The Great Chain of Being
Most of the concepts about the nature of living things in the early modern era were derived from the writings of Aristotle. Aristotle wrote about the concept of distinct types of organisms that could be distinguished from all the rest. Aristotle was interested in much more than the biological world, and attempted to build a theory of the world as a whole. As part of this theory, he believed that all of nature could be seen as a continuum of organization from lifeless matter. This matter consisted of the four embracements of water, earth, fire and air and composed everything all the way to the most complex forms of life. He thought of humans as different from the rest of animals though because of their capacity for reason and thought. Aristotle proposed a rank ordering of all living things, from the least to the highest (humans). This idea developed, during the later centuries, into the concept of the "Great Chain of Being". All living things were seen as members of unchanging types, called species, which could be ordered from the least to the highest. Each species has at least one similarity between the species above it and below it in the “ladder”. Only individuals were born and died; species themselves were eternal. The metaphor of the "chain" of being suggested that these species were linked to each other by a logical progression. This concept, in the Western tradition, is the result of the attempt to combine the Aristotelian philosophy and Christian theology.
To look at this from the religious standpoint natural theologists used the great chain of being to show that God had created stability in the world and linked all life together to prove that God existed. God created species in the great chain of being in a perfect set and hierarchy. In the religious aspect, God and the angels were at the top of the ladder and gave humans the “divine right” to command over the animals on down to plants, and then earth itself.
The fixity of species was also blended over to the political aspects of humanity by showing how different social classes “mock” the natural world. The monarch was seen as the direct ruler from God and has the divine right to command his country from God and is stable at the top of the chain of being.
Hester's sin is that her passion and love were of more importance to her than the Puritan moral code, but she learns the error of her ways and slowly regains the adoration of the community. For instance, 'What we did had a consecration of its own. We felt it so! We said so to each other! Hast thou forgotten it?';(Ch.17: 179). Hester fully acknowledges her guilt and displays it with pride to the world. This was obvious by the way she displays the scarlet letter with elaborate designs showing that she is proud. Furthermore, she does not want to live a life of lies anymore when she states 'forgive me! In all things else, I have striven to be true! Truth was the one virtue which I might have held fast, and did hold fast, through all extremity save when thy good--the life--they fame--were put in question! Then I consented a deception. But a lie is never good, even though death threaten the other side!';(Ch.17: 177). Hester learns from her sin, and grows strong, a direct result from her punishment. The scarlet letter 'A' was as if a blessing to Hester changing her into an honest person with good virtues. Fittingly, she chooses to stay in Boston with Pearl although Hawthorne admits, ';…that this woman should still call that place her home, where, and where only, she must needs be the type of shame';(Ch.5: 73). She is trying to stay and face her consequences instead of running in the other direction. Most people would leave a town where they are looked upon as trash the scum of society. Finally, the colonists come to think of the scarlet letter as '…the cross on a nun's bosom';(Ch.
In conclusion, “Slaves No More” helps examine the destruction of slavery and the redefinition of freedom in the midst of the nation 's chaos. The book addresses an important aspect in the study of the Civil War; it also helps to analyze how slaves gain their freedom and what freedom meant to them.it also helps emphasize the effective role of slaves in the country. The book demonstrates how the emancipation changed the lives of all Americans, including both white and black.
In his Metaphysics, Aristotle defines essence as “what the thing is said to be in its own right” without qualification (1029b14). Essence includes the fundamental or necessary properties of a substance, the properties that if taken away would cause the substance to cease existing as that substance. Essence also ignores accidents whose existence is contingent upon a primary substance. Essence is found in a species (secondary substance) and is not indicative of particular referents of that species (primary substance). In order for a thing to qualify as being part of a certain species, its qualities must meet the definition or criteria of this species; these qualities are its essence. Essence is the most fundamental quality of a substance that
“Everybody was finally equal.” This is what all people want, but true equality should never be reached. In the short story “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut Jr., the year is 2081 and government has finally made all its people equal. The government puts handicaps on those who are stronger and smarter than the average person. The character Harrison Bergeron strongly disagrees with this. With Harrison’s rebellious and forceful ways, he tries to overthrow the government because he feels this is unjust.
“Harrison Bergeron” is set in a distant and dystopian version of America, where due to the 221th, 212th and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, everyone is 100% equal (1332). The “playing field” has been completely leveled. However, this isn’t the brand of equality that
In "Harrison Bergeron", Kurt Vonnegut investigates the topic of constrained balance in American culture not long from now. Vonnegut makes a world in which all living individuals are equivalent in all ways. He concentrates on making uniformity by changing excellence, quality, and knowledge rather than managing race, religion, and sex, the genuine issues of correspondence in the public eye. He composes this story to instruct the lesson that all individuals are not equivalent, but instead, they all have qualities and shortcomings making each exceptionally person.
In Aristotle’s Metaphysics, he discusses what he believes to be the theory of origin. One must differentiate Aristotle’s theory with that of creation. The word “creation” implies a biblical idea. Aristotle was not familiar with the biblical text and therefore did not understand the concept of “creation” in the biblical sense. Rather he was more interested in the “origin” of the world.
Throughout the world there are various cultures with varying religions and creation stories to explain the creation of the Earth and it’s inhabitants. Of these creation stories two with similar and also different characteristics is the Creation story in the book of Genesis which is a part of the 1st Testament in the Hebrew Bible and explains the creation of Earth and humans, and the Theogony which is the greek creation story that describes the origins of the Earth and the Greek Gods. Both the Theogony and the Creation in Genesis show nature as a blessing for humans but it can also affect them negatively, However the myths differ in the ways that the Earth and humans were created and how humans interact with the deities of the creation stories.
To the modern reader, Aristotle's views on astronomy, as presented in Metaphysics, Physics, De Caelo (On the Heavens) and Simplicius' Commentary, will most likely seem very bizarre, as they are based more on a priori philosophical speculation than empirical observation. Although Aristotle acknowledged the importance of "scientific" astronomy - the study of the positions, distances and motions of the stars - he nevertheless treated astronomy in the abstract, linking it to his overall philosophical world picture. As a result, the modern distinction between physics and metaphysics is not present in Aristotle, and in order to fully appreciate him we must try to abandon this pre-conception. Aristotle argued that the universe is spherical and finite. Spherical, because that is the most perfect shape; finite, because it has a center, viz. the center of the earth, and a body with a center cannot be infinite. He believed that the earth, too, is a sphere. It is relatively small compared to the stars, and in contrast to the celestial bodies, always at rest. For one of his proofs of this latter point, he referred to an empirically testable fact: if the earth were in motion, an observer on it would see the fixed stars as moving, just as he now observes the planets as moving, that is from a stationary earth. However, since this is not the case, the earth must be at rest. To prove that the earth is a sphere, he produced the argument that all earthly substances move towards the center, and thus would eventually have to form a sphere.
...ence of the cognitive feature of the animal. For Aristotle the body and soul are not two separate elements, but they are of one thing. A body and a soul make a person. If a person has no soul, then that person is dead and it would only be a person by name. A thing that has a soul and is complete must be able to move and change. The soul dies with the body, and without the soul, the person is no more a person, but another inanimate object. One cannot exist without the other. With this concept of one not existing without the other, Aristotle leaves no room for there to be a possibility of immortality. Aristotle’s ideas of the soul and the body really formulate and combine both psychology and biology together, even though today many of his ideas have been proven wrong, for his time, they were very advanced with the research and materials that he was able to come by.
The lion is always considered the head of his clan but is it because he is the strongest, the most vibrant, or because his roar is the loudest? What causes this desire to dominate someone else? People want to feel superior because they are convinced that it is human nature to become superior. While Aristotle describes the idea of human nature as consisting of a natural pattern of wanting to dominate other people, often to the point of slavery, Douglass believes in the idea of education leading to people wanting to dominate other people, proving that it is a social force that affects peoples’ nature. Men are looked upon as individuals who dominate everything. White men are the common oppressors of both women and slaves. White women believe themselves to be superior to slaves and as equal as men. These groups believe the reason to their sense of superiority is human nature. But, this is not actually the case; in reality, everyone is equal.
The Reverend Dimmesdale was another character that demonstrated the effects of sin. He committed the same offense that Hester committed, adultery. The difference between Dimmesdale and Hester was that Dimmesdale was not publicly punished for his crime while Hester was. Because of this, Dimmesdale felt extremely guilty. This feeling of guilt was so atrocious that it mentally and physically withered Dimmesdale, as he felt a very strong need to repent and cleanse his soul.
Throughout history, many individuals wish to discover and explain the relationship between nature and society, however, there are many complexities relating to this relationship. The struggle to understand how nature and society are viewed and connected derives from the idea that there are many definitions of what nature is. The Oxford dictionary of Human Geography (2003), explains how nature is difficult to define because it can be used in various contexts as well as throughout different time and spaces. As a result of this, the different understandings of what nature is contributes to how the nature society relationship is shaped by different processes. In order to better understand this relation there are many theorists and philosophers
The label ‘teenager’ as we know it was a concept that first arose in the 20th century. Before this there were young people in their teenage years; however there was no sub-culture or institution in place that brought them together or that helped to develop peer group cohesion on a societal scale. Whilst some worked at home, on family farms, or in factories or offices, others attended school. Some were married off or were being prepared for marriage. Teenagers didn't do that much to distinguish themselves from adults. They dressed exactly like their parents as well as having the same views and music tastes.
Indeed, adolescent may be defined as the period within the life span when most of a person’s biological, cognitive, psychological and social characteristics are changing from what is typically considered child-like to what is considered adult-like (Learner and Spainer, 1980). This period is a dramatic challenge for any adolescent, which requires adjustment to change one’s own self, in the family, and in the peer group. Contemporary society presents adolescents with institutional changes as well. Among young adolescents, school setting is changed; involving a transition from elementary school to either junior high school or middle school; and late adolescence is accompanied by transition from high school to the worlds of work, University or childrearing. An adolescent experiences it all ranging from excitement and of anxiety, happiness and troubles, discovery and bewilderment, and breaks with the past and yet links with the future (Eya,