Analysis Of Aristotle s The Golden Mean - 820 Words

Final Exam- The Golden Mean In the philosophical book Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle introduces the means to reach the ultimate good of happiness. A guide called the Golden Mean is provided to therefore reach eudemonia. This concept encourages a balance in life in order to remain virtuous. There is, however, social movements such as feminism and the black activists that shows exceptions to this principle. This mean is also inexact, as it is relative to each, and is thus subjective to its level of virtuosity regarding someone’s actions, giving no ultimate guide for human’s to follow. In this essay, I will be articulating a definition and a critical analysis of Aristotle’s concept of the Golden Mean. Aristotle observed that happiness can be attained through the possession of virtues, such as, courage, temperance, patience, modesty, and more. True virtue can withstand any misfortunes in life, and thus be key to attaining happiness. He also observes that every virtue is between two vices. The Golden Mean is the desirable middle of virtue between two extreme, such as excess and deficiency. The same actions that produce virtue can be the cause of its destruction. Excess and deficiency is detrimental to virtue. For instance, a man who fears too much is cowardly and a man who fears too little is reckless. Its desirable virtue would thus be courage. Another example could be the mean of proper desire, or pride, which in deficiency would be laziness, and in excess, zealous. Moreover,Show MoreRelatedAnalysis Of Aristotle s The Golden Mean 1109 Words   |  5 PagesPart 3 - Aristotle - The Golden Mean Aristotle was a greek philosopher that taught and stressed many important and revolutionary ideas/philosophies. He was born in 384 BC, and was a student of Plato, as well as founded/ taught at several academies. He wrote on diverse subjects, including physics, metaphysics, poetry, logic, politics, government, and ethics. He contributed to almost every field of human knowledge in existence during his time, and he was the founder of many new fields. Aristotle was oneRead MoreTaming Of The Shrew By William Shakespeare1671 Words   |  7 Pagesbut given the opportunity to fulfill this task; Katherina from Shakespeare’s Taming of the Shrew displays the distinct characteristics which allow her to be placed among the sinners in the Inferno. Kate’s tragic flaw of being the shrew in the play means she personifies anger. Her anger is clearly seen at the beginning of the play, but appears to lessen during the remaining acts. On the surface it can be easy to conclude that Kate is a shrew no more and her marriage has tamed her. Shakespeare’s TamingRead MoreQuestions On A Ethical Dilemma1482 Words   |  6 Pagesbreach of policy or personal values, break the golden rule, the action is not publicly acceptable, or would harm others - then the action is a ethical dilemma. The first criteria examines the illegality of action. The second criteria asks if the action is a violate of one’s professional or corporate ethic. The third criteria examines the if the dilemma’s relation to individuals’ consciences and personal values. The fourth criteria posits the golden rule as an ethical barometer. â€Å"Would you likeRead MoreExecutive Compensation2864 Words   |  12 PagesCase Summary In 1993, Michael D. Eisner of Walt Disney fame received $203 million as executive compensation. Although this award was inflated by Eisner s exercise of stock options, many examples of compensation in millions and tens of millions raise questions on how CEOs should be paid. Critics dispute that CEOs are deserving of their pay. CEOs downsize companies or perform badly, yet continue to draw a substantial salary. Unlike low level managers, it seems there is no formula for executiveRead MoreThe Future Of Rhetoric Is Not Changed Much Since The Years Of Aristotle3176 Words   |  13 PagesTHE FUTURE OF RHETORIC IN OUR ELECTRONIC AGE Name: Institution: Course: Professor: Date: Abstract Rhetoric has not changed much since the years of Aristotle. However, the application of concept of rhetoric appears to have undergone dynamic transformations as new technologies come into the market. Rhetoric is employed in all spheres and levels of life in conveying information especially in the world of business and politics. For many years, rhetoric has been used to convince and persuadeRead MoreAristotle And Plato s Influence On Western Philosophical Tradition2851 Words   |  12 Pagesthere were the medieval times, which are traditionally divided into two main periods: the period within the Latin West which was then followed by the Early Middle Ages until the 12th century. At this time, Aristotle and Plato’s works were conserved and cultivated. And the second period was the golden age of the 12th, 13th and 14th centuries in the Latin West, which witnessed the pinnacle of the recovery of ancient philosophy, along with a reception of the Arabic commentators, and immense d evelopmentsRead More Principles for Cognizing the Sacred Essay4240 Words   |  17 Pagesscientific analysis of basic world views which expresses genuine understanding of the sacred. Such world views hold the main principles for cognizing reality. A ‘substratum’ understanding of the Sacred is characteristic of mythology and magic, wherein all spiritual phenomena are closely connected with a material or corporeal bearer. Functional understanding of the Sacred is developed by the earliest civilizations in which the spiritual is separated from the material. For example, Plato, Aristotle, andRead MoreParmenides and Heraclitus5510 Words   |  23 Pagesof Heraclitus writing was Word. Heraclitus felt strongly that our ability to use and understand language is the same ability that allows us to understand and describe the world. So logos is both the actual order of the universe as well as the means of our ability to understand it.    Abstract Socrates views are analyzed by studying a conversation between Socrates, Cephalus, his son Polemarchus and his followers. The author explains how Socrates enters into a philosophical dialogue with severalRead MoreBusiness Ethics: Miriam vs. Jenny Case Study2804 Words   |  11 Pagesdevelopment beyond the stage of a spiritual amoeba, relentlessly devouring every particle that floats within range of its tentacle. There are as many rules as there are problems around us, many of these rules conflict, and so moral thinking often requires analysis of the underlying assumptions that determine when various rules apply or not. Hence metaethics provides guidance after normative and applied ethics fall short or contradict each other, as they do here for Miriam. Stakeholders have shared and conflictingRead MoreWhat Constitute Happiness to Man6479 Words   |  26 Pages In what does happiness consist? Is it the same for all men, or do different men seek different things in the name of happiness? Can happiness be achieved on earth, or only hereafter? And if the pursuit of happiness is not a futile quest, by what means or steps should it be undertaken? On all these questions, the great books set forth the fundamental inquiries and speculations, as well as the controversies to which they have given rise, in the tradition of western thought. There seems to be no question

American Culture and Politics Free Essays

This research looks at American Culture and Politics since there is so much in American history and culture. The proposal paper contains some of the findings about the American politics and culture. This paper can help scholars who want to have a wide knowledge about American politics and culture and how they influence each other. We will write a custom essay sample on American Culture and Politics or any similar topic only for you Order Now The primary research sources that will be used include: Questionnaire and Interview. Secondary sources include: published textbooks, and published statistics. INTRODUCTION To begin with, American conservatives claim that the Left, from its parapets of power in Hollywood, the universities, the national media, the federal courts, and the National Endowment for the Arts, has waged, for decades, a â€Å"culture war† upon the American people — a war that the people have been losing. The conservatives’ complaint is commonly put this way: the Left has set out to â€Å"politicize† American culture, to force it to conform to a new orthodoxy of political correctness in everything from homosexual marriage to pronoun usage (Kesler, 1998). The conservatives’ point is that culture should be above, or at least separated from, the political order; that civil society — the realm of art, religion, family, and private property — should be protected, for the sake of liberty as well as culture, against political encroachments. Instead of politics trying tyrannically or arbitrarily to create culture, politics should devote itself to conserving culture (Combs, 1991). According to Goodnow politics had to do with the policies or expressions of the state will (Parashar, 1997). Thus in the conservative view, politics should grow out of culture and serve culture, not the other way around. Scholars and activist on the left should take warning: What once political movements have become translated into personal quests for fulfillment (Cloud, 1998). But at this point one sees that there are actually two conservative views of culture. They differ on the question of what it means to â€Å"conserve† culture: Does it mean to keep government’s hands off it, to be neutral towards culture and allow it to develop however artists and citizens choose? Or does it mean a hands-on approach, an active promotion of â€Å"traditional American values† against their would-be subverters in and out of government? Hands-off is the preference both of libertarians, who tend to take a democratic and laissez faire attitude towards culture, and of those neo-conservatives who defend high culture against the public’s attempts to influence it (Josephson, 2007). The hands-on approach is preferred by the so-called Religious Right, by most who refer to themselves as â€Å"cultural conservatives† or traditionalists, and by many neo-conservatives who are repelled by the prospect of American society’s utter de-moralization. Even conservatives who are prepared to use government to shore up American culture, however, typically reject the notion that they are â€Å"politicizing† the culture (Whitfield, 1996). They argue that they are only using politics to get beyond politics — that is, to overcome the culture’s artificial or forced politicization. White Southerners, used to a friendly custodial environment, were confronting a more diverse and secular American culture (Marsden, 2006). Seizing upon this contradiction or ambiguity, the Left today charges that conservatives are prepared, when they are prepared, to take a laissez faire attitude towards culture only because theirs — the white male bourgeois culture — is the dominant one. When its hegemony is challenged, liberal critics note, as it is being challenged currently, then conservatives cease to be defenders of a hands-off cultural policy and quickly become advocates of cultural protectionism (Wald, Calhoun-brown, 2006). Yet in challenging the supposed hegemony of patriarchal or conservative culture, most liberal intellectuals do not imagine themselves to be calling for the hegemony of their own culture. Today’s liberals stand for â€Å"multiculturalism,† for the replacement of ruling-class culture by the multiplicity of cultures belonging to oppressed, or formerly oppressed, classes and groups. In the past, white males had used their culture to justify and reinforce their rule over the rest of society; it was white males who â€Å"politicized† culture, according to the multiculturalists (Sturm, 2002). Now, the rest of society — indeed, the world — can bring previously excluded cultures to bear in order to delegitimize the old â€Å"racist, sexist, homophobic† order and ordain a new, more inclusive one (Roper, 2002). From the standpoint of traditionalist conservatism, every society or people are defined by its culture, and therefore every culture is more or less an exclusive one (Neve, 1992). In John O’Sullivan’s words, â€Å"A multicultural society is a contradiction in terms and cannot survive indefinitely. It either becomes monocultural or runs into trouble. â€Å"1 At this juncture, we urgently need some clarity on the meaning of â€Å"culture. † Becoming American was initially a political and constitutional choice, but finally it necessitated a series of profound transformations in business, speech, dress, religion, literature, education, heroes, holidays, civic ceremonies — in character (Bergmann Seminar on Feminism and Culture in Latin America, 1990). The public schools movement was one of the most important, as well as one of the most obvious, of these subsequent efforts to conform the American people to their new republican institutions. It is an old political observation, echoed in Montesquieu and countless other writers, that in the beginning men make the institutions, and after that the institutions make the men. The American founders had this maxim very much in mind as they built the institutions that would guide the nation’s destiny, and today it is worth pondering anew. Perhaps it is time to build some new institutions, if we are to have a real chance to rehabilitate American culture. During a relatively brief period of time the first food industry has helped to transform not only the American diet, but also our landscape, economy, workforce, and popular culture (Schlosser, 2001) as a kind of growth: a culture is a living social organism that has particular ethnic â€Å"roots† and develops from those roots, often flowering into unique, that is, characteristic achievements of high art. To understand a culture means therefore to appreciate it in its particularity, to see it as a unique historical growth — not as a mere exemplum of a common and unchanging human nature, much less as an imperfect embodiment of the best political or social order. Reason has little to do with culture in this sense, therefore, because the modern concept of culture emphasizes the ethnic, the particular, the authentic at the expense of the universal; whereas reason strives, even in practical affairs, to see particulars in the light of universals. An authentic culture is natural in the sense of being an uncoerced growth, not in the sense of containing universal principles that can be grasped and perhaps manipulated by reason (Tomsich, 1971). Accordingly, an authentic culture cannot be designed or planned because it cannot be thought through; it is always in the process of slow change or adaptation. Ever since Edmund Burke, whose defense of the British Constitution became the model for the Right’s thinking on the cultural roots of politics in general, conservatives have argued that culture is neither a goal that politicians can seek to achieve nor a product that they can make — let alone export. SUMMARY Oddly enough, the multiculturalists agree with the traditionalists on the primacy of culture over politics, and to some extent even on the definition of culture. What the multiculturalists insist on, however, is that culture does not have to be exclusive, or more precisely, that Americans can participate in many cultures without succumbing to any one of them and without ceasing to be American. But this is to pile absurdity upon absurdity. References Bergmann, E. L. Seminar on Feminism and Culture in Latin America. (1990). Women, culture, and politics in Latin America. California: University of California Press. Cloud, D. L. (1998). Control and consolation in American culture and politics: rhetoric of therapy. New Delhi: SAGE. Combs, J. E. (1991). Polpop 2: politics and popular culture in America today?. New York: Popular Press. Eric Schlosser. (2001). Fast food nation: the dark side of the all-American meal, Volume 1000. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Josephson, M. (2007). The President Makers – the Culture of Politics and Leadership in an Age of Enlightenment 1896-1919. New York: READ BOOKS. Kesler, C. R. (1998, May 15). Culture, Politics, and the American Founding. Retrieved June 13, 2010, from www. claremont. org: http://www. claremont. org/publications/pubid. 496/pub_detail. asp Lipartito, K. Sicilia, D. B. (2004). Constructing corporate America: history, politics, culture. New York: Oxford University Press. Marsden, G. M. (2006). Fundamentalism and American culture. New York: Oxford University Press US. Neve, B. (1992). Film and politics in America: a social tradition. New York: Rout ledge. Parashar, P. (1997). Public Administration in the Developed World. New Delhi: Sarup Sons. Roper, J. (2002). The contours of American politics: an introduction. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Sturm, C. (2002). Blood politics: race, culture, and identity in the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma. California: University of California Press. Tomsich, J. (1971). A genteel endeavor: American culture and politics in the gilded age. California: Stanford University Press. Whitfield, S. J. (1996). American space, Jewish time: essays in modern culture and politics. New York: M. E. Sharpe. Wald, K. d. Calhoun-brown, A. (2006). Religion and politics in the United States. Oxford: Rowman Littlefield. How to cite American Culture and Politics, Papers

Right to Life and Human Dignity

Question: Explain the core principles of that theory.? Demonstrate how the principles of the theory support a certain position on that question.? Articulate a relevant objection to the theory on the basis of that argument.? Answer: Introduction- "End of life medical care- Euthanasia" The word Euthanasia has been derived from Greek words " Eu " and " Thanatos ". The word 'eu' means good and the word 'Thanatos' means death. Thus the meaning of the Euthanasia is a beautiful death. There are two theories of this Euthanasia. One is utilitarian theory and other is a Deontologiacl ethical theory (Collins, F. 2008). The former one stresses on the right or wrong consequences which determines morality while the latter focuses on the intent of the action such as duties, principles and respect for rights. The report would focus on the Utilitarian theory with respect to Euthanasia. The report would look at various aspects of what are the principles of this Utilitarian theory. The Utilitarian theory which is applied to "End of life medical care- Euthanasia" According to the utilitarian theory the actions which are performed for promoting the happiness of an individual is right.The actions or the activities which leads to give pain to an individual is not considered as a right. According to the Utilitarian theory the consequences should be given due importance (Stumpf, S. 1970). It is the consequence which decides that a particular act at a particular time is appropriate or not. According to this theory, if a law is broken for the happiness of the majority of people, then it is considered as a right. On the other hand Rule utilitarianism said that an individual must obey to the rule, irrespective whether it gives the greatest pleasure to him or not (Hoxhaj, O. 2014) . The idea of this rule utilitarianism is that one must follow rules that may at the end gives happiness to the community. It does not mean that a person should be allowed for euthanasia. Thus, currently there is no practical way by which what is good or bad can be measured a ccording to utilitarian theory. Principles of the Utilitarian theory and its importance. The main principle of this theory is the happiness principle. The core of this theory is that anything which is done can be justified as right if it gives maximum happiness to everyone involved. Happiness can be defined as pleasure and no pain or very minimum pain. Pleasure should be qualitative as per the theory and not just quantitative.There are other factors defining pleasure and in turn happiness, these are for how long it would be there, whether it is permanent or temporary happiness (Stuart mill, J. 2010).The principle says that we need to calculate and evaluate benefits of all the options which are available. A decision should be taken based on the best option of these benefits, As some of the options would destroy the happiness, whereas the other option might increase the happiness. While selecting the option to opt for, it is very important to identify what is the total happiness quotient involved. The Utilitarian theory and its support to Euthanasia. For Euthanasia which is the end of life, the above theory of Utilitarianism related to happiness is quite relevant. As for a human being, happiness is the most important thing in life. If a person or people close to him are not happy then there is no point of that life (Collins, F. 2008). So whenever a person has decided for Euthanasia it means that he have given a great deal of thought about how this is the best option and would reduce the suffering for everyone involved with him in this pain (Snyder, C. 2006).If the happiness quotient is higher for this option then there is no harm in going with this option, as this would reduce the stress level which is on all the people involved. From a long term prospective Euthanasia might not be a bad thing for the person as compare to whatever the person has been through entire life or even might have to undergo in the future.All the factors should be considered before deciding on Euthanasia. Relevant objections to the Utilitarian theory. Euthanasia is the end of life of a person by his own wish or it can be said that the wishful death of a person. It is very easy to say that a person will get happiness by accepting death or for the relatives attached to the person, but actually it is not that easy to decide (Varelius, J. 2013). When a person suffers from the pain of the life and the medical science has no treatment left for the disease that he has and even with the passage of time his condition becomes worse than it is actually a good decision to end such a painful life but practically it is very difficult to decide that it is the appropriate time to end the life (Stumpf, S. 1970). To give happiness to another by ending ones own life is not that easy. But it is difficult to understand how a person can get happiness by ending his own life or how the person attached to him can get happiness by his death. It is quite difficult to justify that death would give happiness to the people surrounding that person. Conclusion Euthanasia means the peaceful death that one wants when he has no option left in medical treatment. Now when it relates to Utilitarian theory, means what is right and what is wrong will be determined by the consequences that determines the morality. This report has provided details that the happiness can be given to a person who is severely ill and has no medical treatment left with which his condition can be improved. Even with the passage of time his condition becomes even worse. So in such kind of situation the wish to die is appropriate or not should be determined based on the happiness the option would provide. Also the ultimate principle of utilitarian theory which is happiness to the majority should be given due consideration before finalizing on any decision for the person.7.0 References References Collins, F. (2008). Retrieved 11 May 2015, fromhttps://www.baruch.cuny.edu/facultyhandbook/documents/FrankCollinsentryUndergraduatewinner.pdf EUTHANASIAA MEDICOLEGAL STUDY. (2001).JAMA,285(2), 144. Hoxhaj, O. (2014). Euthanasia - The Choice between the Right to Life and Human Dignity.Academic Journal Of Interdisciplinary Studies. Snyder, C. (2006).Euthanasia. Detroit: Greenhaven Press. Stuart mill, J. (2010).Siue.edu. Retrieved 11 May 2015, fromhttps://www.siue.edu/~evailat/i-mill.html Stumpf, S. (1970). Euthanasia and the Right to Death: The Case for Voluntary Euthanasia.JAMA: The Journal Of The American Medical Association,214(8), 1567. The Lancet Neurology,. (2003). Right to dieright or wrong?.The Lancet Neurology,2(10), 583. Varelius, J. (2013). Voluntary Euthanasia, Physician-Assisted Suicide, and the Right to do Wrong.HEC Forum,25(3), 229-243.