Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Definition of happiness in literature
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Definition of happiness in literature
Finding the Good Life in Symposium
There are many different interpretations of what the good life truly is. Individualists believe that the good life is pleasing oneself, while utilitarians believe that the good life is acting for the good of the rest of society. Philosophers, too, have their own interpretation. Plato alludes to the philosopher's good life when he uses the phrase "my greatest pleasure." The inherent subjectivity of the word "my" tells the reader that philosophical conversation may not necessarily be everyone's greatest pleasure.
"After all, my greatest pleasure comes from philosophical conversation, even if I'm only a listener, whether or not I think it will be to my advantage. All other talk, especially the talk of rich businessmen like you, bores me to tears, and I'm sorry for you and your friends because you think your affairs are important when really they're totally trivial" (Symposium 173C-D). The casual observer may believe that these lines, spoken by Apollodorus, are trite, offering little more than some humor to begin Symposium. However, a well-learned reader will read between the lines and quickly realize that, embedded within the words of the passage lies a plethora of ideas that are integral to the work as a whole. The two primary ideas which stem from the preceding passage are the philosopher's view of the good life and the very different lives that philosophers lead.
There are many different interpretations of what the good life truly is. Individualists believe that the good life is pleasing oneself, while utilitarians believe that the good life is acting for the good of the rest of society. Philosophers, too, have their own interpretation. Plato alludes to the philosopher's good life ...
... middle of paper ...
... not only to listen to the ideas of others, but to make a judgment about those ideas after they have been heard. In offering the judgment of the philospher's good life being the best one, Plato enticed his readers to attend his academy, one goal of his book. The ultimate idea of the passage, and indeed the book as a whole, is to for one to keep an open mind to hear the opinions of others, and for one to divulge one's own opinions for the betterment of society. After these opinions have been heard, thought through, and fully realized, individuals have the capacity to make decisions for the good of themselves and those around them. When these intellectual, spiritual decisions are made correctly, human beings can begin to live the good life.
Works Cited:
Plato. Symposium. Trans. Alexander Nehemas & Paul Woodruff. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1989.
Holy Feast and Holy Fast emerged as a pivotal work during the mid-1980s in response to a prevalent trend among scholars which placed apostolic poverty and chastity at the very core of the Western European vita religiosa at the expense of attention toward the forms of austerity, some of which were more common to women. Bynum builds up her narrative by exploring how, although the renunciation of money and sex had a shared significance to both genders, the chief metaphor governing the spiritual life of women specifically concerned food. Bynum weaves her monograph together through a careful analysis of both food symbolism and food-related religious practices as described in the works of female mystics themselves and in the hagiographical vitae of female saints. Although this review will be chiefly focused on the latter portion of the work, “Chapter 6: Food as Control of Self” in particular, a brief overview of its preceding sections may be useful for setting context.
The article equips the reader with the tools needed to better understand other cultures, in terms of their own beliefs and rituals. Miner’s original approach does create a certain level of confusion that forces the reader to critically evaluate his purpose. “Body Ritual among the Nacirema” by Horace Miner ultimately brings people together, by illuminating the eccentricities present in all
On one hand, baptism is a sacrament that any human must have because it is a lifelong process of salvation and it is necessary for eternal salvation. Since Adam’s sin, all human is born spiritually death; therefore a newborn in spirit is necessary, in order for humans to have “spiritual eyes open” It will keep the person closest to God, because “open eyes” helps to discriminate good from bad during the person journey in life. Baptism present two parts, an outward and sensible sign, and an inward and spiritual grace implied, but baptism is not sanctification by itself. Furthermore, baptism is the Church’s external affirmation and proclamation of prevenient grace; it is an initiation and incorporation into Christ Holy church. During baptism church as a whole play an active role; first, by welcoming the new member, then after baptism, the church provides the nurture that makes possible a comprehensive and lifelong process of growing in grace. On the other hand Communion celebration by using bread and wine is a remembrance of Jesus death, and resurrection and the waiting until He comes again. The way in which bread and wine is converting into Jesus’s body and blood is a mystery. When during celebration Jesus says “for you” it connotes expiating and sacrifice meaning to liberates “us” sinners. Participate in communion
In ancient greek philosophies such as platonic, aristotelian, stoic and epicurean, as well as in medieval christian philosophies, the answer to to the question “what makes a life go best?” is always a narrow answer. With little variation the only life that is good and worth living, to the aforementioned schools of thought, is the life which which is spent developing an understanding of nature and of metaphysics, or rather the life spent as a philosopher. However the position which is by far more popular today is that of pluralism. Pluralism is the concept that there are multiple ways to live that result in a life going best; Desire Satisfaction Theory attempts to offer a justification for pluralism.
To begin with, in order to maintain a profound and efficient life by living off of the land, the society must offer human sacrifices as a way to keep the gods happy and rain down their blessings upon their people. According to the text in Understanding World Societies, in Mexica society religion was the dynamic factor that transformed other aspects of the culture within economic security, social mobility, education, and war....
Unfortunately, the life-saving potential of transplantation is limited by the shortage of organs available for donation. In general, several suitable organs from deceased individuals are not harvested for donation (for reasons that will be discussed later) and this largely contributes to the shortage1. In 1968, the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act gave individuals the right to donate organs and tissue in the United States1. Donors can either be living or deceased. Living donors are individuals who choose to donate portions of vital organs or a single kidney. Their donations can be directed to a specific recipient or can be an indirect altruistic donation; however, altruistic donations are very rare. Majority of donations come from deceased donors2. Deceased donors are individuals who have been medically declared dead, and who have previously registered as organ donors or whose legal representatives (usually their family members) have authorized organ donation on their behalf. One deceased donor can make up to eight donations from different organs, and therefore, can save up to eight lives4. Candidates for donation are chosen based on their blood-type (it must match the donated organ) and their medical need for a donation (the most critically ill patients are more likely to receive donations). The organs that are currently approved for transplantation are the kidney, heart, lung, and liver. Although living donations are a significant proportion of donations in the United States, this paper will focus on increasing the number of deceased
Rogers, Carole Garibaldi. “Why Catholics Fast: Searching for the Tradition.” America. Vol. 186 Issue 6
Many Church Fathers in their teachings and writings against heresies have upheld Eucharist as the only Sacrifice in a sacramental mode. For example, St. Ignatius of Antioch, in his letter to the Smyrnaeans said “...the bread is the flesh of Jesus, the Cup, His blood” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 7: 1). St. Justin Martyr in his Apology said; “not as common bread and common drink do we receive them….; but in like manner as Jesus Christ, our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood... so likewise ... the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word ...and from which our flesh and blood...are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” (First Apology, 66). In his teaching against the Marcion, Tertullian teaches that Christ’s death on the Cross is made sacramentally present on the altar in unbloody manner (Tertullian, Against Marcion,
Plato states being a just person ultimately lead to being a happy person. By giving the definition of what it is to be just, he is giving the definition of what it is to be happy. Plato shows through the definitions of being just he has given us the key to happiness. Through rationality and harmony we can achieve happiness. The definition in its self is a solution to becoming happy. And I thank Plato, for showing me the light.
We might not have the same opinions, paths, and ways of living; but we all, millions of people around the world, share the same purpose of life: Being able to say “I am having a good life!” What we mean by “good life” is living in pure happiness and having a wonderful peace of mind. The difference between us is that each one of us chooses a different way in his pursuit of happiness. Some find it in stability with a big house, a family, and a good paying job. Some find it in adventure and wildness, travel, and taking risks. While others don’t really have specific criteria or an organized plan, they just believe that happiness comes with living each day as if it was the last, with no worries about the rest. Personally, I find it in trying to be the best version of myself, in staying true to my principles, and in the same time in being able to make my own decisions; which reminds me of what George Loewenstein said “Just because we figure out that X makes people happy and they're choosing Y, we don't want to impose X on them.”
What is the meaning of a good life? How do we achieve the right to happiness? We live in a society full of suffering depressed people, terror, and mass murders.It is no wonder that there are so many monsters are in our society today.(The Making of a Monster 1)
However, we can wonder if the pleasures that derive from necessary natural desires are what actually brings us happiness, since having a family, friends, a good job and doing fun things seem to bring the most joy in life. Plato’s ideas on life are even more radical, since he claims that we should completely take difference from our bodily needs. Therefore it seems that we should only do what is necessary for us to stay a life and solely focus on the mind. Although both ways of dealing with (bodily)pleasure are quite radical and almost impossible to achieve, it does questions if current perceptions of ‘living the good life’ actually leads to what we are trying to achieve, which is commonly described as
The journey to achieve the good life on a personal level has defined human life across all cultures and time periods. Although we human beings have this similar goal in life, what we consider to be the “good life” differs from person to person. The Hindu people, for example, believe that one reaches the good life or enlightenment when he/she finds and truly understands Atman, the inner self or soul. In my opinion the good life involves following one’s internal ideals and values. These values should allow him/her to enjoy the good life in spite of time progression and outside influences such as material wealth. However, this concept of the good life comes with costs that prevent those without a strong will to stray from their values. On the journey to find the good life people often come across social and political barriers much like the civil rights supporters of the 20th century. Still more people struggle with making the sacrifices needed to sustain and ensure the longevity their good life, which is illustrated by Aldo Leopold’s land ethic. The costs may seem overwhelming at first but they are only temporary and the long lasting, internal benefits eventually become dominant.
According to Aristotle, the good life is the happy life, as he believes happiness is an end in itself. In the Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle develops a theory of the good life, also known as eudaimonia, for humans. Eudaimonia is perhaps best translated as flourishing or living well and doing well. Therefore, when Aristotle addresses the good life as the happy life, he does not mean that the good life is simply one of feeling happy or amused. Rather, the good life for a person is the active life of functioning well in those ways that are essential and unique to humans. Aristotle invites the fact that if we have happiness, we do not need any other things making it an intrinsic value. In contrast, things such as money or power are extrinsic valuables as they are all means to an end. Usually, opinions vary as to the nature and conditions of happiness. Aristotle argues that although ‘pleasurable amusements’ satisfy his formal criteria for the good, since they are chosen for their own sake and are complete in themselves, nonetheless, they do not make up the good life since, “it would be absurd if our end were amusement, and we laboured and suffered all our lives for the sake of amusing ourselves.”
Socrates felt that, above all, one should be a good citizen and always do the right thing (Plato 18). However, many in his time did not worry about doing what was correct. Socrates realized this, and understood that they did not care to look into their actions and beliefs. Their first thoughts were on the goals that they had, such as money and pleasure, rather than the thought of whether or not the goals they held were actually what should have been considered important and right (Plato 26). Socrates knew that, unless they took the time to question their lifestyles, they would never do the right thing. By living a life that was being examined, the citizens would be living a life that was, for the most part, also right. Socrates believed that a life that was not right was not worth living, which is why he also felt as though an unexamined life would also be not worth living.