In my own opinion I would not take the pill just due to the fact that I would never be able to dream again, which is a huge thing for me. If one were to take the pill to allow them to survive on one hour of sleep a night it would result in many changes. The biggest of them all being never having the ability to dream again. Some of the many advantages a person could gain by taking the pill would be adding 7-8 or more hours a day to do whatever need be. Whether it be cleaning, studying, sports, or just time for yourself never being able to dream again, I believe, weighs out all of those heavily.
Does our soul or spirit go to heaven or hell, do we get reincarnated, or does nothing at all happen? There are many different theories, but these questions will never have an answer. Many people don’t believe in suicide of any kind, God or whomever a person believes in will make the ultimate decision on when it is time to leave this earth. My parents raised me believing that suicide is selfish, and a coward’s way out. I still believe this, but on the other hand I also think physician assisted death is the humane thing to do for people who are suffering.
Macbeth and Red Maggies rise raises expectations Ambition and desire can be both good and bad. Without ambition we wouldn’t have leaders, a drive for success and we wouldn’t push ourselves to excel at life. Yet if you take your ambition too far you can end up destroying your own moral code. You can lose your life, your good name, your family and every single inch of yourself. People’s desires aren’t needs but wants.
Although we are going to look at this topic in terms of a Christian approach we must also recognise the views of other faiths, and their value to such a study. When considering any topic it is always important to define the terms. At first thought ‘death’ might seem easy to define. We could all agree that it is ‘the complete and permanent cessation of all vital functions in a living creature’. Probably all philosophers would agree with this, but many would claim that this is not the end of life.
I’m not sure there are any “appropriate” forms of punishment. We’re all individuals and what works for one, doesn’t always work for another. I think the most effective form of punishment would be to eliminate the need for it. Wide scale community and family reform and requirements of a stringent schedule of activities throughout the childhood and early-adult years might be a place to start. While any kind of reform would never completely rid our nation of crime, a massive reorganization of our daily lives could go a long way towards
Instituting a Buy Nothing holiday has some good as well as bad effects, although the harm greatly outweighs the benefits. A Buy Nothing Day is of use socially in a time where the focus should be about spending time with loved ones and worshiping in that way one sees fit although, when such a day causes a huge lag in improving the economy the social implications are worthless. Even if all the money that was spent buying non-necessities were donated to charities, there is no guarantee that all the money donated would reach those in need. In short, A Buy Nothing Day although virtuous in thought is horrible in reality as it allows for the breakdown of an already fragile
To increase the supply of deceased donors is quite difficult; donors have to die under the right circumstances. Still if we harvested all of the eligible cadavers, the gap would still not get filled. However things like laws and cultural beliefs discourage healthy people from donating their organs. Paying more for any scarce commodity is one way to increase the surplus.
This argument is not just a religious issue, as many non religious believers find the prospect of a post mortem existence highly desirable. What we mean by human life has many consequences on the various theories of life after death. Monists would argue that the body and soul are linked together to form one identity, with the soul being ‘the immaterial ‘I’’. Dualists on the other hand believe the physical body and the soul exist as distinct entities. Descartes tried to prove that the thinking self is separate from the physical, through his statement, “I think therefore I am”.
Pascal informs the reader that they must accept this wager; that they cannot deny to take a side. This forces the reader to choose one way or another, and takes away any chance to argue against both sides. The wager that Pascal presents is that one must either accept the existence of god, or accept that no god exists. He then informs the reader that if you wager that god does in fact exist, and this is in fact the correct guess, then one will gain all eternal bliss possible. If one wagers that god does not exist, and one wagers incorrectly, then one is sentenced to eternal hellfire and damnation.
My thoughts on elderly drivers would be based on nothing more then the importance of safety on the roads. It would be quite difficult for me to strongly point my opinion, since my voice on the restrictions of senior citizen driving could easily be turned back on me in the long run. Sooner or later as long as we’re living, we will all eventually become older; so each and every one of us will have to face the scrutinizing pressures of society on whether or not elderly citizens should be allowed to drive. Not all people are alike; a 75-year-old man could be in top-fit shape driving without the slightest problem, while a 65-year-old woman could be suffering from poor health conditions that impairs her driving abilities. I feel that elderly people should not be allowed to drive under certain circumstances.