Thomas Aquinas Research Paper

Two Brands of Nihilism As philosopher and poet Nietzsche's work is not easily conformable to the traditional schools of thought within philosophy. However, an unmistakable concern with the role of religion and values penetrates much of his work. Contrary to the tradition before him, Nietzsche launches vicious diatribes against Christianity and the dualistic philosophies he finds essentially life denying. Despite his early tutelage under the influence of Schopenhauer's philosophy, Nietzsche later philosophy indicates a refusal to cast existence as embroiled in pessimism but, instead, as that which should be affirmed, even in the face of bad fortune. This essay will study in further detail Nietzsche view of Schopenhauer and Christianity as essentially nihilistic.

If Christianity and Schopenhaur are based on denying life ... ... middle of paper ... ...itique is that he views religion from the outside, so doesn't this make it a one-sided story? But obviously Nietzsche will think that his critique is one-sided. He is a perspectivist. Why is a view from outside any less valid than a view from inside? Is the ladder of religious cruelty a complete account of religious development.

Descartes was incorrect and made mistakes in his philosophical analysis concerning understanding the Soul and the foundation of knowledge. Yes, he coined the famous phrase, “I think therefore I am,” but the rest of his philosophical conclusions fail to be as solid (Meditation 4; 32). Descartes knew that if he has a mind and is thinking thoughts then he must be something that has the ability to think. While he did prove that he is a thinking thing that thinks (Meditation 3; 28), he was unable to formulate correct and true philosophical arguments and claims. For instance, his argument for faith that a non-deceiving God exists and allows us to clearly reason and perceive was a circular argument.

Friedrich Nietzsche uses this phrase to make a point, to define an event, which signifies the last man's life as pathetic. Perhaps we realize that God is not dead; perhaps our belief in God is so sure, that even contemplating Nietzsche's ideas appalls us. The truth is, his ideas make us think. They make us contemplate our beliefs and our mentality. I suggest that Nietzsche has a point; we must discover the role of religion in our lives.

Kant directly deals with the problems presented in Hume's analysis of metaphysics. Where Hume stops his line of thinking and becomes skeptical as to the existence of metaphysics as a science, Kant picks up. He proceeds to analyze both the validity of metaphysics as a science and a force in our lives. Turning to the methods of other credible men in the scientific field- such as Copernicus- Kant develops a whole new approach to looking at the world. However, like Hume, Kant encounters an obstacle and does not find a solution for it.

He opines, that “they place themselves beyond good and evil”, concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior; that is morality. The reason for so doing, according to him, is for philosophers to be able to make considered decisions, which he classifies as an “illusion”. Nietzsche then states the etiology for his claim; it originates from his intuition that “there are no moral facts at all”. In the second section, he provides the readers with a comparative statement, in which he points out the resemblance between moral and religious judgments. Both, he states, confide in “realities” that are imaginary.

These two values will be analyzed In greater detail later in this essay. The first part of this essay focus... ... middle of paper ... ...p support their natural drives. On Nietzsche’s view, then, the commitment to objective truth is inimical to the affirming force of life, because it denies the character of human passions. On the contrary, the ultimate purpose embedded in Christian morality consists in the blind faith in truth. The will to the belief in an unconditional and the overvaluation of truth both lead to an age of cynicism where people become more skeptical about the value of illusion as opposed to the Greeks.

He must either deny that rational standards apply to truth or think that the faculty inherently cannot access all truth. Those who read Kierkegaard as an irrationalist in the strongest sense believe he argues that reason cannot function as an adequate standard of truth in general. If Kierkegaard argues purely against reason as a human faculty, however, then the failure of reason lies not in reason itself but in the ability of finite beings. Upon first reading of Concluding Uns... ... middle of paper ... ...egelians, he offers a subjective approach to essential truth that, by virtue of the absurd, grants an individual a passionate relationship with Christ rather than simply a dogmatic adherence to Christian doctrine. His points are incredibly helpful in outlining what it means to be a Christian within an existentialist framework.

His conception of a universal religion of reason refers to a praising of human reason without ignoring existing religious beliefs. However, it appears that these two conceptions of religion cannot coexist. Moreover, Lessing’s conception of a universal religion of reason seems to fail to understand the nature of religion, which is to apprehend the causes of one’s existence. Works Cited Nietzsche, Friedrich. "Human, All Too Human by Friedrich Nietzsche: From the Soul of Artists and Writers."

Friedrich Nietzsche and Charles Darwin are two influential thinkers who posited compelling arguments about morality. The two philosophers rejected the traditional Christian teachings, but their stance on morality differs considerably. However, the two differing opinions require a closer examination and analysis due to the complex but yet interesting nature of their arguments. Darwin offers a provocative analysis of the evolution of human morality and concludes that morals (especially empathy and sympathy), which comes from experiences, were critical to human development and survival. On the other hand, Nietzsche disagrees and literally deconstructs the accepted understanding of morality (slave morality) and deems it irrelevant.