Laws Governing Our Behaviour Philosophy Essay

Laws Governing Our Behaviour Philosophy Essay à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦the very fact that a man obeys the law is due to his goodness. (Aquinas: 96) The gap between how people actually behave and how people ought to behave is so great that anyone who ignores everyday reality in order to live up to an ideal will soon discover he has been taught how to destroy himself. (Machiavelli, The Prince, p. 48) But fear restrains men because they are afraid of punishment, and this fear never leaves them. (Machiavelli, The Prince, p. 52) It is essential that anyone setting up a republic and constitution for it should assume that all men are wicked and will always give vent to their evil impulses whenever they have the chance to do so. (Machiavelli, Discourses, p.92) Men never do anything good except when forced to. (Machiavelli, Discourses, p. 93) Laws do not make men good. Critically compare Aquinas and Machiavellis responses to this claim Laws cannot make people good and virtuous, it should be people who have to make laws good Human beings do not just exist as biological creatures, they are also social creatures. Humans have to fulfill some responsibilities to live in a commune, for that reason every individual have to obey the spoken and the written rules. Society without law is impossible to think of. It can only regulate and work properly with laws. However laws do not make men good. People do not need laws and rules to know what is right or wrong. This knowledge is to be inside of every individual. Basic issue that my term paper needs to examine is that laws make men good or not. I will explain Machiavellis and Aquinas response to these questions then I will explain my argument. According to Machiavelli, virtu is skill and ability in ruling. It is not a moral thing. A man that has virtu means he is extremely good at what he is doing. To survive and lead to victory, he believes, sometimes prince should act unjustly. The virtuous man is the one who has the qualities that lead him to success in his actions. Prince is a decent man but sometimes he should act without morality.(Prince,18). If he wants to hold on to power, he should learn how not to be good. Because, in some circumstances, his goodness would damage him if he cannot use it skillfully.But even virtue cannot guarantee success. So fortune is an important term for prince to achieve his goal.( Prince,20). Some events happening in our lives and we are not able to change it. Machiavelli says that fortuna determines one half of our actions but it also leaves us to control the other half.(Prince,74). A ruler who only depends on his luck will not survive long because when his fortuna changes, it will destroy him. If one knew how to change, as times and circumstances change will survive with his luck. Virtu depends on fortuna and Machiavellis prince needs fortuna to survive long. Both luck and skill needed him to overcome problems. He says the way that people behave and should behave is differ and they obey the rules not because they are good but because fear restrains them (Prince,48). Hence laws do not make men good, people pretend to act good and they only obey it because they are forced, we cannot say law contribute them to be act virtuously. People can easily corrupt and it is their nature to want to be ambitious and to be greedy. Where there is a freedom of choice, they will immediately abuse it. So they only act justly when they are forced to.(Prince,93). Obeying rules does not make them just, they behave this way because they fear. On the other hand, Aquinas supports that law is a measure and rule which governs peoples acts.(Aquinas,77). It is a kind of teacher that teaches people how to act virtuous. So for Aquinas, human laws are required not only to prevent the vicious acts, but also to lead them to be virtuous. Law, even by forcing and punishing, leads men to act good.(Aquinas,100). For him, happiness is the final end of human life and lawful acts tend to produce happiness and blessedness to reach the final end.(79). He also believes there is a natural law in people. He points out that every individual understand what is good or bad for himself and human laws derive from the natural laws. Laws are the guardians against the human nature because people would corrupt the freedom if they are not restrained. However rules are not enough to make people good. It just help us to understand people who are tend to bad things. We do not need rules and laws to know what is wrong or right. This knowledge we should have inside. If law compels citizens to act good and they only obey it because they are forced, we cannot say law contribute them to be act virtuously. It is a fact that human beings react in different circumstances in different way of acting. Virtue is something which people acts morally without any external force. So for that reason it frees people from obligation because virtuous person is choosing to act morally by his own. It is a fact that if laws restrain a man not to kill anyone it can never leads him to have virtue. It must be chosen voluntarily otherwise it does not make him good in real. In conclusion, the thought of fear and punishment restrains peoples acts. To ensure the peace, human laws are required. However when people act involuntarily good, it does not make them really good. Acting virtuously is a choice that people accept it freely. It is impossible to improve people as virtuous by putting control mechanisms. They may act just today but when things change they can easily corrupt and act the way they please. If some people who tend to act badly have the chance, will not hesitate to do what they pleased. So laws cannot make people good and virtuous, it should be people who have to make laws good. Glossary Prince: Machiavelli uses prince not to mean a kings song. His term means ruler. This ruler should be both loved and feared, but since it is difficult to be successful in both at the same time, it is much better to be feared. Virtu: Machiavellis understanding of virtue is quite different from the common understanding of the virtue. Of course his virtues include courage, justice, prudence and honesty but he accepts all this actions when they are successful. Virtu means for him skill and ability in ruling. It is not a moral thing. A man that has virtu means he is extremely good at what he is doing. To survive and lead to victory, he believes, sometimes Prince should act unjustly. The virtuous man is the one who has the qualities that lead him to success in his actions. Prince is a decent man but sometimes he should act without morality.(Prince,18). If he wants to hold on to power, he should learn how not to be good. Because, in some circumstances, his goodness would damage him if he cannot use it skillfully.Both luck and skill enable him to overcome problems. Fortuna: According to Machiavelli, even virtue cannot guarantee success. So fortune is an important term for prince to achieve his goal.( Prince,20). Some events happening in our lives without our reaction. Machiavelli says that fortuna determines one half of our actions but it also leaves us to control the other half.(Prince,74). A ruler who only depends on his luck will not survive long because when his fortuna changes, it will destroy him. If one knew how to change, as times and circumtances change will survive with his luck. Virtu depends on fortuna and Machiavellis prince needs fortuna to survive long. Underlying problem Basic issue that my term paper needs to examine is that if law makes men good or not. I will explain Aquinas and Machiavellis response to this claim then I will critically discuss it in my argument. The questions that will help me; Do people act justly because of they forced? Is it beneficial to act justly? Do laws always illustrate the rights? Are there natural laws? Philosophers response According to Machiavelli, the way that people behave and should behave is differ. Hence, they obey the rules not because they are good but because fear restrains them.(Prince,48).Laws do not make men good. They act colorable. People are easily corrupted and they are selfish. Where there is a freedom of choice, they will immediately abuse it. So they only act justly when they are forced to.(Prince,93). But acting justly does not make them just because they behave this way because they fear. On the other hand, Aquinas claims that law is a measure which governs peoples acts. It is a kind of teacher that teaches people how to act virtuous. So for Aquinas, human laws are required not only to prevent the vicious acts, but also to lead them to virtue. My Argument In my essay, I will support the Machiavellis idea and will refuse the idea of Aquinas. I will argue that laws do not make men good. Laws cannot make people good and virtuous; it should be people who have to make laws good. Of course there are natural laws exist which accepted by majority. They are unique and inconvertible. But natural laws are not enough for ruling the city. So to ensure the peace, human laws are required. Fear and punishment restrain peoples acts and lead them to act just. However when people act involuntary good, it is impossible to say that they are virtuous.

The Role Of Women in Shakespeares Othello Essays -- GCSE English Lite

The Role Of Women in Othello In Shakespeare's Othello, as in most writings of his time, women are viewed as trophies or objects to capture the attention of men. I do not doubt that these men do love their wives, but the love, respect and admiration for their women is much different that of our time. It seems modern women are much more capable of having what could be known as an "equal opportunity" marriage. In the days of sacred virginity, and honesty of one's word, well off women such as Desdemona were not given responsibility. Women in her position sat back and left the work up to their men and their servants. In due time they were given respect and admiration, and were seen as angels to be loved and cared for, but what does this really matter when one is unable to care for themselves, or have the power to accomplish without being told that someone supposedly more powerful will take care of it for them? I feel that this misogyny and sexism is eternal and even now, our world suffers from it. Many say this has t o do with the "times" and the period in which Shakespeare was writing. But still, in these times as many others, there were people even then, that knew that misogyny and sexism were wrong, and must be changed. Unfortunately, it was not a general consensus. In this play, the roles of women are perfectly laid out. There's the well off good girl, the cute middle class girl who waits on the well to do girl. Then at the bottom of it all, there is the prostitute, slut that every man and boy has fantasized about. So in essence, men have it all in this play, every major fantasy, war, violence, and betrayal. So we see who Shakespeare’s writings catered to. ... ...!" They depend on their love for their husbands, and their husbands use it as power against them, abusing the ideals of trust and morality. (P.165) Another issue that most do not deal with when it comes to writings like Shakespeare is the language used towards certain genres of people, especially women. In many occasions do male characters in this play call women "wenches" (p.139) or "wreches" (p.123). Then the men (Othello) say things like "Nor from mine own weak merits will draw The smallest fear or doubt of her revolt, For she had eyes, and chose me." (p.131) Men are praise when they do the slightest of "gentlemanly" acts, but never punished for speaking badly towards women. There needs to be some sort of revolt or revolution for these women and they would not be trapped in situations where they are not comfortable with themselves or their surroundings.

Media and public sphere

The Internet is a place where people gather information, discuss issues of common concern, and coordinate political activities. At the same time, the Internet is a part of a larger communicative environment, which is connected to other parts of the public sphere as well as other parts of the uk/todd-gitlin-summary-on-media/">media industry. In other words, the Internet is a complex, multidimensional space, where a lot of different things are happening. Given this fact, what are the criteria we would need in order to decide whether the Internet is good or bad for democracy (and the public sphere)? Based on those criteria, what is your verdict for the Internet: good for democracy or bad for democracy? Internet is a major source of the information overflow in the society today. It is undeniable that it is through this particular advancement in the technology of conversation and communication that the different areas around the globe are becoming easily connected through the World Wide Web. The said nature of opened communication that society is particularly involves with in present naturally makes it easier for simply anybody to share their idealisms about several social issues through the internet. These issues include political as well as social issue-based topics that naturally raise questions in the society today. Having the capability to express ones views on certain issues and have the chance to be heard by others around the world who are naturally interested in the same issues is such a huge privilege for people of the present generation. It is undeniable though that with this particular freedom of expression, many among the population of the human society today recognize that speech could be abused as long as it tells the truth. However, the measure of truth is differently presented depending on the views of the people involved in the issue. Usually, the truth is measured by individuals through identifying how the situation that they are into actually relates to them. In this regard, the basis of the freedom that people particularly enjoy in using the different assets brought to them by the internet developments could be noted to have an impact on the social behavior of the entire human society with regards freedom and democracy. The demarcation line of what should be considered as limits of the process may not be that easy to identify anymore. This is particularly the reason why so many fraudulent informations are flooding the territories of the Internet today. It is indeed undeniable though that although these informations are known to be fraudulent, there are those who cannot differentiate the substance of the issues presented through blogging and web postings on whether they are actually true or simply a misconception or opinionated views of several individuals wanting to affect the others with their idealisms in life or on certain topics of interest as they are. Considering Jay Rosen’s comment on the issue, it could be observed that he pointed out an important fact in his article. He noted that democracy through internet measures may not be called democratic freedom as it is. At times, the situation goes out of hand and freedom becomes an unnerving result of abuse of speech. Given your research topic, how are the discussions/ conversations/ commentaries different in the Internet than they are in some other media format? What kind of data would you need to determine whether these Internet conversations are connected to the public sphere in a way that improves (or damages) democracy? Internet issue presentations are usually opinionated rather than based on factual evidences. This is because of the fact that there are numerous writers, both amateur and professional who are able to present their ides through the net. Most often than not, it is the ability of the people to concentrate on actually showing the people what position they particularly take in certain issues concerning the society that drives their motives of writing. Obviously, this process of presenting values of the events is a biased procedure of engaging with the different causes of the emerging issues on the increase of fraudulent information in the internet. In terms of being authenticated, it is naturally obvious that internet based informations may not be easily noted to be reliable at all. This is because of the fact that the sources are not merely that easy to identify to say that they are indeed of high reputation to gain the trust of the reading public. Most of the time though, readers of the net have a hard time recognizing this particular fact in the systems of internet information sharing. Hence, they fall for the snare of believing even fraudulently presented issues through the assistance of the Internet’s worldwide connection. To identify the validity of the informations, it is important for one to become balanced in viewing the bulk of informations shared through the Internet especially of the issues are based upon political topics. The idea herein is to actually assist the readers of the net in segregating the informations that they particularly meet with through the World Wide Web. How could this be done? Conscientiously integrating the presentations on the web with that of the other media systems considering the topic could be a great help. It really makes it easier for one to have a better overview of an issue if the system is much more likely based on two different points of view. Balancing the informations received would then be more efficient as the issues are to be measured as to how they were particularly shown through the different mediums of media presentation. Kerbel and Bloom’s study particularly points out that the increase of blogs and other internet based information posting never stops annually. The reason behind this increase perhaps is the fact that the people involved in these information posting also gain the confidence in presenting more and more opinionated informations which they would like to other internet surfers around the world. Words are powerful. With the use of information exchange, there had been numerous changes happening in the world. The idea is that the more words become influential, the greater strength it begins to acquire upon the ability of the human mind to segregate the information that it receives. Most of the time, the said informations are either factual or not. However it may seem, it should occur that the factuality of the informations should always be checked for the validity of the informations presented on the part of the readers. In the second question, based on research topic, after 9/11 world wide uprising tension; So now how media represents religion on the public sphere? are they use people sentiment? Because of the current events occurring around the world, like that of the situation that happened in 9/11, gaining the sentiments of the people to be able to come up with measurable strategies of fighting the supposed â€Å"wrong deeds† of those who initiated the bombings has been the main idealism of the different blogs from both the American government and other social institutions during those specific times of turmoil. Constantly seeing the vulnerability of the society to the situation has actually been the key reason why the opportunists saw the time as a basis of the basic approach that they are going to use to get the attention of the readers so as to persuade them in agreeing to the fight against the terror movements of the other side of the supposed â€Å"war†. Conclusion From this particular discussion, it could be observed that Internet has been considered as super highway of information during the 21st century. Overall, the evaluation of the informations presented through this particular route of informative issues shows that it has naturally given way to the major stratifying procedures of feeling the sense of freedom of speech even among ordinary people surfing the net. Several articles from professional writers attest to this particular fact as they are aware that there are those who simply would like to write while there are those who right for a reason. This is why it is very important for one to be aware and enthusiastic about what he reads from the net. References: Cass R. Sunstein. (2007). Is the Internet really a blessing for democracy?. http://bostonreview.net/BR26.3/sunstein.html. (October 22, 2007) Jay Rosen. (2007). In Democratic Time. http://bostonreview.net/BR26.3/rosen.html. (October 22, 2007). Matthew R. Kerbel and Joel David Bloom. (2007). Blog for America and Civic Involvement. The Harvard International Journal of Press and Politics.

Analysis Of The Poem The Blessed House By James Joyce

Post Colonialism Impacts Post colonialism is an enormous impact on a nation that was occupied by a foreign entity and it changed its people culture, language, and political aspects. Furthermore, one problem of post-colonialism are two culture clashing against one another, for instance, the people identity does not have a individuality that separates it from the world. Some nations like India, Haiti, and parts of Africa adopted some form of Western influence. In one of Jumpra Lahiri short stories called This Blessed House† from her Pulitzer Prize book titled â€Å"Interpreter of Maladies† it subtly exemplifies how post colonialism can begin with anyone regardless of race, religion, or gender. Also, the author James Joyce introduces his own†¦show more content†¦Resolvedly, Sanjeev does not want to accept these statues because they undermine is Hindu intuition, furthermore, Twinkle wants these statues put in place where ever she finds it comforting. The couple are drawn by Western culture, but Sanjeev is more drawn by Western paraphernalia as in purposely and thoughtfully though Twinkle is attracted to them more naturally and instinctively. One reason why Sanjeev is really apprehensive in Western culture is because he still has his Indian mentality stuck in him, since he recently arrived to America. Eventually, once Twinkle wants to uninhibitedly place these religious artifacts all over the house this enthusiastically attitude of finding more artifacts from her looms over Sanjeev cultural individuality existence. Observing this situation more closely, Lahiri exemplifies how Twinkle is taking possession of a newly found area in certain subtle steps. Initially, there is appropriation which Twinkle procure the religious items in the house as rightfully hers since she bought the house. Next step is re-representation, Twinkle places these items on mantelpiece without really learning of the items correct contextual purpose. Lastly, there is re-int erpretation, again, Twinkle discovery of the items means it’s an emblem of the house being blessed. According to the protagonist in the story she states that, â€Å"Face it. This house is blessed† (144). In other words, if a colonizer whereShow MoreRelatedCommon Themes of Edgar Allan Poe3152 Words   |  13 PagesAn Analysis of the Common Themes Found in selected works of Edgar Allan Poe A Research Presented to The faculty of the English Department In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in English IV By March 2010 Acknowledgement The researcher would like to thank the following people who help and give guidance to make this project To the Project adviser and the home room adviser of the researchers, who gave his outmost patience and time to check the drafts and format of eachRead MoreCommon Themes of Edgar Allan Poe3166 Words   |  13 PagesAn Analysis of the Common Themes Found in selected works of Edgar Allan Poe A Research Presented to The faculty of the English Department In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in English IV By March 2010 Acknowledgement The researcher would like to thank the following people who help and give guidance to make this project To the Project adviser and the home room adviser of the researchers, who gave his outmost patience and time to check the drafts and format of each part of this very