There is no exact definition to being happy. Many writers such as Mark Twain, Ernest Hemingway, and Ralph Waldo Emerson have sought out ways on how to lead a happier lifestyle. Russell implements these beliefs and defines happiness in a whole different way.The Happy Life, written by Bertrand Russell, is a rhetorical essay about his meaning of “happiness.” He persuades his audience through the use of pathos and ethos. I agree with his interpretation of how to live the happy life because one cannot help another at the expense of their own happiness. As Dalai Lama once said, “Happiness is not something really made.
The author will usually rely on his examples to prove is arguments. He does not explain the claims he makes, which decrease the strength of his arguments. For example, he mentions that a high-five is “not the mutual appreciation of achievement, but the feeling we get upon the achievement of mutual appreciation”. This statement is arguable, some people perform the high-five to actually show appreciation of achievement rather than of trying. The author does not signify whatsoever why the high-five does not mean “job well-done”.
In her book entitled „Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities” , Martha Nussbaum deals with topics regarding education all over the world but her main focus is on the United States and India, places that she has better knowledge of. For that reason, her main thesis is that by declining the study of the humanities the world can end up with some „useful profit makers rather than thoughtful citizens.” (142) Even though people want to replace the arts education and humanities with technology or technology education, Nussbaum does not say that the arts and humanities are neglected by individuals. She mostly thinks that they are somewhat feared because for example, humanities at the same time with art can heighten one’s creativity and imagination but as well as his or hers compassion. And this also makes me think that she wants to make people aware that a society
This excerpt highlights the second influence on the mind, learning from the past, and more importantly the influence of books. He says that books contain ideals and memories of the past, and these books change the basis of truth. The truth is biased and tainted by society, and this represents one of the basic tenets of Transcendentalism, that man and nature are inherently good while society corrupts the purity of an individual. The purity being individualized truths. Emerson’s respect for individual thought and truth is inspiring.
A fool can be satisfied but he will not see all the aspects that Socrates will see. Thus making him ignorant to the reasons for Socrates dissatisfaction. Although Socrates claims to be ignorant himself, he is one of most respected and studied philosophers in history. This shows that he was clearly onto something with his ideals. Socrates might say that the fool’s satisfaction is not the kind that he would want, he would want a much more fulfilling satisfaction than one who seeks common wants such as wealth, fame etc… Would Socrates be satisfied if he knew the answer to every question he or someone else asked?
His dialect with both examples of humor exhibits that Stein is impartial to the feelings of either parties and is simplify stating facts. Although some may disagree, the humorous aspect makes the article enjoyable and pushes the reader even further to agree with Stein’s argument. In addition to research and personal experience, Stein also uses humor to create his successful argument on millennials. The unreliable hateful statements that many have said about millennials has definitely been countered by Joel Stein’s article, “The New Greatest Generation. Why Millennials Will Save Us All.” Throughout his article, Stein defends millennials and their new way of life against some of the older closedminded generations.
He then wastes no time in finding personal ties to this event through his family, which shortly thereafter, he states his main argument. Although this use of pathos in the opening is quite enticing, Milbank does not support it properly throughout the piece. As mentioned earlier, he states that the fight for apartheid to end, gay to have protected rights, and environmentalism to be more care for are not really powerful movements in society, though as seen in recent years, many people can beg to differ. Of course, if Milbank had made such a statement with sufficient evidence, it might have had a chance to win the reader over; however, he hardly scratches the surface of any possible evidence that could have been used, which makes this statement seem more like a shallow insult than just a simple criticism. Also, this lack of evidence makes the reader question Milbank’s legitimacy pertaining to this issue, as it begs the question: Does Milbank really know how much sacrifice went into these merely “noble” movements?
He offers explanations into why they might be a certain way, and often gives conflicting and contrasting accounts of the same story; this shows that he is on a quest for the truth, and not necessarily the most interesting story. In other words, he is being much more charitable towards another culture than the translator of Aladdin is; he acknowledges his own fallibility, and offers multiple sources to indicate the impossibility of knowing exactly what the “others” are like. We can indeed see here that the change of writing purpose seems to have an effect on the portrayals of the unknown. But, can we say this for all instances of historical writing? Let us briefly look at another example of historical chronicling as comparison.
Comparative analysis of Aristotelian Equality In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle asserts one cannot live a virtuous and fulfilling life without the presence of a friend, despite the presence of the essential goods. In addition to his point, he states the best friendships are built upon a true equality which in turn builds on the mutual contributions and goodness of the character of the individuals within a friendship. Without equality, Aristotle argues, friendships tend to fall apart either due to eventual conflicts of interest or the friendship outliving it usefulness. However, some might argue the best friendships do not need any equality among individuals and can still produce the benefits of a Aristotle definition of the best friendship. Although this argument suggests the absence of equality produces a better friendship and life, I will defend Aristotle’s view by presenting textual evidence from of Nicomachean Ethics proving otherwise.
While an argument can certainly be made for this theory, it is better explained by the context it is presented in. When thrown back into society, all of the progress Huck and Jim have made striving for equality is negated by the fact that they are back in white society. The PBS film “Born to Trouble” explores this possibility. Specifically, the professor from Seattle notes how the inclusion of the words and actions critics deem offensive are what give Huck Finn its power. Without them it would just be another book, without any real lesson on racism and the evils that pertain to it (Born to Trouble).
First, The text mentions that Stein 's work was obscure and hard to read. The professor disagrees with this statement and put a cogent case that most of the critics who are claiming that Stein work was cacographic, were not aware of her style and never read her luterature. Refuting to claim
Edmundson 's sarcastic tone in his writing shows that he does not believe the Stanford professor 's explanation for grade averages going up. He believes that professors are softening the grades. Phil Primack also is aware of the many excuses professors give for grade inflation, he even comes up with a reason. He sates, "colleges are unwilling to challenge and possibly offend students and their hovering, tuition- paying parents with some grade tough love. And without institutional backing, individual faculty members simply yield to whining students."
Knowing where liberal arts should be taught and who should get a degree is easily enough found out, however, the repercussions of having the degree or not, and how it relates to job and monetary success must be divulged. Everyone wants to have a good paying job, right? Of course, but the best route to take which yields the best financial stability must be considered. Additionally, it is absolutely a commonality that a person can be successful without a college degree, let alone a degree in liberal arts - Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft Inc. is a fine precedent. The misperception Unger debunks regarding jobs is: "college graduates are finding it harder to get good jobs with liberal-arts degrees."(qtd.
Introduction Freedom of speech is a luxury afforded to every American citizen, however oftentimes that particular freedom may come with a cost. Both Roth and Sinderman were professors at institutions of higher education who spoke out in regards to their dissatisfaction with their institutions and in return, their contracts were not renewed for their positions. Their former places of employment did not directly link the actions of their employees to the termination; however, both Roth and Sinderman believed that speaking out led to the cause of their termination. Both of these cases introduced a clearer definition on what it means to be a tenured and non-tenured employee as it relates to the 14th Amendment. The term tenured can vary by the place of employment.
These are generally not words used by adults. The poem addresses the errors in the ways that we portray our thoughts through words. We don’t have the confidence to stand up for our beliefs anymore, due to the fear of being wrong. It shows the gap that has been created between our