When growing up in a predominantly Catholic background it is frowned upon to question the basis of human existence and the correct way to live your life. Catholics always assume the basis is God and to follow Jesus’s teachings. This essay will show how my life has slightly altered from a Christian background to a way of critical thinking through the writings of the Ancient Philosophers like the Stoics and Skeptics. First, I will show how the definition of God has altered in my mind because of Xenophanes definition of one unmoving unknowable effortless God. Then I will explain how I have less anxiety because of the Stoics way of living. Lastly, I will explain how none of my new and old thoughts are completely truthful because there will always …show more content…
Anthropomorphic is giving God human like characteristics. For example, they give him a human form, a body. Christians also explain God as being conceivable, so God is benevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent but also knowable. After reading fragments of Xenophanes writing I started to critically think of what God could really be. Is God a who or a what? Xenophanes explains in his writing that all people and maybe even animals can imagine God as looking like themselves, but God cannot look like everyone. Xenophanes explains God as, “There is one god, among gods and men the greatest, not at all like mortals in body or mind…” Xenophanes believes God is not Anthropomorphic and cannot look like humans or think like one. Someone cannot explain God if they have never seen …show more content…
Epictetus in Chapter 29 says, “In every undertaking consider what comes first and what comes after, than proceed to the action itself. Otherwise you will begin with a rush of enthusiasm having failed to think of the consequences, only to find later, when difficulties appear, you will give up in disgrace.” I can apply this antidote to almost everything I attempt in life. I will give two examples of how this would have helped me prior to this semester. The first is when I plan out my weeks; I first give my boss my availability. When I give my boss my availability I just give him the times I am in class. I never think about the hours I need to put in after class with homework and studying. If I thought about the consequences before I commit to a certain schedule, than I would have more time to put more effort into school. A different example is when I write my essays. I begin with a rush of enthusiasm and never contemplate the consequences. Instead of diving head first when attempting a writing assignment I should sketch out an online. Therefore, my essays will flow better if I map out my thoughts first instead of just jumbling all my thoughts on to the paper. The Stoics made the biggest impression on a change in my
In today’s society, there are two topics of conversation that most people shy away from discussing in order to avoid the endless debates and pointless agreements these topics can evoke with a mere mention of them; debates which educate no one on a different point of view but only cause people to fight with relentless passion to defend their own view. These two hot button topics are religion and politics. Even though the touchy nature of these topics is widely known, Thomas Mardik decided to disregard this notion and discuss his religious beliefs in the semi public manner by making them the topic of his “This I Believe” essay. The main belief he discussed was a basic one and is fairly common; millions of others all over the world hold this same belief to be true. This belief is the belief in God. The purpose of his paper was to inform his audience of his belief and to explain aspects of his belief, events that have strengthened his belief, and ways his belief is part of his life. Thomas’s essay is a semi success mostly due the ways he tries to appeal to his audience in the three different areas. These three areas of appeal are logos, ethos, and pathos. Today I will be analysis how Thomas used logos ethos and pathos in his essay.
Many readers follow Descartes with fascination and pleasure as he descends into the pit of skepticism in the first two Meditations, defeats the skeptics by finding the a version of the cogito, his nature, and that of bodies, only to find them selves baffled and repulsed when they come to his proof for the existence of God in Meditation III. In large measure this change of attitude results from a number of factors. One is that the proof is complicated in ways which the earlier discourse is not. Second is that the complications include the use of scholastic machinery for which the reader is generally quite unprepared -- including such doctrines as a Cartesian version of the Great Chain of Being, the Heirloom theory of causaltiy, and confusi ng terms such as "eminent," "objective" and "formal reality" used in technical ways which require explanation. Third, we live in an age which is largely skeptical of the whole enterprise of giving proofs for the existence of God. A puzzled student once remaked, "If it were possible to prove that God exists, what would one need faith for?" So, even those inclined to grant the truth of the conclusion of Descartes' proof are often skeptical about the process of reaching it.
St. Thomas Aquinas presents five arguments to demonstrate the existence of God. However, this paper focuses on the fifth argument. The fifth argument is regarded as the Teleological Argument and states that things that lack intelligence act for some end or purpose. While the fifth argument satisfies God’s existence for Aquinas, some contemporary readers would argue that Aquinas neglects the laws of physics. Others argue that Aquinas allows a loophole in his argument so that the Catholic conception of God is not the only intelligent designer.
When working in solitude on his six Meditations, René Descartes wrote a first person narrative inviting his audience on a spiritual journey that is centered on the reader. Readers are encouraged to doubt all prior certainties such as reality, perception and even one’s own existence. Printed in 1641, Meditation I, subtitled "What can be called into doubt," asks meditators to reflect on everything believed to be true, then ruthlessly question that body of knowledge built up from these illusions.
Over the course of human history every society, even the most culturally isolated of civilizations, has developed some form of faith-system for interpreting and understanding the spiritual and material worlds. Thousands of such systems have existed over the centuries, and as tribes and cultures expanded, these faith-systems inevitably met each other face-to-face and clashed. Two thousand years ago there was a particularly important collision; one between the Roman stoic and the gentile Christian. At this time in Western civilization, Christianity was just planting its seeds and beginning to grow, whereas stoicism was already legitimate in its foundation and strong in its following (Stavrianos 100). One might wonder how Christianity ultimately replaced stoicism as the prominent and official religion in Rome. There are a few particular political and historical events that tell us exactly when and how it happened, but the curious man is more concerned with the psychology behind the transition. In other words, why would men tend to prefer one over the other?
In Descartes’ second meditation, he offers up an argument for Defective Nature Doubt that brings forth the idea that we can’t be certain of anything we perceive being actual and real (153). Descartes thinks that there is a possibility that we are constantly being deceived due to the fact that we don’t know, with perfect certainty, know where our ideas originate from (154). He tries to describe a method in order to dispel this Defective Nature Doubt by giving an argument for the existence of God. I think that the argument he gives for the existence of God is valid, yet I find it to be unsound due to the fact that a few of his premises are can easily be debated. In order to express this opinion, I will first provide explanations of the premises and conclusions of the argument, and then I will critique the premises that I find to be inadequate in order to support my opinion that Descartes’ argument is valid but unsound.
Stoicism is a philosophical school of thought that asserts virtue as the one true good that can produce eudemonia, the Stoic term for happiness or living well. This good is accessible to all, by means of using impressions properly and behaving in accordance with god and nature. Virtue is a good achieved through both internal and external sources. The Stoics associated virtue with the venerated status of sage, which can be achieved only when the soul is unwaveringly consistent with true human nature. But what is human nature? Unlike many philosophical theories that focus on the role of emotions in human nature, the Stoics thought human nature to be closely tied to rationality. The Stoics believed that it was human nature to seek out good and happiness, and that all wrong choices are made in the pursuit or avoidance of a wrongfully perceived value. These errors in rationale and perception contribute to the formation of false beliefs, which causes non-virtuous or vicious behavior. Determinism, or the acceptance of living in accord with events outside of our control is a key feature of Stoic theory. This strict determinism allows Stoics to distance themselves from encumbering emotional reactions that are often associated with negative or positive outcomes. A stoic would attempt to dissuade a non-sage from engaging in emotions because they lack the capacity of assenting strictly to kataleptic impressions because emotions negatively effect their beliefs. In order to behave in accordance with this logic it requires a rejection of common emotions. Ordinary emotions such as pleasure and fear are considered false impression, which contribute to a bad mental state. In order to avoid assenting to false impressions one must gain a rational und...
Smith, Andrew. "Chapter Nine: Life After Death." 2014. A Secular View of God. 12 May 2014 .
Procrastination has become such a bad habit for me. It is very hard to stop procrastinating everything once you have gotten into the habit of doing it. Once I had a term paper due for my religion class. It was to be ten pages long and we were told to spend a lot of time doing it. Being the procrastinator that I am, I waited to the very last minute to do it. I waited until the night before to do most of it. Needless to say, I was up very late that night. In this class there was always a part of the paper due on a certain date before the final paper was due. Having things due before the final paper is due keeps me on task and keeps me from procrastinating until the day before the paper is due. There was one paper which we had to get sources for a while before the paper was due and it forced me to keep up with the paper, rather than let it go to the last minute. This class has taught me that the earlier you start the more positive your final result will be.
The current inquiry considers some of the chief notions of the Stoics, but more specifically it focuses upon one important question: what does it mean to follow nature for the Stoics? To answer this question, the testimonies of several of the Stoics are pooled and examined together in the end. Not only does this inquisition illustrate chief attributes of Stoicism, but those attributes are eventually evaluated in light of their coherence as well.
The purpose of my essay will be to examine Descartes' argument for the existence of God. First, I will discuss Descartes’ proof for the existence of God then I will critique the argument of his existence. Lastly, I will point to some complications and problems that exist within the proof. Descartes’ proof of the existence of God is presented in the Third Meditation. He shapes his argument on the proof in the Second Meditation that in order for Descartes to think he must exist. From this specific examination he realizes his existence is very clear and distinct in his mind because of the fact he had just discovered his own existence. He then creates a rule that whatever things he sees are clear and distinct, are all true. Descartes begins his proof by splitting his thoughts into four categories, which consist of ideas, judgments, volitions, and emotions. He then further analyzes these categories to decide which thoughts might consist of error.
In today’s world, we all have different views of how we observe and see the world. Some people perceive the world through the philosophical eye, and others see the world through their faith and religious positions. The topics that will be discussed in this paper will be an explanation of my epistemological stance and where my roots originated, an exposition of my view and the textbooks view on reality and freedom, a discussion on where God is placed in my world and life, an account on how I make acceptable and appropriate ethical choices, an investigation on my greatest influencers in my life, an expository on how I observe life and my purpose in life, and an overview on how this class has assisted me in life. The basis for this paper is to
Through out history there have been questions of where we come from and how we got here. It all comes down to the question of God’s existence. God’s existence has never been questioned during the times of when Christianity, Judaism and Islam were born. The question of God’s existence comes from our new way of thinking after these religions. Science has made us think of how things work in our world and brings Gods existence into question. There were no scientific studies done during the days of Jesus to prove that God exists, so where did the people in history get this idea of God from? Many philosophers have been questioning and giving their ideas of God and his existence. The ideas that we may have of God is usually connected with religion and our beliefs. One philosopher that touches on this topic is Descartes. Descartes gives his ideas on God’s existence and his out look on our selves compared to God. Most religions believe that there is a God and that he has created everything around us. Everyone has a different answer to this question that they think is the right one. Throughout this paper, I will be discussing God’s existence, while looking at Descartes ideas and through different perspectives of whether or not God exist as well.
When it comes to our personal and professional lives, Managing your time efficiently should be a mastered ability. As a student, this could have a huge effect on performance and grades. Seeing that Time Management is imperative when it comes to college and success, recognizing bad habits, should be one of the first obstructions immediately eliminated from your daily schedule. Create new habits if you tend to procrastinate and start planning ahead to manage your most important priorities. According to David Allen (2001),"Getting Things Done: The Art of Stress-Free Productivity" (p.59) "changes in the way you clarify and organize all things that command your attention-could represent a significant shift in how you approach some key aspects of your day to day work." Setting up deadlines and completing your assignments a few days before the due date will eliminate the procrastination stage. Creating a list with the most important priorities first, will help sort out your assignments and eliminate stress and feeling overwhelmed.
The rise of Christianity raised questions on how this new mode of thinking, based on faith, could fit and interact with a world that had not based its thinking on faith but instead on human reason. While some rejected that the new and old modes of thinking were compatible, others sought and found ways to reconcile both ways of exploring the world. The traditional philosophical method of starting with assumptions that cannot be proven but are assumed to be true and progressing to conclusions based on those assumptions was applied by both Aquinas and Descartes to address the mutual challenge posed by Christianity and philosophy.