II. The Absurd. The absurd is a disproportion or conflict between our expectations or ideals and reality. In particular, it is the confrontation between our longing pr nostalgia for order, meaning and clarity on the one hand with the chaos, confusion, and irrationality of the world on the other hand; between the human longing for happiness and the evil in t he world. The absurd is not in man alone nor in the world alone, but in the juxtaposition of the two: “The world in itself is not reasonable, that is all that can be said.
"The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing." -- Albert Einstein Does society take perfectly healthy people and turn them into evil monsters? My opinion is no. "Ignorance, the root and the stem of every evil." -- Plato.
According to Superson, in order for self-interest to successfully defeat the skeptic it must defeat both action and disposition skepticism, which is where it lacks. It is unable to show that for every (ordinary) person, acting morally will always be in that person’s self-interest. There are also immoral acts other than self-interested ones that are at least as much in opposition to morality. A successful defeat must show that all immoral acts are irrational. Superson’s goal is to defeat the skeptic and does not believe self-interest is sufficient enough to do so.
Later, he describes himself as "Deformed, unfinished, sent before his time into this breathing world, scarce half made up." The deformity, which has been shown to have been exaggerated or even deliberately faked in portraits of Richard III, is given as the source of his evil ways. He says that as he "cannot prove a lover" he is "determined to be a villain." While everybody makes fun of Richard, and thinks that he is not able to achieve anything, he shows everyone that even though he is handicapped, he can achieve the highest power, to be King. Richard overcompensates his inferiority.
Your job is to figure out that something. Once you have figured out the something, a meaning, you need to show what the play means through a specific lens. When introducing Theatre of the Absurd, we discussed its major characteristics. One of these characteristics will be the lens through which you discuss the meaning of Godot. Check your notes; below is a succinct synopsis of that introductory discussion: “Waiting for Conventions” In Waiting for Godot, Beckett implements broken conventions of traditional theatre in order to successfully satirize the detrimental nature of the human condition symbolized throughout this absurdist play (which seems to have no plot).
The two texts ultimately depict the difficulties that are linked in the treatment of insanity, presenting sobering measures in which to cure the mind of madness. In the plays Equus and Hamlet [->0] of the main characters portrayed (Alan and Hamlet) are insane, "Being unable to appreciate the nature and quality or the wrongfulness of their acts." (The Legal definition) which is established through their actions and in Hamlet's case via an insight into his "madman" like thoughts. The paired texts project two different types of insanity, an event induced mental state and a "nurtured" madness. In Equus, Alan experiences the latter of the two, with it being raised in him through out his life, largely on account of his mother.
Nature A prominent philosopher named Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) wrote "So many authors have hastily concluded that man is naturally cruel, and requires a regular system of police to be reclaimed; whereas nothing can be more gentle than him in his primitive state, when placed by nature at an equal distance from the stupidity of brutes and the pernicious good sense of civilized man..." This, as you can see, really redefines the notion of human "servitude" to the whims (these not always being the most viable) of societal fixations. This Blank State refers to the premise that the brain is born with the blankness of a white piece of paper with the presumed ability to reform and contuse to the appropriate "figure", whatever that may be. It is the very underlying of the statement that the body and mind are separable entities that don't affect each other in the way that many people perceive them to. Remember that time during the seventh grade in which you were bullied profusely? Well theoretically that one continued action gave forth a section of your behavior that generally perpetuates anger and contempt for the public.
Agnosticism is the purely epistemological stance that sufficient evidence does not exist for or against theism therefore the best stance on the argument is no stance at all. Combinations of these positions are possible due to their varying natures, but here only the argument between theism and atheism is examined more closely. The problem of evil is described and used to argue against the existence of God. Richard Swinburne’s solution to the problem of evil is explained and used to revise the original atheist’s argument from evil to its best, but still insufficient, form. Commonly, atheists hold the view that organized religions are corrupt and actually cause more harm than good.
Unfortunately, we live in a world with such infinite possibilities of beliefs and lifestyles that Kantianism, a model that holds an extremely narrow definition of right and wrong, is just not practical. Why would Kant prohibit actions if they cannot be carried out universally? I only find this applicable for serious offenses against mankind; murder for example. People of all cultures act in their own unique ways and should any of their behavior be universalized, society would be unable to function properly. For this reason I find utilitarianism to be a much more valid concept.
Through the minds of Palahniuk and Stevenson a common ground is reached in the two books Fight Club and The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde; both the narrator and Dr. Jekyll create their own misfortune in trying to fix the problems of the world, or better yet what they perceive the problems to be. In a sense the doppelganger of Dr. Jekyll and The Narrator create a misery that is eerie. These characters could be considered Byronic heroes; they start off admirable individuals but by the end of their journey we pity them. Another observation than can be made is through the birth of their alter egos Dr. Jekyll is in essence attempting to play God, and Tyler Durden (The Narrator’s doppelganger) believes he is God. The consequences of their decisions lead them to, ceaseless misery,