, the fragility of life. This reinforces the fear of death. From the clash between despair and integrity, sense and nonsense born wisdom. Erikson describes it as an
Pod Cast Malcom Gladwell is author of Outliers The story of success. Gladwell speaks on success how circumstances may out come your success but that may not be that case. Tony Robbins a motivational speaker, author, and philanthropist. Robbins doesn’t see circumstances as a determined factor.
In “Promising to Try”, Jason D’Cruz and Justin Kalef claim that though we take no comfort in the idea of ‘promising to try’, all one is capable of doing is just that and anything more would be deemed irresponsible. D’Cruz and Kalef theorize that, “... promising to try can genuinely restrict a promise in a way that is responsible and morally significant” due to uncontrollable factors that one might face externally and internally. They briefly reference Marusic, who is against the idea of promising to try and mention that an evidentialist would be faced with a dilemma of promising and not promising where there is some evidential uncertainty of not following through with a promise. Responsible promisers are keenly aware of the implications of promising to do something under conditions that might cause one to not follow through with their promise. In circumstances like these, there are reasons why promising to try would be significant.
Mr. P advises Junior to have perseverance so, he should never give up on his hope of becoming better. Mr. P believes hope leads to greater things, a better future. Therefore, he wants Junior to have hope and leave the reservation for the greater thing, a better future. Another example is Junior's experience at Reardan. For instance, while Roger is making inappropriate comments, Junior decides to defend Indians, black people, and buffalo, so “he punched Roger in the face”(Alexie 65).
Wiglaf, because he was more accepting of death, was able to assist Beowulf in death. Bedivere was denying the fact that Arthur would die and was, subconsciously, making an attempt to preserve his life by preserving an inanimate object. Bedivere’s flaws force him to see preservation of life as more important than life itself. Being one of King Arthur’s knights, he has repeatedly put his life at risk for his king. The constancy of danger and death in his life has caused him to cling to Arthur’s sword with a worship-like attention.
In the real world, these people can only achieve a few solid accomplishments if they are lucky. On the other hand, logical people go after realistic ideas and goals, even though they may not approach an idealist’s high standards. They are more likely to achieve their goals when compared to idealistic people. Even though realistic people are better off with less risk of failure, taking the easy path is what most people in the world do anyway. Yet, those who have accomplished big things in history have veered from this path and tried something new.
Through the book Holden changes from a coward to man, immature to mature and black and white view to a grey view. In the beginning his view is clear-cut. He generalized everyone, making a judgment on society as a whole. Near the end he understood the world cannot be the romanticized version he dreams of. The advice Mr. Antolini gave was “the mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, the mark of the mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one.”
Yet, this argument does not stand. A posteriori knowledge is based in oneself, which, while being extremely valuable, is not enough to create complete understanding. Knowledge, as I know it, is dynamic. It is ethereal and can only begin to be grasped by one person. A posteriori, or personal, knowing completely lacks a larger understanding, that can only be obtained through shared knowledge and many perspectives.
Yet, at the same time the success of the advocates who fought to make the move successful should encourage advocates that there is hope. Obtaining funding, especially with state funds being diverted from programs such as these, is a huge hurtle that could discourage advocates and SPMI individuals from even exploring the possibility of developing a drop-in center.
Any reasonable person could tell that, but for some reason Gasland blantaly seems to ignore the other side. Some may view this as a strong point, but an educated argument will always include the counterargument as it lends credibility to the piece and makes more likely to agree with the argument being made. Gasland as an argument piece would’ve benefited by ceding some point or simply explaining the counterargument, but without that key element Gasland just appears
But, not just that also work hard towards what you want to do. Yes it may take time to reach that goal but in the end it is worth it. Overall some of the philosophies and key principles in the book make me think a lot about Anh and what he has achieved in life. From Fleeing from a war torn Communist state and almost losing his family in the process.
From the “Night” by Elie Wiesel, his Jew character turns to God and asks: “What are You, my God? I thought angrily. How do You compare to this stricken mass gathered to affirm to You their faith, their anger, their defiance? What does Your grandeur mean, Master of the Universe, in the face of all this cowardice, this decay, and this misery?