Others argue that free will, which has the capability to act at one’s own judgment, is the main cause of Oedipus’s downfall. 1.2 Definition of Key Terms To completely understand these theories, hamartia, fate, and free will, they will need to be defined to fully understand what has been argued. Aristotle, the founder of term hamartia, defines it as some sort of “mistake” (Aristotle 77).
There are many defining characteristics as to what constitutes human character. The ability to communicate, empathize, and reason are all parts of human nature. In many philosophies around the world free will is considered one of the most important parts of human being and quintessential in upholding dignity. The short novel The Anthem by Ayn Rand is conducive to the discussion of free will. The main character Equality 7-2521 struggles to reconcile his inquisitive nature in contrast to the world he lives in which he has been conditioned to believe truths given to him by the ruling elite.
The aberrant perspective of Gilgamesh which I am presenting may seem divergent and atypical when analysed in accordance to our modern values and principles, but to Gilgamesh this would be quite natural. The values and ethics that contemporary readers hold shape their perspective of characters as they respond in various ways to the adventures that said characters undertake. A perfect example of this is when the narrator speaks of the state of Uruk and says “No son is left with his father, for Gilgamesh takes them all”. From this, the contemporary audience frames Gilgamesh as an immoral tyrant, as their value of free will is being challenged. However, Gilgamesh’s intentions were in the interest of the people, as he moulded the sons into warriors to protect the city.
Identify and discuss possible problems with the Stoic notion of fate? Stoics learned that our lives are not entirely our own. The complain about what they could not control. The Stoics chose to master what they could – their own minds. They also believed that serenity comes to those whose will is in according with the World reason, the Logos.
Like Candide, Pangloss is not a tenable character; rather, he is a distorted, hyperbolized representation of a philosopher whose beliefs and perspective is considerable linked to his philosophy. Voltaire illustrates two major quandaries intrinsical in Pangloss’s philosophy. First, his philosophy confronts inundating evidence from the authentic world. Pangloss is ravaged by syphilis, proximately hanged, proximately dissected, and confined, yet he perpetuates to espouse optimism. He sticks to his positive views even at the cessation of the novel, when he himself admits that he has reservations in believing some of it.
Had the prisoners in Plato’s allegory asked themselves ‘why am I imprisoned’, or by another questioned, “Why have you accepted such a fate?” might they have responded “why indeed,” curiosity aroused, would not a search for truth commence? Those once Imprisoned by ignorance now “enlightened” by truth would they not now be freemen? Liberators of their own destiny?
In the dialogue Socrates asks, “Is conduct right because the gods command it, or do the gods command it because it is right?” (Rachels, 50). This question asks out of two opposing possibilities, which one is true? On the one hand it asks whether God decides what is moral and immoral. Is God the one that determined that it is wrong to steal, murder, and torture? Did god determine that it is good to help the poor, give gifts, and preserve life?
We are tempted to think that the soul purpose of Arthur Miller’s play The Crucible was to create an outlet that exposed the mass hysteria of the McCarthy era , however to say this you would be ignoring the central themes that have allowed this play to reach universal audiences. Among themes such as the abuse of power, conflict with authority and mass hysteria The Crucible deals with the importance of identity and the individual conscience. These two themes are closely linked because until you complete your journey in finding yourself you are unable to have an individual conscience. Miller uses one of the central characters in the story, John Proctor, to explore the journey of individual conscience. This theme combined with a unique structure and language allows him to creature a play that addresses the social and political concerns which are essential to every human existence.
Destiny is defined as an event or course of events that will inevitably happen in the future. Although there is a debate on whether destiny exists in real life, the gods in The Odyssey influence the humans’ destinies. Along with them, certain prophets can tell the future as if it is indeed inevitable. A reader would think that the future is inevitable in The Odyssey because everything predicted comes true. In real life I believe that the future is not set and only God knows what is going to happen.
In Both plays The Wild Duck, and The Merchant of Venice there are characters’ that appear to sacrifice parts of their lives for the benefit of others. Once we compare these sacrifices with Nietzsche’s idea of ethics and moral we see a broader view of people’s actual agendas. These characters sacrifice something they have to get something equal in return. Nietzsche’s view on sacrifice is thoroughly different compared to moral/social beliefs we have today. He believes that it is “a will to nothingness, an aversion to life, a rebellion against the most fundamental presuppositions of life.” To explain this we must first define sacrifices in general, which is to give up something so as to feel better when suffering, reaching a moment of inspirational truth.