I disagree with Socrates’ claim that morality is objective. According to Dr. Jordan B Cooper (2018), sophists believed that there was no objective truth that could be concluded by the use of philosophy. The perception of life, including morality, varies from person to person. Morality is like a temperature, which can be cold for one person and hot for another person. People’s moral beliefs of what is good and what is bad is a construction of the knowledge that was obtained from other people of the same society as children learning from the parents. For example, some ancient societies had a human sacrifice, which was a part of social norms, while other societies did not see such activities as morally acceptable. Thus, the definition of morality is relative and can vary from society to society, and even from individual to individual.
Modern law is a very complex set of rules. Those rules were based on the vision of lawmakers on what is moral and what is not. It is morally justified to break the law if the person truly believes that the action he is committing is within his moral concepts. According to the Academy of Ideas (2013), Socrates believed that evil is committed because of ignorance. If one knew that his action is evil, he would not commit such acts. Hence, the question of whether it is justified to break the low directly relates to the individual’s moral concept. For example, people smoking marijuana truly believe that marijuana poses no harm to society. Socrates’ reason not to resist the death sentence was part of his moral standards. In this sense, I agree with his decision not to escape from prison.
Nietzsche is known for his pioneering deductions and highly controversial views on religion, human nature, and ultimately the natural and societal forces and laws that govern the entirety of a person’s life. In truth, historical figures like Friedrich Nietzsche challenge the status quo merely by expressing themselves; however, one of his ideas in particular has made significant resonance – the idea on the origin of morality. Specifically, in regard to this, the collection of essays titled On the Genealogy of Morality has received the grandest share of attention from readers. For this reason, the following work examines the main themes that Nietzsche postulates in the body of the work. Those are the polemic on the etymology of the good and bad and the condition of the modern man connected to his main argument on the origin of morality.
The central problem of On the Genealogy of Morality can be found in the first essay titled Good and Evil, where the skeletal structure of the state-of-the-art of morality is depicted by Nietzsche. This particular part of the treatise is often viewed separately from the other two, as rightfully noted by Meredith, for its compelling clarity of discourse that separates it from the other chapters (248). It is also the part that received the most scholarly attention, and surely, not without a reason, however, Meredith says, that the morality principles discussed in the Good and Bad are far from exhaustive (248). Restricting oneself to the first essay inspires to compose distorted and limited interpretation of the concepts proposed Nietzsche. It is for this reason in particular that the current work aims to compile an overview as close and as comprehensive as possible.
What appears to be quite obvious for Nietzsche concerning the origin and the true nature of morality appears at least extraordinaire for the reader at first. Nonetheless, the philosopher’s arguments become increasingly convincing as the work progresses. In the preface, the philosopher inquires, “under what conditions did man invent the value judgements good and evil?” – and this can be named as the prime interest of his in the On the Genealogy of Morality (Nietzsche 4). In the following chapters, he then proceeds to analyze the origin of moral code as it is, returning to prehistoric societies with its inherently natural, untouched state of the values. His philological deductions constitute major interest, as they appear particularly convincing and relevant to the emergence of “noble” and “slave” types of moralities – and self-sufficient in their wholesomeness. To give an example of his linguistic explorations, which he conducts masterfully, it would be appropriate to refer to the German “schlicht” – “plain, simple” with no derogatory connotation – gradually transforming into “schlecht” – “bad” (Nietzsche 13). The formation of this word with its current meaning can be referenced to the times of formation of the duality of morals, which developed in the same manner.
The shifting meaning of words like “schlecht” clearly demonstrates the shaping process of values. However, this investigation defines only the early origins, and does not expound upon the nature of morality according to Nietzsche – he introduces the main concepts of priestly caste and the warrior / aristocratic caste further. The most significant distinction in the first chapter is the juxtaposition of these two and one of the main historical examples that spawned many variants of false reading of Nietzsche: “it was the Jews” (Nietzsche 17). In this case, the Jewish nation serves only as a suitable example, as the philosopher distills the values of good and evil, guilt and responsibility, and ascetism from the Christian paradigm. His main argument is rather concerned with the way the values were turned upside down by priests – namely the Jews – and the effects it had on the subsequent current condition of the modern man.
The role of ressentiment has an important connotation as well – it serves as a base for the whole operation of the reversal of values from aristocratic to slave. It is a force binding it together – a force of hatred and resentment, which is why it is particularly effective. It is the “a reactive and negative sentiment against the oppressive masters” of the slaves revolting and proclaiming themselves, the poor, the crooked, the weak as righteous (Nietzsche 27). Thus, he presents his central argument: moral values were purposefully reverted and the current moral norms are derived from the perspective of the weak; the original, noble values promoted faded away and need to be restored.
The conditions and circumstances replace each other according to the stages the society. Nietzsche’s depiction of different conditions shows the progression of the principles he discusses, whether it is responsibility, guilt, conscience, or the notion of ascetism. For instance, in the second treatise, he shows how “morality of custom finally reveals what they were simply the means to: we then find the sovereign individual as the ripest fruit on its tree” (Nietzsche 36). Similarly, the circumstances of the time On the Genealogy was conceived, clearly shows the degradation of morality and its subsequent nihilistic nature of the philosopher’s modernity. Thus, his thoughtful deconstruction of the circumstances influencing the appearance and nature of morality contributes immensely to the understanding of the so-called Modern Man.
However, as mentioned before, the main role in the treatise is given to the moral dualism of the noble caste and the priestly caste. Nietzsche’s analysis certainly inspires the feeling of the author being somewhat biased in this matter, however, being able to retain integrity. As can be seen in the text, he clearly leans towards the noble morality being this pristine, original, and rightful concept. The priestly caste, on the other hand, is something that perished the human society, bringing it to the current devastated form. This can be deduced by the quite emotional assessments that Nietzsche makes regarding every new idea he introduces into the text. The point of view of a man of ressentiment is “re-touched, re-interpreted and reviewed through the poisonous eye” of hatred (Nietzsche 22). Therefore, up to the point of introduction of slave/noble and priest/noble categories, it appeared that Nietzsche was aiming at objectivity: however, his wording concerning the nobles proposes a different interpretation. He compares the noble races to birds of prey: “there is no reason to blame the large birds of prey” (Nietzsche 26). Despite the subjectivity, his analysis of slave-noble dualism appears utterly rational and logical.
The correlation between the ressentiment and punishment is not as obvious. Clearly, according to Katsafanas, the images of punishment and cruelty are “to forcefully instill new desires in an animal through images of pain so that it’ll behave as its masters require” (156). Nonetheless, despite this being the main link between punishment and slave morality, Nietzsche gives a variety of interpretations for it. In the treatise, punishment is viewed “as a means of rendering harmless”, “as payment of a debt to the creditor” or as means “to prevent further spread of the disturbance” (Nietzsche 53). In this sense, the following interpretation can be proposed – punishment, albeit being the tool to ensure power of the dominant force, instead serves to uphold ressentiment and slave morality as a whole. Punishment is deeply connected with responsibility, which is inherently an enforced concept and thus, fits perfectly into the moral system depicted by Nietzsche in the form of a useful tool of maintaining it.
Overall, On the Genealogy of Morality constitutes a convincing critique of Nietzsche’s contemporary state-of-the-art in the social morality dominant at the time. He reviews different aspects of morality, borrowing them mainly from Christianity: the notions of good and evil are thoroughly expounded upon – from etymology to specific historical accounts. His main concept concerning the origin of morality revolves around the dual nature of aristocratic morality and priestly morality. The latter gives birth to slave morality, which, by the way of ressentiment, views only the weak and the crooked as righteous – the paradigm in power. It is particularly compelling to draw parallels between the historical accounts he offers and the condition of the modern man that the notions described have resulted in. Nietzsche employs the deconstructive method in order to arrive at his conclusions concerning punishment, guilt, responsibility, and the true nature of ascetism – and offering a unique interpretation of the world relevant to this day.
Works Cited
Katsafanas, Paul, editor. The Nitzschean Mind. Routledge, 2018.
Meredith, Thomas. “The Radical Goals of Slave Morality in Nietzsche’s on the Genealogy of Morality”. The Review of Politics, vol. 82, no. 2., 2020, pp. 247–268.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. On the Genealogy of Morality. Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Rhetoric debates on whether something is morally right or wrong provide many answers to a single question, and each individual is free to decide on what basis they judge others and their actions. Philosophical theories that explain each side of the topic vary greatly in their definitions of the basis for good and evil. In this essay, different ethical views, including deontological and utilitarian, will be reviewed.
Utilitarianism vs. Deontology
The philosophy of utilitarianism strives to be adapting in its judgments. It focuses more on the relative rather than an absolute definition of good and evil. Everett and Kahane describe utilitarianism as a principle to “act in a way that impartially maximizes aggregate well-being” (1). According to this theory, there is no ultimate solution that fits all cases. Followers of utilitarianism thus claim that an action is morally right when it increases the happiness of the involved parties and minimizes the harm (Everett and Kahane 3). It is based on the theory of consequentialism, which ushers people to pursue actions with the best possible consequences according to each given situation (Everett and Kahane 5). Utilitarians can perceive one event as both right and wrong, depending on the outcomes.
In turn, the decisions of deontologists are based on intrinsic duties that every person has. Their philosophical theory does not focus on a situation but on intentions and the absolute negation of actions that may cause regret (Goldstein-Greenwood et al. 2). They take into account feelings, perceptions, and assumptions that it is a person’s obligation to operate on the basis of the idealistic good. Unlike utilitarians, who may justify their actions and have a clearer conscience, deontologists will always strive for perfection or suffer from guilt.
These two philosophies are often juxtaposed in their views on morals, as utilitarians rarely follow absolutist rules, while deontologists do not consider circumstances as an influencing factor as relativists do. Kant’s deontology is a perfect example of moral absolutism since it takes into consideration values independent of an individual’s personal preferences (Alvaro 33). At the same time, moral relativism allows situations where an action that would be otherwise perceived by some as evil is to be done in the name of maximizing overall happiness. For example, consequentialists use personal judgment and common sense when making such decisions as in the trolley dilemma. Objections against moral relativism often stem from the feelings of being lost in decision-making processes, evaluations, and sacrifices that detrimental to others (Alvaro 33). Absolutists, such as Christians, may hardly accept such ideas as a sacrifice of one for the safety of others, yet their feelings of guilt may drive them through challenging decision-making processes.
Conclusion
In conclusion, each action or decision is either right or wrong in accordance with an individual’s personal views on morality. Utilitarianism and deontology present contrasted opinions on what to consider morally right, leading to different decisions in life. Utilitarianists may be regarded as lacking remorse towards outcomes for some of the involved individuals. Deontology is stricter in terms of the judgment of decisions, as it requires one to have a strong moral compass. Followers of this theory do not analyze the consequences but operate on the existing imperatives. It has more to do with one’s affective rather than cognitive abilities. Despite outcomes, each action will always be judged as either right or wrong by moral absolutists or will depend on the situation in accordance with moral relativism.
Works Cited
Alvaro, Carlo. “The Incoherence of Moral Relativism.” Cultura, vol. 17, no. 1, 2020, pp. 19-38.
Everett, Jim A., and Guy Kahane. “Switching Tracks? Towards a Multidimensional Model of Utilitarian Psychology.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, vol. 24, no. 2, 2020, pp. 124-134.
Goldstein-Greenwood, J., et al. “(How) Do You Regret Killing One to Save Five? Affective and Cognitive Regret Differ After Utilitarian and Deontological Decisions.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, vol. 46, no. 9, 2020, pp. 1303-1317.
Immanuel Kant is one of the most influential philosophers whose works continue to serve as the foundation for many modern developments in this field of study. His take on morality and the fundamental ideas on humans’ understanding of self play a critical role in defining core political and social aspects of civilization. In this essay, Kant’s self-incurred minority and enlightenment will be discussed and proposed as a foundation for morality.
Immanuel Kant’s Ideas
A self-incurred minority is a vulnerable and undesirable state of mind described by Kant. It is characterized by a complete lack of desire to seek knowledge without being supervised (Kant 17). The death of independent thought follows the complete loss of freedom. According to Kant, thinking of leaders as guardians who have to guide others and prevent them from “daring to take a single step” without strict directions is the premise for the end of humanity (17). Morality plays a critical role in this discussion since it is tied to one’s ability to judge.
Enlightenment is a critical goal for humankind to achieve in order to prevail as a civilization. In Kant’s essay, enlightenment is the opposite of apathy, inaction, and indecisiveness (Kant 17). At the same time, the author acknowledges that many forces continuously seek to prevent people from becoming independent thinkers due to the inevitable loss of control over the minds of the masses (Kant 19). The desire to control may stem from good intentions, yet it is never a positive behavior in a society built on personal freedoms and public duties. Kant argues that such an approach would be “a crime against human nature” (20). Morality can be taught to people who lack the potential for self-motivation. However, genuinely moral acts come from an understanding of the core reason behind the necessity to act morally right, which is impossible to achieve without enlightenment.
From this letter, it appears that it was Kant’s intention to link morality and enlightenment as inseparable concepts. Only an enlightened individual is truly capable of being judged and judging the morality of others and the self. When a reason for a moral act comes from an outside influence, the morality of such an event lies on the mentor. It is worth noting that Kant calls people who lack independency “domesticated animals” and “creatures” instead of humans (17). While actions are always judged by their intentions, these minorities possess only a copy of their mentors’ morals. An individual who actively seeks knowledge is on the path toward enlightenment, as Kant described. This exact path allows one to find meaning in morally right or wrong actions. Without this desire to understand the world around them, a person is incapable of thoroughly thought-out judgments or conclusions. A sense of duty is a characteristic of an enlightened person whose freedoms allow them to act either within or outside of the boundaries of publicly acceptable morals. At the same time, this responsibility comes with the burden of being eligible to be judged.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Immanuel Kant’s views on enlightenment have a close tie with a person’s morality through critical thinking capabilities that lie at the core of knowledge-seeking processes. The self-incurred minority status essentially prevents one from being appraised for their actions since these actions are dictated by an outside source. The concept of morality is inseparable from the ability of each person to appraise its worth without being told the ‘right’ answer.
Work Cited
Kant, Immanuel. Practical Philosophy. Edited by Mary J. Gregor, Cambridge University Press, 1996.
The conflict between the optimal outcome and reality has long been a source of contention in the political domain. In this sense, some renowned philosophers have constructed envisioned situations for the betterment of the society upon which their whole body of work is based and their entire ideologies. Notwithstanding, several academics, like Machiavelli, have previously voiced doubt over the plausibility of such utopian governments. His famous saying the end justifies the means has long been a topic of constant discussion. In divergence, Plato’s notion of validation of achievement has since been celebrated by many. The two thinkers believe that an ideal state exists and that this perfect state functions as the fundamental objective of human civilization. Nevertheless, the contrast between the two idealists did not mean that Machiavelli’s idea was heinous compared to Plato’s. Instead, it was just a difference of seeking incongruence questions and ideas since both scholars’ ideas were conquered in some instances, as encompassed in this discussion.
The discrepancy between Plato and Machiavelli about objectives stems from the fact that Machiavelli’s signifiers prepare the way for the ultimate goal, which is unavoidably terrible. Thus, he favors procedural fairness in governance above fundamental justice, disconnecting the connection between politics and morality. Modern politics becomes petty as a result of this moral disengagement. He added that they convened to create laws and punish those who broke them. Therefore, this position emphasizes the need to regain the philosophical component of morality in political debate to attain fairness.
Nevertheless, based on Plato, the solitary concept of virtue can provide a republican with actual justice and operational justice and the power to defend human liberty from governmental intrusion. According to Machiavelli’s political philosophy, Plato’s political view is a compromise between the best and most pragmatic possibilities. While Plato’s political theory emphasizes ethical values as the city-major state’s objectives, he also believes that the flawless must be accomplished in reality in order to be considered legitimate. According to him, reconciling the gap between ideal and reality is necessary for the development of a political philosophy capable of guiding the Greeks in their quest for liberty.
Regarding education, Machiavelli did not concentrate on how to educate citizens to establish competent institutions and the reverence of rights and liberties. A skill set is required to enhance sound performance in the relative duties, and the guardians should be trained to prevent war through physical training and music. Hence, nothing of this nature interested me. Machiavelli’s perspective was entirely focused on the prince’s authority, who should master the skill of utilizing both love and force when required. The consequences of this secular politics are incapable of providing moral or spiritual instruction to various classes since this is not the goal of their guide. Since individuals are compelled to violate the law, the city probably lacked a strict sense of justice, as the prince does not believe in moral equality and uses it only when required. To foster justice, the prince must feel in and cherish the ultimate truth; otherwise, ethics would deteriorate so that fairness would vanish.
However, Plato believes education is the city’s fundamental obligation since, minus it, people cannot consider what justice, morals, goodness, and evil are. So the leader must embody these principles and inspire others to do so. In this way, the virtues are vital in education so that everyone understands what they are doing in the city. Individuals should first be educated on how to rise above the apprehensions and defend the city’s borders with a Republican army. While the duties of auxiliaries vary from those of guardians, the lower class employees are considered subject to their whims.
Following that, in The Laws, Plato takes a distinct approach to the notion of democracy. He contends that there are two main types of the constitution: monarchy and democracy, which are mutually exclusive. He argues that the optimum form of government incorporates elements of two types of constitutions to construct a constitutional monarchy. As has already been noted, Plato is a vocal opponent of democracy and condemns it throughout his writings. Yet, in the Laws, he summarizes what he views to be the contrasting constitutions, democracy, and monarchy, to develop a constitutional monarchy philosophy that he calls a constitutional monarchy. Once again, his technique of inquiry informs his perspective of democratic institutions. He begins with the democratic political system, then examines its opponent, the monarchical system, and then synthesizes the two to get closer to an ideal.
On the other hand, Machiavelli departs from Plato’s ideas and technique, which define his view of democracy. Machiavelli’s philosophy is not always a dimension of reality, and semantics is the notion of actuality. While his approach and ontology are progressive, they are not directed toward a specific goal. He argues that man’s behaviors are determined by their free will only in part. Instead, Machiavelli urges people to aspire a bit oblivious to what would be anticipated to accomplish their objective. Thus, it boosts one’s chances of success, particularly given his perception of the future as unpredictable. Additionally, he asserts that when men do this, they may use their virtue to combat uncertainty. It relates to his view of democracy: since the future is unpredictable, kings cannot simply develop plans in isolation from the population.
On the same note, Plato is more concerned with its durability than whether a political philosophy is valid. He detailed the perfect constitution and lifestyle for the majority of city-states during his political career. In this respect, most people do not have a sort of education that demands all-natural abilities and assets based on chance, nor a flawless constitution, but rather laws in which the majority of cities may engage are the most critical factors to take into account. In other aspects, this stands in contrast to Machiavellian conceptions of heaven as a place reserved for the superior intellects. Plato may be called the inventor of pragmatic politics when it comes to political philosophy.
However, the fact that in some instances, the two philosophers conquered in ideas; for example, both Machiavelli and Plato believe in continuous political and social progress, requiring a competent leader to start a new cycle. According to Plato, there is only one kind of virtue in political structure, namely the proper rule of the philosopher-kings, but an endless variety of evil. Plato’s portrayal of subordinate sorts of governance in a historical series starts with the Republic and gradually fades away. A legitimate rule, according to Machiavelli and Plato, needed an inventive person who was beyond the structure he constructed. Further, according to Machiavelli, governance decays through time as it moves between people and the masses, ultimately succumbing to a more significant foreign force. Thence, a state sinks into turmoil; one person must renew the cycle, not by democracy or republic. Machiavelli explains this necessity by citing historical precedents, except when structured by one man, no republic or kingdom is founded or rebuilt successfully. Plato and Machiavelli both concentrate the weight of liberation on one leader, dubbed the founder-hero. In order to advance not his interests but the public good, the hero-founders must each descend in turn and dwell with others in the cave. Hence, it means that their laws are designed to promote the general benefit of society, not the welfare of any one group. Thus, one of the deemed hero founders is required to recreate a stable society from the ruins of its final deterioration.
Moreover, it symbolizes the height of ethical standards and morality. According to Plato, pleasure is ultimate and self-satisfying, and it is attained via the completion of the capacity for action. Further, he accentuates that the greatest and best good is the accomplishment of the science or art that has the most authority of all, which is the science of statesmanship. Yet, the political ideal is fairness; justice, as in politics, is a common benefit. As a result, it is evident that Plato’s politics of righteousness encompasses a diverse set of concepts and interpretations. In regards, to political morality, for example, it is the science of attaining enjoyment for the public, in opposition to Machiavelli’s violent and unethical regime. The ideal case scenario is one in which politics is motivated by a desire for justice, which is the only criterion of government efficacy, rather than by a passion for power, as Machiavellian philosophers believe.
Likewise, contrasting and comparing Plato’s and Machiavelli’s views on citizenship may guide us in determining what constitutes appropriate political ambitions. According to Machiavelli, man’s potential to engage in politics is contingent upon the state of the society in which he lives. While the essence of man’s nature is relatively steady, humanity is an ungrateful and voracious race. Thus, within the Republic’s social conditions, humankind is capable of making an excellent contribution to political life. While Plato argues that the metropolis is, humanity’s most sovereign and encompassing union and that man is inherently a city dweller. As a consequence, the objective of free men’s citizenship is to participate in the political process. Additionally, the Aristotelian political theory maintains that those unable to engage in the benefits of a political union are either gods or animals in terms of their social niche.
Similarly, Plato asserts that humans must be equipped with logical and religious traits. Thus, people may better understand acceptable political goals by opposing and comparing Plato’s and Machiavelli’s ideal citizen notions. Conversely, citizens under Plato’s government and Machiavelli’s Republicans are capable of adhering to and supporting the law and lobbying for legislative change. Additionally, they are capable of engineering, performing extraordinary creative feats, and campaigning for the state’s interests.
In accordance with the Confucian moral order, the Tale of Kieu can be considered as immoral because of actions the main heroin takes. Immorality of the order is often perceived through Kim’s decision to sacrifice her life for the sake of her impoverished farther and force into prostitution. In contrast to Kieu, Kim Trong, the heroine’s first love, is depicted in a full apposition to Kieu.
He is a noble, smart, and faithful, trying to adhere to the Confucian moral order in the male-prevailing world. However, despite his nobility and morally justified features, both Kieu and Kim neglect the Confucian old traditions to follow their true feelings and preserve their love. So, romantic love between the heroes is considered to be inacceptable in Vietnamese society of that time because, according to the existing ethical and moral principles, passionate relations prevent a couple from executing their obligations.
However, the story still reveal morally justified and pure relationships between Kim Trong and Kieu that are specifically emphasized in the end of the poem when the beloved become only friends. Arising from this, the author creates Kim Trong for creating a comparative overview of Kieu’s adventures, distinguishing the role of man and women in forming the traditions of society, and estimating Kieu’s deeds.
At the beginning of the poem, one can see Kim Trong as an ideal of a man according to the norms and principles of the Vietnamese society:
Kim Trong, a scion of the noblest stock.
Born into wealth and talent, he’d received
His wit from heaven, a scholar’s trade from man.
Manner and mien set him above the crowd:
He studied books indoors, lived high abroad (Du 10).
Judging from the description, the author intends to emphasize that Trong’s personal qualities correspond to a moral person who adheres to the principles of Confucianism and who respects all traditions of Vietnamese society. However, like Kieu, he ignores his parents’ wishes for the sake of his love for the heroine. In this respect, man’s destiny, though being less subject to prejudice, is also hard and challenging because Kim Trong should also overcome the stereotypes existing in the society to reunite with his bellowed.
Therefore, the moral of the poem is sufficiently preserved because the author is more committed to the idea of presenting pure love that was destroyed by political power and greed (Colet 412). Kim Trong’s attitude to Kieu makes readers consider him emotionally and morally elevated because he is faithful to all wishes of her bellowed and he is ready to scarify the fixed ideals and principles.
Like Kieu, Kim’s behavior significantly deviates from the norms established in the Confucian society. Hence, despite the gossips and rules, he is ready to marry Kieu’s younger sister because the heroine has to get marry to another person who can guarantee her father’s freedom.
Despite those morally unjustified actions, as it can be seen at a glance, both Kim and Kieu are loyal to each other in their hearts: “ With the moon shining brightly from above/ In one voice we pronounce our eternal love/ Our innermost sentiments fine as silk threads/ Will unite use forever – this we pledge (120).
The purity and innocence of their love is approved at the end of the poem when Kim and Kieu marry again, but live not a wife and husband, but dearest friends. Their feelings remain platonic, which supports the idea of morality sustained in the poem (McLeod and Nguyen 72).
Finally, Kim Trong as one of the main male characters in the poem serves the amplifier of the moral concerning the social position of women in Vietnamese society. It is admitted that women are likely to blame for immoral acts or the ones contradicting the Chinese philosophy. In a male-dominating society, however, Kim Trong tried to undertake part of her sufferings and understand her life position that makes her resort to immoral actions.
In this respect, the author presents specific symbolic imaginary to show his commitment to Kieu: “Our betrothal moon appears with constancy/ As your face is etched deep within my heart” (Du 9). Despite Kieu’s passionate character and nature, Kim remains loyal to her beloved, which puts any displays of sexual desire aside. The hero reconciles her vivid and burning nature and is ready to reunite even in the capacity of a friend.
In conclusion, it can be stated that the poem deserves to be considered as morally justified because it discloses the veritable ethical and moral principles. In this respect, Kim Trong, one of the male characters and Kieu’s fiancé, plays an important role in evaluating Kieu’s decisions and actions and amplifying the right moral order that the heroine adheres.
Specifically, she remains committed to her first love and reunites with Kim to lead a happy live. Kim understands the importance and inevitability of Kieu’s sacrifice and, therefore, he immediately agrees to marry her at the end of the poem. Although the plot of the story can be perceived as the criticism of Confucian traditions, it still embodies certain moral frameworks.
The novel Wieland by Charles Brocken Brown has been received both positively and negatively by those who have analyzed the themes of the book. It is regarded by most people as literature that sentimentally and gothically relays tradition of the society. The narratives of the novel address such elements as suicide, murder, insanity, and seduction. Wieland is perceived by many to be basing its arguments in notion of Puritanism. Other scholars however feel that the piece of literature is a historical parable and self based allegory as depicted in the book itself. The story presents a tale of the Wielands as a precautionary tale that is meant to cushion against taking hard stance in religious matters; Theodore Wieland’s over-commitment to religion is presented in this book as the critical cause of the tragedies that befall this family.
The principles of morality
The very beginning of the logical story reveals the reasons for questioning the moral and religious issues exaggerated to the extent of implicit faith. The main characters of the novel Wieland are Clara and Theodore Wieland. The Wielands’ father gained his wealth due to several factors: “The cheapness of land, and the service of African slaves, which were then in general use, gave him who was poor in Europe all the advantages of wealth” (Brown 10). It can be assumed that he felt remorse because of his yearning for wealth instead of being truly religious. His death is a result of his desire to reconnect with his spiritual supreme being that makes him go to temple. He eventually meets his death after a thunderous strike and exposition. This occurrence is described as a spontaneous combustion and later on their family’s mother dies and lives Theodore and Clara to depend on human sympathy and religion. The religion has been the matter of life for their father. So, Theodore believes this to be an integral part of their lives as well. The death of their father has opened a way to religious and philosophic interpretations of wealth that does not go well with commitment.
The commitment of the old Wieland is obvious and a bit ridiculous because a person believes that some religious aspects spread among indigenous people can make him closer to Deity and godlike affairs. In this respect, the commitment of Theodore grows further and becomes a mania, especially after hearing strange voices. An ordinary person that does not know about the God and similar things would become concerned about his or her mental health. However, Theodore Wieland is absolutely sure that the voices belong to Deity and should be followed. This idea of Deity voices can be easily attributed to his over-commitment to the Bible and a desire to follow his father’s foundations.
When Henry, Catherine’s brother, jets in from Europe and he together with Theodore resort to an argument about philosophy and the issue of religion, we can clearly see the level of commitment and devotion demonstrated by Theodore in debate. Regarding this, we can assume how vigorous can such person be in putting theory into practice and proving the devotion in action. In this respect, Theodore can be treated as a religious fanatic whose over-commitment is the main reason of all tragedies experienced by the members of this family. It is absolutely clear that he is not able to regard the religion as a belief in something wiser than people supported with emotional background.
Theodore Wieland believes the voice he can hear and decides to act with an even self-motivated idea of killing Pleyel and his sister to show God how committed and obedient he is to Him. As a religious fanatic can be even more persistent that any other one in proving to all around, him/her self and the Deity that his/her faith is strong, we should take this into account while observing the actions of Wieland. His attempt to murder Clara is aborted following neighbors’ inception and as a result, Wieland is taken to prison. It is necessary to mention that the true religion and the real Deity would not require any proofs of somebody’s faith and commitment. The moral values of a vigorous religious fanatic are questioned with regard to the genuine bases dwelled on the main book of Christian religion. The Bible is mentioned as a source of creed in the novel, whereas it should be the main source of knowledge on God and similar issues:
His understanding had received a particular direction… His constructions of the text were hasty, and formed on a narrow scale. Everything was viewed in a disconnected position. One action and one precept were not employed to illustrate and restrict the meaning of another (Brown, p. 8).
All these misconceptions were established by the father of Clara and Theodore. After their father’s death, Theodore implemented the ideas of his parent through his personal beliefs. In other words, Theodore was devoted to the ideas of his father to the extent that his mind let him down which resulted in his hearing the voices and other terrifying things.
Clara as the main narrator of the novel claims that “the limits of his acquirements consisted in signing his name, and spelling out a chapter in the Bible” (Brown, p. 227). Theodore can be considered the lost soul that cannot find the way back home and is deceived by evil voices. The voices heard by Theodore can be also interpreted as doubts that exist in the mind of every person. The doubts experienced by Theodore Wieland were unbearable and his morbid imagination has suggested him a certain way that went against his moral values and religious principles. “Where one discovered only confirmations of his faith, the other could find nothing but reasons for doubt” (Brown, p. 23). In this respect, Theodore creates some voices and assigns those to the Deity due to his mental health problems for I can not believe that a true believer can commit such cruel crimes in the name of god. On the contrary, we can revise the history of Crusades.
When Carwin confesses that he was responsible for the voice that was overheard and that he practices ventriloquism, the readers are likely to give a sigh of relief and tell that they suspected that there were no voices. However, the voices heard by Theodore happen not to be produced by Carwin. In this respect, it is necessary to search for another reasonable explanation of voices except for ventriloquism, Deity voices, or mental diseases. Excluding all these variants, it is impossible to find nothing more reasonable than a well-planned manslaughter.
The way of life of Wieland and his father depict how theme of madness can be explored in a given literacy work. Other scholars view the tale as a Faustian theme or American conception of Faust. The story also brings out the interpretation of ideas without justification and how this could wreck havoc in our societies. The novel ends without giving answers to a number of issues and this is viewed by readers as the author’s notion that human beings do not always know the truth, at least by some degree of certainty. Due to Brown’s work on this novel, he has been criticized for lack of skills in literature writing. It was only till recently that these critical appraisals have been withdrawn following the idea that it was a deliberate strategy used by the author. In addition, since the book was based on narration of a confused character, it is upon the reader of the novel to see that this confusion is brought by the narrator and not by Brown himself.
Conclusion
The Wieland gives the readers a great opportunity to interpret the concepts regarded in the novel with regard to their life perception and certain knowledge on the environment they live in. The novel therefore stands as an example of challenges human beings face in their efforts to have a broader understanding of natural surrounding and how over-emphasis on the search for answers that are hard to come may lead to disastrous consequences. The combination of wealth and religion, moral values and the degree of commitment can be approached while reading this piece of literature. As you can see, the author managed to question religious issues without denying the existence of God. The goal was reached with the help of exaggerating the importance of following the religious matters blindly due to the implicit faith. It is necessary to restate that the role of background for religious commitment is emphasized in the novel as well as the family principles and values.
Works Cited
Brown, Charles Brockden. Wieland. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Imagery is one of the strongest elements used in literature, and especially in poetry. It is one of the major means which is often used in order to develop the theme of the tale. There are many types of imagery used in the poetry: nature imagery, imagery of smell, view and hearing, weather imagery, etc. Symbolic imagery is one of the strongest means available to the authors too convey the message.
The most commonly used elements of imagery are taken from nature. Indeed, the elements of nature have deep philosophical and cultural context, thus, they presents a great help to the writer when developing a particular theme.
Moon imagery is often used in literature, especially in Asian, because moon is very symbolic and takes a very significant place in the Vietnamese life and culture. The story of Kieu is considered to be a masterpiece and it is well known to every Vietnamese. The author uses symbolic imagery of the moon in order to develop the theme of morality.
This imagery explores the character of the main hero of the tale, Kieu, and moral choice that she faced. Using the moon, the author demonstrates the purity of the soul of the main character despite harsh conditions of her life. In particular, the author addresses symbolic imagery of the moon when talking about mental state of Kieu, her appearance and how she managed to remain the same girl as she was before the events.
For Vietnamese, The Tale of Kieu became, “a kind of continuing emotional laboratory in which all the great and timeless issues of personal morality and political obligation are tested and resolved (or left unresolved) for each new generation” (Swensson n. p.).
Thus, it is no wonder that the author uses the uses the imagery of the moon in order to explore the mental state of the main character in situations that she encounters in her life. First of all, the author refers to moon when describing the purity of Kieu’s first love, “The stark bright moon was gazing from the skies/ as with one voice both mouths pronounced the oath” (Du line 25). Moon is associated with the Keeu’s mood.
The mood is bright, as well as the mood. We meet the image of the moon each time when Kieu is happy, or when the situation is positive. For example, when she comes back home after a long time, “the waning moon shines more than at its full” (Du 161). The girl is happy and the moon shines brightly. However, moon is a symbol of not a good mood only, but appears when the girl is sad, “An autumn night-through windows wafts of breez;/ high in the sky, a crescent moon, three stars.” (Du 85).
Moon is used to describe the appearance of the main character, as well as her sister Thuy Van. In Vietnam mythology, there is a goddess of the moon which is considered to be the icon of beauty.
The girls are described as “her (Van) face of a moon, her eyebrows two full curves” (Du 3) and “She (Kieu) ought to rule the moon.” (Du 57). Van is beautiful as the mood, but Kieu is even more beautiful. She possesses the features of the Moon goddess which means, that she has the same qualities; that she is not only beautiful, but tender, graceful and gentle, with the same moral qualities.
As it has already been mentioned, the nature imagery (moon) is used to develop a theme of the tale and address the moral issues. As the moon is associated with the main character, the author refers to Kieu when developing this theme. The girl was forced to meet difficult circumstances.
Each time, the presence of the moon accompanied these dramatic events. We can see that regardless the “turns of fate” and harsh circumstances, the girl managed to remain the same personality that she was at the beginning when manifesting her pure feeling of love to Kim.
She was forced to go against morality and sell her body, but her soul was guarded by the moon. Her actions were moral from the point of view of her intentions. Thus, we can conclude that moon preserved her morality and her soul remained as pure as the moon. The moon was a witness to her innocence. “We’ve had no chance to tie the marriage tie. / But it’s still there, the moon that we swore by:/ not face to face, we shall stay heart to heart” (Du 29).
It can be considered that the author shows the immorality of the tale. Indeed, the girl’s actions were immoral, even when her intention was sincere. In this regard, the imagery is used to contrast the purity of the moon with immorality of the girl. However, the girl did a moral choice, and thus her actions are moral. The image of the moon at the end of the tale supports this.
The image of the moon plays an important role in the tale. The author makes use of the moon imagery to develop the theme of the story and address moral issues. The image of the moon is used to describe the appearance, mental state and morality of the main character. It also helps in understanding of the problem of the Kieu’s moral choice. Thus, the author estimates that the girl managed to save her morality and the innocence of her soul regardless the circumstances she faced.
Works Cited
Du, Nguyen. The Tale of Kieu. Trans. Huynh Sanh Thong. New Haven: Yale University, 1983.
Swensson, John. “Kim Trong and Scholar Ma Section”. Lecture by John Swensson, Oct. 1998. Web.
The issue of morality and moral responsibility is one that usually elicits varied debates depending on the region and situation of the persons involved. In a majority of cases, whenever times of hardship come around, moral values are abandoned as individuals strive to first maintain their survival amidst the adversities. This essay shall analyse the presentation of morality and moral responsibility as presented in two hardship-themed plays.
In the play mother courage and her children by Bertolt Brecht, the roles that have been traditionally associated with women have essentially been abandoned (Brecht 124). This is occasioned majorly by the fact that the situation in which the women (represented by mother courage and Yvette) find themselves in.
Brecht wants to illustrate that in a war situation, the social and moral responsibilities are easily abandoned (Thomson, and Vivien 47). Both mother courage and Yvette are in survival mode and they both turn to individualistic ideals as opposed to the communal livelihood that is usually encouraged by the principles of good morals.
The play homebody/Kabul by Tony Kushner is also a description of how lose of societal morals play into change in living conditions (Fisher 198). The major aspect that in essence links into the idea of degrading morals is the issue of corruption; this has actually been given some major prominence in the play.
Both plays to some extent propose the moral obligations that family members have to one another. From the play homebody/Kabul, we see the mother leave her family for Afghanistan and when she goes missing her husband and daughter do all that is within their capacity to find her.
Despite the harshness of the environment in Afghanistan, as we come to discover through the eyes of the daughter, she (the daughter) fosters on in her quest to find her mother.
Mother Courage goes to all extents to ensure that her children have a better livelihood than most of the people surrounding them. As a matter of fact the play revolves around her and her business and it is revealed how sometimes she employs vices that would normally be unacceptable within the confines of morality such as trickery and lies, in order to make that extra coin.
For instance, she categorically denies any knowledge of Swiss Cheese since she knows that he could lose his life should the soldiers find him. In the same dialogue, she admits that she not usually concerned about the identities of individuals and as long individuals pay up, then she has no issues with their background. From this dialogue, we see Mother Courage cleverly cover up the identity of her son; in essence protecting him and herself as well.
It is unclear what to make of mother courage’s business especially after the author depicts her as an opportunist who lives of the war. However, this is a situation that calls for disregard of morality and religious issues in general and first of all work towards one’s survival. Mother Courage wants to make enough money so that she can secure the release of her son.
The protective nature that is usually associated to mothers is presented as well in the way Mother Courage tries to shape her daughter’s character by imploring her not to behave like Yvette. In any society, anyone with less than acceptable behavior is generally used as an example when trying to deter young children from deviating towards the improper behavior. This is the way that moral norms are shaped and this is what mother courage is aiming at.
The doctor in the play homebody does not exactly fulfill his moral responsibility as he would typically be expected to. He fails to go along with the doctrines of the profession when he goes ahead to detail the gruesome way in which the homebody died without giving consideration to the feelings of her husband and daughter.
This is from the second scene of act one. From the same scene we learn of the reason as to why the homebody was killed. Much as it may not be justifiable from other cultures, the homebody abandoned moral issues as dictated by the rules of the land she had traveled to by not dressing appropriately. It is also revealed that she had gone against the moral demands of her religion by listening to music which she clearly knew was not allowable to Islam.
In the play mother courage and her children, Brecht wants to show how irrelevant religion is times of crisis (O’Neil 137). This social and moral aspect is represented in the play, though negatively, through the presence of the chaplain. The chaplain’s character is not quite at par with social expectations as we see him easily change his view points when the situation becomes unfavorable.
This is clearly depicted in scene 6. Towards the end of the play, we see Kattrin climb up to the roof to illustrate how sincere the prayers of the peasants are as compared to those of the church leaders. This effectively shows how the religious leaders have totally abandoned their moral and social responsibilities to the people, in essence leaving them to fend for themselves spiritually.
From the play homebody/Kabul, we are left with more questions than answers as regards to the moral viewpoints of the mother. In normal conditions, the mother is thought of as the pillar of strength for the family and she is the least expected to just abandon her responsibility to her home to go live in the land of her dreams (Jenkins 109).
The homebody puts her husband and daughter in a lot of pain and suffering by her act and the audience is left to wonder whether she had taken into consideration the impact that her selfish move would have on the people closest to her.
As the story unfolds, we are forced to believe that the entire family is probably in a broken state primarily because of her instability. She has no respect whatsoever for her husband and she refers to him as an “it”. Her daughter though grown up has a history of instability in the sense that she had tried to commit suicide earlier.
From the development of the plot in the story Mother Courage and her children, Yvette may have found herself in a moral predicament when she got married to the brother of a colonel she had been with in an earlier scene. She inherits a fortune once he dies, and this makes it hard for the viewers to believe that she had other intentions other than money when she got married to the colonel’s brother.
If she was asked to defend her move, she would probably argue that there is no crime in falling in love with anybody as long as she was not married to someone else. However from an outsider’s perspective this is an argument that could take various morally-positioned angles.
Whether true or not, as we are left to decide the homebody also feels the pain that her family is in when a message is conveyed to Priscilla, her daughter urging her not to continue looking for her. She claims that even though she is not dead, her daughter should act like she (the homebody) is.
This maybe the homebody’s gut feeling telling her that she infact made a mistake in abandoning her family and though she may want to go back to her life, she is in a bit too deep to come back. Eventually, Priscilla goes back home without finding her mother or the body she was so committed to find.
From Brecht’s play, we find out that mother courage’s business keeps her occupied to the extent that she completely disregards her family. She is not aware of some of her children’s deaths and this is primarily because at the time they occur, she is chasing one or the other of her business ventures.
Aside from the deterioration of her family’s moral values, mother courage also serves to fuel the business of war and eventually becomes a subject in its empire. From the play, the viewer/reader holds his or her breath hoping that she will realize the err of her ways and make a turnaround but tragically, the play ends without her realizing how ignorant she has been of the situations that surround her.
The play by Kushner is full of aspects which appear moral judging by the standards of Afghanistan but are definitely amoral by any other standards (Kushner 133). For instance, moral rules demand that revenge is not an acceptable way of solving disagreements. Mullah Aftar Ali Durrani is very bitter at what he terms a bombing attack on Afghanistan.
He isolates incidents from America’s history to illustrate his argument that America does not have the moral authority to impose its ideals on other nations. For instance, he cites the Bill Clinton affair with Monica Lewinsky and he declares that the U.S has absolutely no idea what good morals are. He categorically declares that Islam is the only religion that knows what is good for women.
Works Cited
Brecht, Bertolt. Mother Courage and her children. Massachussets: Methuen, 1980.Print.
Fisher, James. Tony Kushner: new essays on the art and politics of the plays. North Carolina: McFarland, 2006. Print.
Jenkins, Jeffrey. The Best Plays of 2001-2002. New York. Limelight Editions, 2003. Print.
Kushner, Tony. Homebody/Kabul. London: Nick Hern Books, 2002. Print.
O’Neil, Patrick. Great World Writers: Twentieth Century. New York: Marshall Cavendish, 2004. Print.
Thomson, Peter, and Vivien Gardner. Brecht: Mother Courage and her children. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Print.
Tolstoy’s novel, “The Death of Ivan Ilych,” is a meditation on life and morality, as seen through the eyes of a man who is nearing the end of his life. The protagonist, Ivan Ilych, is a middle-aged lawyer with a comfortable lifestyle (Tolstoy 53). Although he is successful in his career, he has not achieved any meaningful purpose. His life is unfulfilled and lacking in meaning. Ivan’s work is a source of stress and unhappiness, and he cannot find joy in anything (Tolstoy 65). As he approaches death, he begins to question his choices and the morality of his life. Therefore, through the story, Tolstoy explores the idea that an unfulfilled life is ethically wrong and suggests that an individual must strive for something more than material success to lead a meaningful and decent life.
The Moral Development of Ivan Ilych
Ethical development is essential to Leo Tolstoy’s novel, “The Death of Ivan Ilych.” The novel tells the story of a man’s journey from a life of materialism and social conformity to an understanding of the value of morality and spiritualism (Tolstoy 76). Through Ivan’s death, Tolstoy explores the moral development of the protagonist and how his death leads to a new understanding of life’s meaning. Tolstoy illustrates the importance of recognizing one’s mortality and the need to make the most of the time given. As Ivan nears death, his thoughts become increasingly focused on his life and the mistakes he has made (Tolstoy 85). He begins to reflect on what is truly important and to think about those around him. Ivan realizes that he has not been living for others and instead has been selfish and egotistical.
Throughout the novel, Tolstoy uses Ivan Ilych’s death to convey the moral development of his protagonist. His materialistic and socially conforming lifestyle consumes him, but as his death approaches, he gains a new understanding of life’s meaning (Zumhagen-Yekplé 89). He realizes that his materialistic pursuits and social obligations have been keeping him from experiencing true joy and fulfillment in life. In addition, he realizes that his life is not as meaningful as he once thought it was. As he begins to accept his mortality, Ivan finds solace in prayer and meditation, and he can find peace and contentment in his final moments (Tolstoy 84). Using Ivan’s moral development, Tolstoy highlights the importance of living a meaningful life that serves others and not just oneself.
In the novel, Ivan is faced with his mortality, and his life story showcases his moral development in the face of death. Ivan comprehends as he recalls his life that he has been living with a false sense of morality and simplistic values. He begins to explore what true morality and personal growth look like (Tolstoy 83). For example, Ivan realizes that he has been striving for material success and social acceptability and that these pursuits have led to moral bankruptcy. He reflects, “[h]e had spent his life in pursuit of trivialities and so had lost sight of what was essential” (Tolstoy 57). Through this realization, Ivan can recognize that his life has been largely empty and meaningless and that he has failed to prioritize the truly important things.
The Theme of Mortality and Unfulfillment in Tolstoy’s Work
Tolstoy’s “The Death of Ivan Ilych” is a powerful exploration of mortality and unfulfilled life. Although Ivan is a successful attorney who is content with his life, he has no real understanding of what constitutes true happiness (Tolstoy 53). As his life deteriorates, he realizes that he has been living without meaning and that his death is inevitable. He experiences great regret and sorrow as he is forced to confront his mortality and unfulfilled life. The story is a stark reminder that life is fleeting and that making the most of it while possible is important. Tolstoy emphasizes this point by depicting Ivan’s death as a moment of great sorrow, where he is forced to confront the truth of his life (79). He realizes that he has wasted his life and that his death will be empty and without purpose.
Tolstoy’s use of symbolism throughout the story further emphasizes Ivan’s mortality and unfulfillment. His death is symbolized by a dark room, a metaphor for death’s darkness and the end of life (Tolstoy 87). Furthermore, the light of day that Ivan longs for symbolizes his hope to break free from the hold of death and find some peace and comfort. The imagery of the window that Ivan looks out of symbolizes his desire to transcend his limited earthly existence and search for a higher, spiritual purpose. Ultimately, Tolstoy’s ‘The Death of Ivan Ilych’ is a powerful exploration of mortality and unfulfillment. Through its use of symbolism, the author presents a compelling examination of what it means to be alive and the ultimately futile nature of life’s pursuits.
Moreover, Tolstoy’s use of mortality is apparent early in the story as Ivan is diagnosed with a terminal illness. As Ivan begins to accept his death, Tolstoy uses it to demonstrate the fragility of life and how easily it could be taken away (Grešš Halász et al. 1705). The reality of death is further highlighted when Ivan reflects on his life and realizes it was lived without purpose or fulfillment. In his last moments, he experiences a moment of clarity that leads him to a spiritual epiphany and his ultimate acceptance of death. It serves to remind readers of the importance of living life to its fullest and cherishing every moment (Choi 154). Therefore, by highlighting the fragility of life and the emptiness of an unfulfilled life, Tolstoy’s story is a powerful reminder of the importance of valuing life and its experiences.
The Role of Religion in Ivan’s Moral Development
Tolstoy’s “The Death of Ivan Ilych” is a story of the moral transformation of Ivan Ilych through his suffering. Religion plays a critical role in his moral development, starting from his denial of death and stubbornness to life (Kuhn 193). When faced with the reality of his mortality, Ivan Ilych is forced to confront the meaninglessness of his life. He is desperate to find a way to make sense of it. He then turns to religion and finds solace in believing that death might be the beginning of something greater. Through his faith, Ivan finds the courage to accept death and his life as it was and make peace with them (Tolstoy 73). This transformation of Ivan Ilych illustrates how religion can provide strength, comfort, and hope for people facing death. Religion helps Ivan find solace and courage, ultimately resulting in his moral development.
Throughout the novel, Tolstoy examines how Ivan’s religious beliefs shape his view of morality. According to Hibbs and Hallam, although Ivan has never been particularly religious, he is aware that he has not lived a moral life (476). He has been selfish and has focused on material possessions instead of spiritual ones. As his illness progresses, Ivan begins to recognize the importance of leading a moral life and takes religion’s teachings more seriously (Kuhn 195). He begins to pray for forgiveness and the strength to live his remaining days with dignity. In the end, Ivan’s newfound faith gives him the strength to accept his mortality and die peacefully. Through Ivan’s story, Tolstoy explores the role of religion in moral development and how religion can provide comfort and solace in times of suffering.
The Importance of Facing Death with A Moral Compass
In Leo Tolstoy’s “The Death of Ivan Ilych,” the concept of the importance of facing death with a moral compass is explored through Ivan’s moral development. At the novel’s beginning, Ivan is driven by the ambition to gain social status, wealth, and material possessions (Kim 59). He lives an immoral life of selfishness and pride, and he is completely ignorant that life is fleeting. As his death approaches, Ivan begins to reflect on his life and realizes his pursuits’ vanity. He realizes that he has neglected morality and must face death with a moral compass. He begins to understand love and compassion and becomes aware of the importance of living a meaningful life (Tolstoy 75). He makes a moral shift and is determined to leave a legacy of kindness, generosity, and love. Thus, this powerful story conveys the idea that death should not be feared but embraced with a moral compass.
Moreover, in his suffering, Ivan finds comfort in the words of a priest who speaks of “the Kingdom of Heaven.” Ivan yearns for the assurance of eternal life, and he begins to turn towards prayer and contemplation of his life (Matthew 413). This is a major turning point in Ivan’s moral development, as he begins questioning his life and searching for meaning in death. Ivan eventually realizes that he has been living a life of lies and vanity, and he begins to focus on cultivating a moral compass that will guide him in his final days. He has learned to appreciate the people in his life and found solace in the knowledge of a higher power (Tolstoy 74). Therefore, Ivan’s moral development is a testament to the importance of facing death with a moral compass and a powerful reminder of the power of self-reflection in the face of death.
Ivan’s Life Choices
“The Death of Ivan Ilych” by Leo Tolstoy is an example of how a person’s life choices can shape their moral development. At the story’s beginning, Ivan dedicated his life to pursuing wealth, power, and status (Tolstoy 54). His life choices lead him to become a successful lawyer, distance himself from his family, and lead a shallow existence. He is constantly preoccupied with materialistic concerns and disconnected from any true spiritual meaning. However, as Ivan’s illness progresses, he begins to see the consequences of his life choices (Tolstoy 74). He understands that he has been living a superficial life and has neglected his relationships and spiritual development.
In “The Death of Ivan Ilych,” Tolstoy uses Ivan to demonstrate how life choices can shape a person’s moral development. Ivan’s life story is a cautionary tale of how a life dedicated to materialistic pursuits can lead to unhappiness and regret (Tolstoy 73). At the same time, it serves as an example of how a person can find spiritual redemption, even in the face of death. In addition, Ivan’s journey from a shallow life of privilege to a meaningful life of spiritual growth is a testament to the power of reflection, repentance, and acceptance. Through his example, Tolstoy shows that, even in death, people can still make choices that shape their moral development. Tolstoy paints a powerful image of Ivan’s mortality and the story serves as a reminder of the importance of cherishing life and pursuing meaningful goals.
Conclusion
Through Ivan’s transformation, Tolstoy demonstrates the importance of an individual’s pursuit of meaning and morality in life rather than a focus on material success. Ivan begins to comprehend the wickedness of ignoring his spiritual well-being just as he nears his demise and realizes that he has led an unfulfilled life. Tolstoy’s message is clear: no matter how well one prospers in the material world if one is not living a life of true meaning, they have failed to experience the life one was meant to. Through Ivan’s suffering and eventual death, Tolstoy shows that life not focused on what truly matters, such as relationships and living a meaningful life, is morally wrong. Ivan’s death exemplifies how an unfulfilled life can lead to a meaningless existence. To live a moral life, one must strive for something more than mere material success.
Tolstoy, Leo. Death of Iván Ílich; an Electronic Study Edition of the Russian Text, edited by Gary R. Jahn. University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing, 2020, pp. 11-243.
Zumhagen-Yekplé, Karen. A Different Order of Difficulty. University of Chicago Press, 2020.