Category: Philosophy 1203

Introduction

Gilles Deleuze (January 18, 1925November 4, 1995) is known as one of the most provocative and influential figures in philosophy of the twentieth century, who became famous not only in France but also worldwide. The ideas and teachings of Deleuze had a significant impact on the development of modern philosophy, ethics, aesthetics, and art. The purpose of this paper is to discuss Deleuzes biography, his specific philosophical ideas, and his contribution to modern philosophy.

Biography of Gilles Deleuze

Deleuze was born in Paris, where he spent most of his life with his family and children. The philosophers parents were conservative, and they belonged to the French middle class. Deleuze received elementary education in a public school in Paris, and then he attended Lycée Henri IV to undertake intensive preparatory studies to enter the higher educational institution (Smith and Protevi). Being interested in philosophy, Deleuze chose to continue his education at Sorbonne University and study the history of philosophy.

After graduating from Sorbonne University, the philosopher continued his research activity and worked as a teacher at various lyceums and other educational institutions in Paris. During that period, Deleuze married Fanny Grandjouan, who was known as a French translator of D. H. Lawrence, and they raised two children together.

In 1953, the philosopher published his first work Empiricism and Subjectivity on the teachings by David Hume. Nietzsche and Philosophy (1962) were published only in about ten years. However, these writings allowed Deleuze to gain his reputation as a specialist in the history of philosophy who had a unique view. The same success was associated with such publications as Kants Critical Philosophy (1963), Proust and Signs (1964), and then Bergsonism published in 1966 (Smith and Protevi). In 1968, Deleuze published Difference and Repetition that is often regarded as his main philosophical work.

A new period in Deleuzes life began as he joined the faculty at the University of Paris VIII in 1969, where he worked until 1987. In the 1970s, the philosopher started a collaboration with Félix Guattari, a psychoanalyst who was known for his radical position. They wrote Anti-Oedipus (1972), Kafka: Toward a Minor Literature (1975), and A Thousand Plateaus (1980), which influenced the philosophical ideas spread in the latter part of the twentieth century (Smith and Protevi). In the 1980s, Deleuze worked independently on several writings, but in the 1990s, the outcomes of his prolonged respiratory disease did not allow him to work effectively, and the man committed suicide in 1995.

Philosophical Ideas

Deleuzes key philosophical idea is that the nature of relationships is in observed events that cannot be evaluated with reference to the opposition between the good and bad, as it is typical for dialectic philosophy. Thus, there is no clear opposition between two characteristics describing the nature of events in Deleuzes philosophy. The focus of the philosopher is on the immanent nature of events and experiences in spite of regarding his approach as transcendental.

Additionally, the focus is also on the concept of multiplicity instead of the idea of substance and the notion of virtuality instead of the idea of possibility. From this perspective, the philosophy of Deleuze was discussed by other authors as close to metaphysics, and the philosopher also supported that idea (Smith and Protevi). From this perspective, according to Deleuze, existence, time, and thought to develop as heterogeneous dimensions that form a transcendental reality that cannot be associated with some form of the experience.

All these ideas form Deleuzes transcendental empiricism based on the understanding of reality and relationships through their differential and immanent nature. The philosopher applied these notions to formulate his vision of empirical ethics as the immanent evaluation of existence and thought that is not equal to traditional transcendental and dialectical ideas. These visions were later developed in Deleuzes work on the desire to belong not to a subject but to society (Smith and Protevi).

As a result, the social desire can form a reality through intensified production to achieve the associated goals. These ideas are rather difficult for understanding, but they allow for regarding transcendental philosophy and metaphysical teachings from a new perspective.

Deleuzes Contribution to History of Philosophy

Deleuze is the author of works in such areas as the history of philosophy, politics, art, cinema, and literature, along with his philosophical treatises on transcendental empiricism and other ideas. The man significantly contributed to the development of philosophy in the twentieth century as he proposed a unique perspective of assessing and applying the ideas by Spinoza and Kant (Smith and Protevi). Furthermore, Deleuze paid much attention to explaining his specific vision of the logic of the thought and sense in order to understand how these components form a persons reality.

Conclusion

It is important to note that Deleuzes vision of transcendentalism of the difference and his teaching regarding immanence influenced other philosophers views and ideas. His focus on events instead of the substance and the concertation on multiplicity and virtuality provided a new vision in the context of metaphysics. As a result, Deleuzes ideas remain to be regarded as rather innovative and related to postmodern philosophy.

Work Cited

Smith, Daniel, and John Protevi. Gilles Deleuze. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2018. Web.

Chapter 2 of Tu Wei-mings essay on Chung-Yung is dedicated to the concept of a profound person and its understanding from the perspective of the Doctrine of the Mean. A profound person is an important concept because it encompasses a range of characteristics, abilities, and skills necessary for a person to achieve his or her high purpose of reaching the ideal of the unity of a human being and Heaven.

First of all, the author stresses that profoundness is not inborn or inherent in only a few people. On the contrary, anyone can become a profound person through learning, adopting certain practices, and perfecting them throughout his or her life. Being profound does not mean exceeding the limits of human nature in a supernatural manner. In fact, the way of a profound person may not be so different from the way of a common person. Being profound, among other things, means getting to know yourself through close observation, which is not an impossible thing to do.

Profound people may do the same things common people do. However, they do them differently. Where a common person simply eats, a profound person eats and knows the real taste of the food; where a common person walks, a profound person walks with a purpose and a destination. Tu Wei-ming stresses, however, that the difference is not quantitative but qualitative. A profound person perceives things on a different level, thus becoming able to understand more.

A key aspect of being profound is watchful over oneself when alone. Profound people explore themselves courageously, and the exploration of self turns out to be a tool for a better understanding of other people and relationships among them. A profound person is not only attentive to himself or herself but also to the world around. It is about the ability to be cautious of something that one cannot see and apprehensive over something that one cannot hear. Practicing observation, exploration, and attention makes a person more aware of the way things are and more mindful of the way they go. This is how one becomes profound.

The fact that there are so few profound people despite the fact that everyone can become profound indicates that profoundness requires a lot of inner strength and constant dedication to learning about oneself and the world around. Yet, how do we know a profound person from a common one if their ways may be similar? There is a paradoxical combination in a profound person: simply realizing his or her nature as a human being, a profound person achieves a level of existence that no common person can achieve. That is why the uniqueness of profoundness is not about the structure of a persons way but about how this way is integrated into ones life. Overall, it can be said that profound people understand their ways better, thus having a purpose that most people do not have. The world constantly provides us with experiences that we are challenged to comprehend, and we should take these chances to find an inexhaustible source of developing into wiser, more understanding, and more profound people.

Tu Wei-mings writing is straightforward and denseit immediately provides readers with many ideas and concepts to comprehend. However, it is also clear and appealing, allowing readers to learn about complex notions of Confucianism even without a background in studying it. The concept of a profound person is explained succinctly and thoroughly, illustrating the authors effective delivery style.

Introduction

Edmund Husserl is believed to be one of the greatest rationalist philosophers of the early 20^th century. During the Nazi regime, the scholar studied and analyzed most of the predicaments that appeared to trouble every European citizen. The events experienced during this period confirmed the challenges that had been encountered during the Great War (1914-1918). These historical developments forced this philosopher to describe the state of Europe after the Renaissance period. This paper uses Husserls thoughts to analyze the crisis of Europe, its roots and consequences, and the best approaches to deal with it.

What Husserl Means by the Crisis of Europe

According to Husserl, European science after the Renaissance era had taken a dangerous path. This was the case because the nature of universal science had been misunderstood by mankind. The scholar argues that the existing level of success within positivistic sciences was its failure. This kind of science had fallen short of the true meaning of consciousness in the universe. Consequently, Europe as a society had misconceived the meaning of man (Hopkins 2011). For several years, Husserl was keen to observe that the field of science in Europe had missed the fact that it ought to be rooted in the human spirit. Due to this kind of failure, it was quite evident that Europe had marked its breakdown. This is something that remains a major crisis in the world today.

Over the years, scientific inquiries in Europe did not accept the nature of ideological and philosophical positivism. Many analysts and scholars did not focus on critical human questions in an attempt to make them part of any scientific approach. This means that man should always be a subject matter whenever pursuing the natural sciences (Husserl 1975). Due to this kind of malpractice, science in Europe continued to become less relevant and insignificant.

He contrasts the existing situation with the common ideas of the Renaissance era. Husserl (2014) asserts that this period was characterized by true science that focused on the best approaches to shape the future of Europe. Unfortunately, Husserl strongly believes the new age had emerged whereby science had very little (if any) to contribute to the nature of spiritual-human subsistence.

This kind of predicament has been fuelled by the fact that man has been concentrating on the exactness of science. Consequently, the pre-modern Aristotelian model that supported a true unity between nature and science has become obsolete. Due to the nature of positivism, scientists in Europe have managed to come up with an inauthentic exactness (Husserl 1975). This means that modern science has been pursuing things as mere objects, thereby making them subjects for systematic approximations.

These developments have created a humorous scenario whereby science has ignored the reality of the universe or the world. This ought to be the true nature and purpose of positivism science. The emerging field has failed to address the broad questions and tenets of philosophy. This analysis, therefore, reveals that reductionist objectivization is a critical problem that has failed to support the true rationale of universal science.

In a nutshell, humanistic sciences in Europe have ignored the laws of natural ideology (Hopkins 2011). This kind of failure in human reason has created something referred to as a dualistic philosophic impasse (Hopkins 2011). Consequently, a gap has developed between subjectivist idealism and inexperienced materialist realism in the world. This is the 20th-century predicament or crisis that has led to the alienation of every European citizen.

European Crisis: Roots and Consequences

The origin of the crisis outlined by Husserl can be clearly understood by focusing on what he believes to be the true nature of idealism. After the collapse of the Renaissance ideology, this philosopher indicates the concept of positivism ignored (or missed) the real meaning of science. This is the case because the idea of I was taken for granted. As a result, the majority of the rationalists in Europe during this period came up with a new approach of positivism that failed to focus on critical questions of human thought (Husserl 1975). Consequently, the positivist approach was unable to support the arduousness of true philosophy. This is the reason why the field has not been successful.

The end result is that the current field of European scientific inquiry lacks the origin or true knowledge that is founded on universal laws. Additionally, this kind of development has resulted in a critical problem since man is treated differently in the field of science (Husserl 2014). The intimate human value and subjectivity have appeared to escape the concept of reduction.

Husserl also observes that the above malpractices and ignorance of humanistic values have created diverse sciences that are unable to address the unique challenges affecting the global society. It is also evident that the positivistic approach to humanistic sciences has affected the integrity of this field in Europe. He goes further to give the example of psychology as a humanistic science. Husserl indicates that philosophy has failed to support the rules of nature in its endeavors (Husserl 2014). This scenario has created numerous problems whereby scientists focus on shallow fields while at the same time ignoring the true purpose and relevance of science.

Additionally, the situation has created the right environment whereby scholars and rationalists continue to be blinded by the idea of naturalism. This means that philosophers have been unable to use a universal (or humanistic) approach to come up with theories that can be used to pursue scientific inquiries in the finest sense (Husserl 2014). This gap is used by Husserl to explain why it has become impossible for European thinkers and analysts to embrace the power of spirituality and use it to focus on the self-centric universe. Spirit, according to Husserl, is something that should be taken seriously by true scientists in order to describe the exactness of the world.

In his work, Husserl goes further to assert that the positivist approach embraced by European rationalists has led to an artificial interpretation of scientific phenomena. This means that mankind continues to apply different exactitudes inappropriately. Since more individuals no longer understand spirit from its natural sense, they have been unable to develop meaningful ideologies, theories, and/or explanations (Husserl 2014). Consequently, an illegitimate inquisition continues to be pursued by many scholars. This predicament is, therefore, used by Husserl to explain why humankind continues to leap into an abyss characterized by alienation and absurdity.

Many societies have recorded increased levels of alienness due to the ignorance of their own spirits (Husserl 1975). This kind of absurdity has created a wider problem that affects mankind. The right explanation, according to Husserl, is that human sciences have been disjointed from the true meaning of human nature, spirit, and life. More individuals have lost their spiritual entelechy. This scenario makes it impossible for them to describe events and happenings from a scientific-natural approach. This crisis has swelled to create disastrous events and pains that echo the attributes of a closed society. From these happenings and outcomes catalyzed by the crisis described by Husserl, it is clear that barbarity is gazing at humankind unless something is done.

From this analysis, it is evident that Husserls predictions came to pass. The nature and problem of the Second World War (an upheaval that claimed the lives of millions of people across the globe) can be likened to the barbarity that was foreseen by the philosopher. This was the case because different scientific inquires and theories had embraced a positivist approach, thereby ignoring the principalities and meaning of spiritual righteousness (Husserl 1975).

The concepts embraced by many scientists after the collapse of the Renaissance era appeared to have resulted in a deviation from the true purpose of philosophy. Fields such as mathematics, philosophy, and science led to the establishment of artificial thoughts that made it impossible for man to live in an open society. This was the case because humanity appeared to have been separated from the realm of the spirit.

Husserls Attempt to Contribute to the Resolution of this Crisis

After describing and analyzing the nature of this crisis that continues to affect Europeans, Husserl does not hesitate to offer meaningful insights that can be considered to transform the situation. From a rhetorical perspective, the philosopher argues that the lived worlds door has been locked by mankind. However, he acknowledges that it can be opened if a man is willing to establish a new form of consciousness with the surrounding environment or world.

Husserl begins by encouraging scientists to embrace the concept of spiritualism whenever pursuing their goals. He believes that they should be willing to become philosophers first in order to have total control or access to their ideologies. This means that such scientists will be on the frontline to ask real questions about the true purpose and existence of man in the universe (Hopkins 2011). By so doing, every scholar will be ready to come up with superior conceptions that have the potential to benefit humanity and its existence.

The rationalist goes further to link science to positivism. According to him, science (true scientific inquiry) should go beyond the idea of the factual assertion. This strategy will ensure that positivistic divisions such as psychology are rejoined to the concept of universal science. This is the reason why the philosopher proposes a European unification whereby the concept of science is pursued as a normative attribute (Husserl 2014). The scholars acknowledge that a new strategy that guides humanity to a common pole of infinity will address this kind of crisis and promote realistic perceptions.

From this analysis, it is quite clear that Husserl manages to diagnose this critical predicament facing Europe. He goes further to offer a powerful therapeutic approach that has the potential to transform the situation and take the world back to the Renaissance era. This formula or approach is workable since it envisions a new form of philosophy that should be pursued as a scientific model. The strategy will eventually address the needs of the universe. Hopkins (2011) acknowledges that the remedy proposed by Husserl is meaningful since it borrows a lot from the concept of cogito. This is an approach where ideas are pursued without the inclusion of the material world. This means that the notion of spiritualism will become critical in order to inform human thoughts and ideologies.

The main information gained from this kind of solution is that societies should be ready to engage in natural confrontation. They should also focus on the issues that affect them without pursuing materialistic gains or ideas. This approach has the potential to mitigate most of the challenges that have been caused by the nature of this crisis. The resultant closed system has caused numerous pains that make it impossible for many people to lead their lives from a naturalistic point of view. Hopkins (2011) uses Husserls ideas to explain why man is required to retrace his connection with God and establish a new world that supports every persons demands. This approach will minimize most of the challenges affecting the modern-day world.

Conclusion

This descriptive paper has used Husserls concepts and arguments to explain why the departure of science from nature has resulted in a positivistic inquiry that ignores every aspect of the human spirit. This malpractice has amounted to a major crisis that has led to conflicts, unnecessary scientific pursuits, and disoriented populations. The rationalist offers a powerful model whereby man can reconsider the aspects associated with the Renaissance in order to deal with this crisis and minimize most of the existing consequences. By so doing, mankind will find it easier to open every closed door and reconnect with God.

Works Cited

Hopkins, B.C. (2011). The Philosophy of Husserl. McGill-Queens University Press: Kingston.

Husserl, E. (1975). The Paris Lectures. Springer Shop: New York.

Husserl, E. (2014). Ideas for a Pure Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy. Hackett Publishing Company: Cambridge.

The use of the conceptual metaphor is a powerful tool because it reaches the very center of our way of understanding the world around us.

Generally speaking, a conceptual metaphor is defined as a metaphor that is so basic in the way people think about something that they fail to perceive that it is a metaphor (Conceptual Metaphor, 2007). As a result, the connection, once made, is difficult to remove. The concept of the conceptual metaphor is brought forward by Lakoff and Johnson, who were building off the ideas of the Greek philosopher Aristotle. The two scholars add a remarkable twist to the Aristotelian distinction, namely that abstract concepts are linked systematically to concrete ones via metaphor.

They refer to the result of the linkage as a conceptual metaphor (Danesi, 2004: 107). The example provided by Danesi is particularly appropriate for considering the messages of advertising. For example, the expression the professor is a snake is really a token of something more general, namely, the conceptual metaphor [people are animals] (Danesi, 2004: 107).

Thanks to this deeper, innate understanding of the conceptual metaphor, we are able to replace the first domain, the professor, with any representative of the second domain, the snake. So we could say that Wendy is a Bird or boys are beasts and make the same application to the conceptual metaphor. Once the concept is understood, it is easy to apply it to real-world applications such as in the use of advertising.

In Fords commercial for their Escape Hybrid, a conceptual metaphor is invoked as Kermit the Frog works to capitalize on the attitudes and beliefs of parents concerned about the quality of life in their childrens future as well as those who feel responsible for the environment. The advertisement opens with an image of Kermit the Frog singing Its Not Easy Being Green as he rides his bicycle over a rocky trail through brush-covered hills, paddles his way through rushing rapids through a rocky gorge, climbs a steep cliff looking over a pine-covered mountainside and finally parts the leaves of thick, bushy undergrowth to reveal the SUV. He peeks inside, giving the advertiser the opportunity to show off the interior, and then walks around to the back where he sees the word Hybrid stamped to the side.

The song stops as Kermit makes the observation that perhaps I guess it is easy being green. Then he stands there and nods his head vigorously, laughing in joy, as he stands back to look at the car while an announcers voice comes in to tell us this is The 36-mile-per-gallon Ford Escape Hybrid.

The commercial ends with a white screen and the cars name and logo prominently displayed, along with a website address where people can learn more. The website further emphasizes the metaphor presented in the commercial as Kermit, in his guise as a news station reporter, stands by ready to walk the consumer through the various environmentally friendly and human comfort attributes of the companys new 4-wheel drive.

There are several ways in which this commercial works to influence the viewer. To begin with, their use of the character Kermit the Frog both conjures childhood memories for the target demographic, consumers who grew up with Kermit the frog as one of their childhood friends, as well as brings to mind thoughts of caring for the children of the world as the character is still a popular star in childrens programs. The metaphor suggested through Kermits journey in the landscape to the environmentally active consumer, whether through conservation or simple enjoyment and adventure, provides the consumer with a warm feeling for the commercial before the product is even in sight. They feel, for a moment, the love and admiration they felt as children for this character and begin to develop a desire to be associated with it. The song he sings seems to be the lament of the environmentally-conscious everywhere as they struggle to live a healthy, outdoorsy life while still doing the responsible thing for the environment.

At the same time, he addresses, through the symbolic trouble of his journey, how difficult it has been for those wishing to reach the far places to do so without damaging the environment.

Kermits travels through this environment are surrounded by the color green, introducing a great deal of symbolism that appeals to yet other conceptual metaphors. One interpretation of this journey appeals to the metaphor life is a journey both in terms of the individual and of the planet. For example, as Kermit travels a rough and rocky trail on a bicycle, the trail is seen as a dark scar across the face of a beautiful green hillside.

This suggests that its been hard for Mother Earth to remain green with the various stresses that have been put upon her, stresses Kermit is acting out in his own struggles through the commercial.

However, the presence of so much green also begins to suggest that perhaps the world is actually full of green, just waiting for someone to recognize it. This is supported by the fact that Kermits activities and locations are reminiscent of several of the more popular activities people do while on vacation. Vacations, of course, represent relaxation and enjoyment, not the struggle and effort suggested in Kermits song. Finally, the fact that Kermit finds the SUV at the top of the mountain suggests that it was able to overcome all of the challenges he had already gone through during the space of the commercial. The way the truck is parked, on what appears to be an open glade naturally designed for the vehicle, further reduces the idea that it is harmful to the environment, not even leaving the kind of deep scar worn into the hillside by Kermits bike.

Not only is it environmentally friendly and frog-approved, but it is also spacious and rugged as well. By simply announcing the name and the gas mileage, the advertiser gives off the impression that this is all a person needs to know about this vehicle to make it worth buying. The metaphor that has built up between the frog and the consumer is now transferred over to the truck, making it a natural match for the buyer.

Through the use of the conceptual metaphor, a relationship is developed between the product being advertised, the spokesperson, and the consumer base that is difficult to ignore because of the depth of the relationship formed in the space of a 30-second commercial. The consumer watching the commercial quickly identifies with the frog on TV as he echoes their lament from a variety of viewpoints. From the busy city wife who works to recycle everything to the active outdoorsman who uses his weekends to participate in the activities presented, the age group being targeted recognizes Kermit as one of their childhood friends and trusted buddies and the connection between them is re-forged. At the same time, empathy for the environment is encouraged as Kermit highlights the many things there are to appreciate in nature through his song. When he finally reveals the product being advertised, his hearty approval of the truck acts as a bridge from the consumer to the truck, transferring to the truck all the positive attributes that have been suggested through Kermit and the consumers identification with him. This is a process that occurs under the surface of the thinking mind in the space of seconds thanks in large measure to the deep structures of cultural identification and the process of the conceptual metaphor.

References

Conceptual Metaphor. Open Politics. (2007). Web.

Danesi, Marcel. A Basic Course in Anthropological Linguistics. Toronto: Canadian Scholars Press, 2004.

It Aint Easy Being Green. (2006). Ford. Web.

The history of Christianity cannot be complete without mentioning such aspect as religious orders. The religious orders throughout history had a great impact on the major historical events in general, and the flow of Christianity in particular. In terms of influence and longevity, two orders should be mentioned, the Franciscan and Dominican orders. This paper examines the aforementioned orders in terms of their foundation, differences in mission, and their success.

Foundation

The foundation of both the Franciscan and the Dominican orders might be related to visions of deficiency and problems in the Christian system that both orders sought to solve, specifically with the rise of heretical groups. The foundation of the Dominican order was traced to Domingo de Guzman (Saint Dominic), who thought that in order for the church to succeed the extensiveness of preaching should be increased, combined with apostolic life. Thus, the reason of the foundation can be seen in increasing trained and educated preachers. (Hinnebusch)

The Franciscan order, was established to promote Jesus way of life, which Francis followed through apostolic poverty, forming a brotherhood of followers. The brotherhood then grew into three distinct orders, The First Order was for men (brothers and priests, called friars); the Second Order was for cloistered nuns (Poor Clares); and the Third Order was for lay men and women, married or single, and the secular clergy. (Brief History of the Secular Franciscan Order)

Mission

Generally, it can be stated that the Dominican and the Franciscan orders mission was similar, in terms of promoting Church reforms. The Franciscan order saw this reform through observing the holy gospel of Jesus Christ, living in obedience without anything of ones own, and in chastity. (Burr) The Dominicans also followed poverty, although among their mission was preaching, where the order put an emphasis on education as a weapon against heresy. Thus, the education the poverty of the order followers might have been adjusted to the orders mission, in order to achieve proper education; The prelate shall have power to dispense the brethren in his priory when it shall seem expedient to him, especially in those things that are seen to impede study, preaching, or the good of souls.(Hinnebusch)

Reflection

The accomplishments of their missions can be seen in their relative reform that they presented to the Church at that time. With the introduction of commerce and trade, the orders attempted to return to the humble way of life. Nevertheless, both orders in addition to the missions of preaching had participating in the inquisition, where some of the Dominican writers, Moneta of Cremona, Bernard Gui, and Nicholas Eymeric, inquisitors themselves, prepared guidebooks for their colleagues. (Hinnebusch) Thus, it can be seen that they achieved similar degree of success, although Franciscan goal of living in poverty might have been put in question, that led to the division of the Franciscan and ultimately declaring it as a heresy to hold the opinion that Christ and the apostles divested of proprietary rights. (Hinnebusch)

Conclusion

It can be seen that the Franciscan and Dominican orders had a prominent effect of the history of Christianity. The occurrence of both orders, as well as other orders was related to the situation in the Christian world at the time. The fact that both orders still exist and function in the modern life today, although with reformations and changes made through their history, is an evidence of the lasting impact of their main goals and missions.

Works Cited

Brief History of the Secular Franciscan Order. 2009. Saint Clare Fraternity Secular Franciscan Order. Web.

Burr, David. Medieval Sourcebook: The Rule of the Franciscan Order. 1999. Fordham University.

Hinnebusch, William A. The Dominicans: A Short History. Dominican Central Province.

John Calvin due to the several aspects of his approach to philosophy can be correctly identified as Augustinian. The teachings of the Catholic Church on free will and predestination are doctrines postulated by the Doctor of Church St. Augustine. Calvin also focused on these doctrines as the center of his teachings on free will and predestination. This paper presents arguments to substantiate the theory that Calvin is Hyper Augustinian so far it relates to the teachings on free will and predestination. Its arguments will include scripture references and some of the reflections of Augustine and Calvin.

John Calvin can be categorized as a Hyper Augustinian with regard to his teachings on free will and predestination. Some of the doctrinal teachings contributed by Augustine to the Church are absolute predestination where he propagated concepts like; the person does not have free will; God commands impossibilities; one cannot understand whether one is saved etc. God has bestowed upon us. Hence we are ever dependent on him. (Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion 118). Calvins teachings on free will have been greatly influenced by the doctrines of Augustine. Augustine remarked that man has no free will, and stepping on this doctrine Calvin presented as if the man had no free will since he is predestinated. If the man is not free, he is determined and God must have predestination. Therefore, it can be stated that Calvin has a hyper dependency on the doctrines over the free will of Augustine. The arguments that are drawn to substantiate this statement are given below:

Human beings are predestinated. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life and others for ordained to everlasting death. (Wesley, 153). In Augustines, view salvation of the soul is not a gift to everyone and God chooses souls whom He loves. According to Calvin, some are chosen for salvation by the grace of God and some are damned to eternal punishment. Both Augustines and Calvins theories have the same perspective on the predestination of souls by God. Angels and some humans are chosen or predestinated by God before establishing a foundation in the world. They will be protected by God like a hen protecting chickens under its wings. References for the predestination from the scripture are used by both of them and a review of some principles has been done in order to substantiate the views that Augustine has been an influence on Calvin. After Adams fall (Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion 118) the whole of humanity was cursed. God created Adam and Eve in His own image and commanded him not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. (Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion 121). From the moment of violating this command, Adam and whole humanity were banished from paradise, became cursed and were thrown into a miserable condition. According to Paul, disobedience was the beginning of all evil while Augustine says that pride is the first evil in the history of humanity. Augustine says that all have broken Gods covenant in that one in all who has sinned. (McNeill, 123). The point is clear that the consequence of sin is the transmission of sin from Adam to all subsequent generations. Therefore, we can say that all of humankind is predestinated and their fate determined. St. Paul is of the view that all are subject to corruption not of their own will (Roma 8:20) (McNeill, 122). Paul speaks that even though we wish to do good things, we may end up doing bad, quite contrary to our will. God has chosen some persons and a group of people as His own. Calvinists speak that God gives it to some only not others, because he has absolutely, unconditionally predestinated them to life before the foundation of the world (Wesley, 152). In the scripture, we see many people who were chosen for salvation by Gods will. Abraham, Moses, Jacob, prophets and disciples are among them. The chosen people were selected before the foundations of the world. God will not choose all human beings but only a selected few to receive the bliss of salvation. God loved Jacob and hated Esau. Augustine and Calvin are of the same view: God chooses some people for salvation and condemns some people for eternal punishment. It is clear that our salvation comes about solely from Gods mere generosity. (Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion 134). Calvin tells that all persons are not born for the same purpose  some are for eternal life, others are for perpetual punishment. God chose and led a group of people called Israel with the call of Abraham. He appointed Moses as the pastor and leader of Israel not considering other humans. He has not dealt thus with any other nations and has not shown them his judgments [Ps.147:20]. (McNeill, 142). From these perspectives, it could be stated that God has a special consideration or call for some individuals and groups and thereby God has predestinated a segment of humanity while god has passed over the rest.

Humankind does not have free will. Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also called; and whom he called, them he also justified; and whom he justified, them he also glorified. (Calvin on free will, para.2). Therefore, Calvin thinks that humankind does not have free will. Mankind is not able to do good and righteous things of its own volition. Augustine is of the opinion that everything is dependent on the grace of God and it becomes valid when we negate the fact about the free will of humankind. Calvins theory borrows the idea from Augustine that God has foreknowledge of everything and some are saved and some are not. All souls are completely given to sin because of commitment of original sin and some are saved because of the unconditional grace of God. According to Augustine, Whether a man is a guilty unbeliever or an innocent believer, he begets not innocent but guilty children for he begets them from a corrupted nature. (Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion 126).

From these arguments, we can infer that grace is a gift of God for the chosen people, which the showers on them unconditionally, through the Holy Spirit. St. Paul also states that salvation is the grace of God, which is not showered according to the merit of the individual but as a gift of God. The desire for good things and even faith in God are also grace. Every good and perfect gift, therefore, is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, (James i. 17,). (Disputation 11, para.14). According to the teachings of Augustine, without grace men do nothing good when they either think or wish or love or act. (Question 109: The Necessity of Grace, para. 4).

Augustine is of the opinion that humans cannot wish for good without grace. No man can come to me, except the Father draw him. (John vi. 44.). (Disputation 11, para.10). This shows that God has a plan for everyone in the world. The statement of Augustine is very clear that we cannot wish for a good thing without the grace of God and Calvin is also of the same opinion on unconditional grace of God without which we cannot wish anything good. Without the knowledge of God, no one can reach God; so each and every deed is known to God. God is the same forever and for Him yesterday, today and tomorrow are like the present moment. At the same time, there are criticisms against this doctrine. What the critics argue is that humankind has the intellect which is shared by God. Since mankind shares the intellect of God he can wish for good things as God wishes. So every individual is the master of his own actions; he is the master of wishes.

Humankind cannot avoid sin without grace. Augustine says that mankind was able to sin and not to sin. Now, too, whatever a man will is given to him; but his willing good, he has by Gods assistance. (Question 109: The Necessity of Grace, para. 10). It brings one fact into light that whenever humans think to do good things and avoid evil, it is the grace of God. From this fact we can understand that individual does not have freedom and everything is determined and predestinated. This is what exactly Calvin also argues. If one has the grace of God he will keep receiving it forever even if he does not have faith in God. Therefore, it transpires that Gods grace is unconditionally showered on the chosen people.

Augustine and Calvin are of the same view on free will and predestination. Both of these scholars argue for the predestination of God and they say that everything is the grace of God which is showered unconditionally on selected people. Absolute predestination and man does not have free will are the doctrines of Augustine who is the Doctor of the Catholic Church. These doctrines are the basis of the teachings and works of Calvin. The basic point in the absolute predestination doctrine of Augustine is that some people are saved by God, but on the other hand He condemns some for eternal damnation. Humankind is not able to understand the criteria used in this judgment. This is what exactly Calvin says going one more step beyond that  the selected people will be saved forever even if they are not believers. On the free will of humans, Augustine remarks that humanity does not have free will to do good and righteous things. Humanity does good only thanks to Gods grace. Calvin also has the same opinion with regard to this doctrine. Based on these facts and inferences, it can be concluded that Calvin could be called hyper Augustinian with regard to the cohesive nature of their doctrines and teachings regarding predestination and free will of individuals.

Also, there are similarities in the teachings like humanity cannot avoid sin without the grace of God, individuals cannot wish for the good without the grace of God. This doctrine is criticized in the philosophical platform. The literature says that humankind is created in the image of God. Therefore, we share elements of God that qualify us to participate in His work. Since God has the sovereign power to do good, we also share this ability in Him. So, this philosophical thought argues that we are the masters of our deeds and thoughts. Augustines and Calvins teachings on free will and predestination reflect similarities. The central ideas of Calvin are borrowed from the teachings of Augustine. A careful analysis of the arguments given above brings out the fact that Calvin is influenced by the teachings of Augustine and thus can argue that John Calvin is Hyper Augustinian.

Works Cited

Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion. Ed. John T. McNeill. Trans. Ford Lewis Battles. Philadelphia: The West Minister Press, 2009. Print.

Calvin on Free Will (From Institutes of the Christian Religion). Web. 2009.

Disputation 11: On the Free Will of Man and Its Powers Respondent: Paul Leonards. Works of James Arminius 1. Christian Classics Ethereal Library, Web. 2009.

Jackson, Wayne. John Calvin and Grace: Unconditional Grace. Christian Courier, 2001. Web. 2009.

McNeill, John T., ed. Calvin: Institutes of Christian Religions. The West Minister Press.

Question 109: The Necessity of Grace: Article 2: Whether Man Can Wish or Do Any Good Without Grace. New Advent, 2008. Web.

Question 109: The Necessity of Grace: Article 8: Whether Man Without Grace Can Avoid Sin: Reply to Objection 3. New Advent, 2008. Web.

Wesley, John. The Struggle with the Calvinists. Ed. Albert C Outler. Oxford University Press, 1964. Print.

The Renaissance is the period of European history marking the waning of the Middle Ages and the rise of the modern world: usually considered as beginning in Italy in the 14th century. This period progressed in all countries of the European continent and made its contribution into different spheres of the human activity including painting, literature, sculpture, music and other fields.

Such aspects as the spirit, culture, art, science, and thought of this period are considered to have peculiar features. Characteristics of the Renaissance are usually considered to include intensified classical scholarship, scientific and geographical discovery, a sense of individual human potentialities, and the assertion of the active and secular over the religious and contemplative life. The period of development and prosperity of the Renaissance embraces the epoch from the 14^th century and to the 17^th century. It began its history in Italy and spread to other European countries.

The period of Renaissance is remarkable for the attempts to restore the previous magnificence of the Ancient epoch. Due to this various branches of human activities followed the principles of the ancient authors. Thus the works of Michel de Montaigne Essays and the Novum Organum written by Francis Bacon are vivid examples of the works inspired by the Renaissance epoch and the whole flow.

The Novum Organum, one of the most important works written by Lord Francis Bacon, it is oriented on the ways and methods of cognition, learning, acquiring knowledge about different aspects of the world. As the epoch of Renaissance was famous for the thirst for knowledge, Bacon was trying to still this thirst by way of improving the organization and methods of acquiring the knowledge about the nature, to simplify the knowledge and methods of acquiring it.

All the political and philosophical works of this author were the result of the emerging scientific spirit of the scholar. The Novum Organum is the source of methodological and scientific approaches towards the research, investigation, and discoveries conducted in order to acquire knowledge.

Meanwhile Michel Montaigne in his work the Essays which was originally translated as Attempts represents the new vision of the contemporary world, the society, social structure, the governing power, the fundamental issues considered from the point of view of Western thought; his works reveal the aspect of skeptical thinking. In his work, he made an attempt to differentiate between human beings and animals by way of assigning the domination of mankind over the world of animals. One of the aspects concerns the social and moral domination of European people over uneducated people of the neighboring continents.

The process of thinking was considered a labor-consuming one by Michel Montaigne but, consequently, a pleasing one. The process and results of thinking is one of the characteristic features of that period, Montaignes well-known expression What do I know? introduces the desire to know more, to acquire knowledge as well as the major work of Francis Bacon reveals the thirst for knowledge, the emerging scientific spirit. The main difference lies in that Bacon wanted to accumulate knowledge in the unique domain, whereas Montaigne expressed uncertainty about the possibility to attain the absolute truth.

Thus both authors are the representatives of the Renaissance epoch and its brightest expressions which lie in the desire to acquire knowledge, the new methods of thinking and the representation of thoughts. Bacon is very radical in his decisions and Montaigne makes unsteady attempts to acquire knowledge.

Works Cited

Montaigne, Michel de. The Essays: A Selection. London: Penguin classics, 2004.

Bacon, Francis. Novum Organum. Chicago: Open Court, 2000.

Introduction

Miracles are something that human beings always want to believe in, but what scholars, philosophers, and scientists try to dismantle. In other words, being a purely religious phenomenon, a miracle is doubted by those who actually doubt the very essence of religion and the fact of the existence of God. One of such philosophers is David Hume, a famous Scottish thinker known for his skepticism and critical attitude towards things.

His essay Of Miracles reflects his ideas about the God and miracles stating that they both are fictional: Humes main argument went something like this. Miracles are contrary to human experience. Thus, they cannot occur (Jackson, 2003). Drawing from this, the very plot of the essay by Hume is developed in order to convince the readers that the individual practical experiences of people are worth more than the evidence and words by those who allegedly saw or experienced miracles. Thus, the present paper focuses on the consideration of Humes ideas in order to assess and analyze them.

Main Points

To start up the discussion of the arguments made by David Hume in his essay, it is necessary to outline the basic directions in which the author places his ideas:

In reading David Humes famous essay Of Miracles it is important to realize that his discussion is about the credibility of testimony about miracles. He does not address the question of whether miracles themselves are possible. His question is whether we can ever have good evidence on the basis of what others tell us to believe in miracles (CHSBS, 2006).

Thus, the ideas that David Hue touches upon in his work basically concern the factor that might make human beings believe in a miracle based on the evidence that anyone else can present in an oral or written form (Earman, 2000). Hume states that it is rather unwise to believe what another person tells you about a miracle; it is much better to recall ones own experience and based our belief or rejection of this miracle on what we ourselves can say or prove about it.

Such a point of view is supported by several arguments that David Hume sees as much more credible than the ideas of other, especially religious, thinkers: Hume says that experience gives us a full proof of the future existence of that event (CHSBS, 2006). Thus, the author attributes the primary importance in the thinking and understanding processes of any person to the experiences that this person possesses (Hume, 1784).

On the contrary, those who believe in the Biblical dogmas and miracles described in the Scripture are bound to be mislead as their opinions are thus formed emotionally but not rationally: Our evidence, then, for, the truth of the Christian religion is less than the evidence for the truth of our senses; because, even in the first authors of our religion, it was no greater (Hume, 1784). Based on this, the very role of religion in the world is diminished, while the fact of the existence of miracles is more than doubted  it is rejected, but not completely. According to Hume, a person can believe in a miracle if only he/she has experienced one in their own lives, but not based on someone elses words.

Queen Elizabeth Argument

One of the best examples of Humes arguments aimed at proving his point of view about the impossibility to believe in a miracle which is not supported by practice of experience is the so-called Queen Elizabeth argument (Earman, 2000). Its essence lies in the comparison of two unlikely-to-happen things in one of which Hume is more inclined to believe. The first one is the announcement that on January 1, 1600 all the Earth will be covered with darkness for eight days, while the second one is the message of the resurrection of Queen Elizabeth who died on January 1, 1600 but then appeared again to resume her throne and rule till 1603 (Hume, 1784).

David Hume states that he would rather believe in the first miracle as his previous experience allows him to do it: The decay, corruption, and dissolution of nature, is an event rendered probable by so many analogies, that any phenomenon, which seems to have a tendency towards that catastrophe, comes within the reach of human testimony, if that testimony be very extensive and uniform (Hume, 1784).

Thus, if the occurrence is at least approximately credible, Hume would believe it, but the fact that a dead person becomes alive again is absurd and it is impossible in the nature: I should rather believe the most extraordinary events to arise from their concurrence, than admit of so signal a violation of the laws of nature (Hume, 1784). Thus, assuming the existence of miracles on the whole, Hume advocates those miracles, which are at least weakly supported by science, knowledge, experience, etc.

To evaluate such an argument from the positions of a modern person, it is necessary to state that nowadays it is impossible to imagine a person with the rational mind, who would believe in the resurrection of Queen Elizabeth in 1600 (Earman, 2000). Nowadays, the things that were considered to be miracles in the 18^th century are possible but only due to the advances of science. Drawing from this, and taking into account the fact that during David Humes lifetime these technological and scientific advances were not yet familiar to the mankind, the argument by the author seems rather reasonable (Earman, 2000).

David Hume goes ahead of his time to reject the purely mythological belief in miracle to bring the miracle of science and human experience into this life: I must confess that I should be surprised at the concurrence of so many odd circumstances, but should not have the least inclination to believe so miraculous an event (Hume, 1784). Thus, the argument by David Hume sounds rather credible, and despite of the fact that scholars like Jackson (2003) call it not valid (Jackson, 2003), it is the argument that allowed human beings to belief in science and depend on it in developing the things that seemed to be miracles for centuries, like for example flights of people, reanimation of those experiencing the clinical death, etc.

Conclusions

To conclude, David Humes essay Of Miracles reflects his ideas about the God and miracles stating that they both are fictional. The author uses clear and precise arguments, like the comparison of Queen Elizabeths resurrection with the darkening of Earth, to convince the readers that the individual practical experiences of people are worth more than the evidence and words by those who allegedly saw or experienced miracles.

Reference List

CHSBS 2006, David Hume Of Miracles, Cmich. Web.

Earman, J 2000, Humes abject failure: the argument against miracles, Oxford University Press US.

Hume, D 1748, Of Miracles  From Section X of An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Millenium Project. Web.

Jackson, W 2003, David Hume and Miracles, Christian Courier. Web.

Introduction

Dualism is a very old theory that has its roots in the Greek culture. According to the Greeks, the spirit of a man is supposed to be distinct from his physical body. According to them, the soul and the body do not have any contact with one another. In reality, Greeks termed the body to be a hostage abode of the soul. This means that dualism is not just another number in the Greek order of words. Its a theory that basically refers to the dividing of the soul and the body in to two distinct parts. This paper expounds on the meaning of dualism and discusses different philosophies contained in this theory. It then gives an evaluation of the theories discussed and finally concludes by explaining why Cartesian Dualism has become obsolete. (Schick 650)

Main Body

Rene Descartes who was born in 1596 is the founder of psychology as we know it today. Descartes believed that the soul only inhabited the body that he termed to be automatically controlled. To him, one did not need to tell people that they had a body but they had to defend the presence of their soul. In reality, this means that one can not deny their presence. According to Descartes, both the body and the soul had their origins from two different places. Where the body parts could be separated from each other, the soul could not. He claimed that the soul is in every part of the body and that if the body was transformed in any way this could not affect the soul. Descartes termed this distinct difference between the body and the soul as dualism. At a later date, this came to be known as Cartesian Dualism.

There are different philosophical points for Cartesian Dualism. One argument is what is known as substance dualism. Substance dualism states that every one of us has an immortal part which may be termed as the brain. After the brain there is the substance part which is the physical body. According to Descartes, the human mind functions autonomously from the physical body and can not be destroyed if the body suffers harm. He argues that all our actions are conceived in the soul and not from the body. According to Descartes, the soul can be altered to give it a new form. He says this is due to the fact that the mind like all substance matter can undergo change.

Descartes argues that the mind has been created by God distinctly from the soul. To prove his point, he gives the example of a substance that can exist separately from another. He argues that the mind is different from the body in that they both play different roles at the same time. This is in like a case where ones mind would be busy listening to a particular topic while the body is doing other things. According to Descartes, this clearly proves that God created the body and the mind differently from each other.

Another theory is that presented by the materialists. To them, everything is physical. Though they do not deny the existence of the human mind, they believe that everything can be explained in physical terms. Unlike dualism which states that the body and the mind are different identities, materialists state that the human mind is just a physical matter that can be explained. In short, to materialists a mind is just a different mindset for a particular time of period.

Like any theory in philosophy, the Cartesian Dualism should be maintained by argument. Its also supposed to explain some things which are considered to be a puzzle. Dualism has been objected on these grounds. One objection that people have voiced is on conceivability ground. Descartes states that whatever the mind conceives becomes true. He asserts that everything is possible if it is conceived from the heart. This philosophy has been contested in that some things in life can never change even if we changed our mindsets concerning it. An example of this is like someones name that can never change even if we imagined they were someone else.

The part that states that one can envision his body from his mind has also been objected. Analysts have disputed this on the basis that the picture of an evil spirit that Descartes describes is not viable and cant be applied in real life. It is clear that the mind interacts with the body at a certain point. How this happens still remains a mystery. In reality, a theory tries to explain a complex matter but dualism does not answer this mystery.

Over time, dualism has lost the support of many philosophers. This is due to its unpopularity among many people today. Philosophers term it as irrational since it fails to address matters pertaining to the mind. They however support materialism which they find to be more open in addressing the subject of the mind and the soul. Where dualism is vivid in many areas, materialism is clear on most matters of the soul and the body.

Conclusion

Though Cartesian Dualism has been a good way of explaining matters of the mind and the body, it has been found to have many limitations in its implementation. One clear point that has been objected is on the idea that the soul and the body are entirely different. Besides this being technically impossible, there is no satisfactory explanation for this point. Another part that has been a subject of debate is on the idea that when a soul conceives something, then it has to be true. Many people instead prefer to support materialism which they find to be more adoptive.

Works Cited

Schick, Theodore& Vaughn, L., 4^th ed. Doing Philosophy: An introduction Through Thought Experiments, McGraw-Hill, 1.1(2009): 645-668.

Introduction

It has been argued over the years, whether to judge people based on their deeds, irrespective of their intentions. When this is done, they are subjected to judgments based on their actions, without considering if they are responsible. It is quite easy to note that people have different reasons for their actions, even though some are inborn and come from within their genes like behavioral tendencies, examples are those born with internal peace and dislike violence at all cost and the ones who cannot do without violence. In this context, the people are considered irresponsible of their acts, however, since they have done them, they are judged based on success or failure (Pojman, 1999, pp. 83-102). An example is the Homeric King, whose followers ,according to Pojman, judge based on their performances in battles, if they keep succeeding, they are termed as arêtes, meaning virtuous and when they fail irrespective of their competency, they are considered aischron, meaning shameful. This does not lie in evaluating their strength against the opponents; they must win at all costs to be considered successful. This paper will seek to assess critically, Pojmans argument that people should strive to make a world in which the arêtes are rewarded while aischons are punished according to the level of their offence (Adkins, 1960, p. 32).

Merit is defined as the things resulting from good deeds, according to most sources. It also refers to those things that result from good thoughts as well as behavior. They are considered to have the capability of contributing towards, ones liberation and overall personal growth (Goodin, 1985, pp. 575-598). Moreover, Merit is considered transferable to a deceased to lessen his/her sufferings in a new life and this is according to the Shitro practice. Pojmans concept of merit lies based on positive attributions like praise, rewards while demerit is a feature of negative attributions, and brings with it penalties as well as other kinds of punishments. He also argues that people do not work to gain the societal advantages they find, for example, Kings are born, and find themselves in the royal family; they do nothing to earn it and therefore call these non-deserved merits. These merits are associated with physical endowments, color of skin, type of skin, type of personality, the basic intelligence a person possesses and other features like good looks (Adkins, 1960, p. 32).

Pojmans Argument

Having categorized merits and demerits as shown above on whether they are deserved and undeserved. Pojman argued that people should therefore strive to make a world in which those who are virtuous are rewarded while the vicious are punished for their deeds on their proportions. This has raised vigorous debate on his stance (Pojman, 1999, pp. 83-102).

Discussion

First, it is quite important to relate his views on the subject, he specifies merit in two categories, those that are deserved and those that are not. Again, he categorizes demerits in the same way, the deserved and undeserved. It is clear from this point that some peoples undeserved demerits hand them disapprobation while on the other hand, those with merits get noticed and even rewarded (Pojman, 1999, pp. 83-102). An example is in rewarding the most handsome or beautiful, the ugly, who in this case convey an undeserved demerit, will be disapproved, for nothing out of their choice, but natural. This is unfair, because when one is brought into this world, he has no chance of choosing where to be born or how, as well as his features. Unfortunately, this is the trend in this world, Kings are born in royal homes, and the beautiful captivates the world for reward while, those with misfortunes of demerits get pushed aside and risks further shame if they try to complain.

People should not be punished for what they do not deserve it is very unfair. On the other hand, there are Merits that are deserved and are earned by each and everyone who tries; examples of these are behavioral changes, from bad to good, despite having undeserved demerits, people can change their ways of thinking and behaviors, to earn merits, rather than demerits. This is very crucial for their development and determines how they respond to the world. This then should follow Pojmans stance, because these are merits and demerits people are able to control and even change. Therefore, they should be rewarded and punished accordingly to help build a better world. Pojmans argument should therefore apply to those features that can be controlled (Pojman, 1999, pp. 83-102).

Conclusion

Pojmans stance on rewards or gifts for demerits and punishments or disapprobation for demerits is a reflection of what is observed in reality. But I am partially convinced by it implications, those who have nothing to do with demerits associated with them should be embraced and instead strengthened, it is quite unfair and cruel to punish someone for what he/she is not responsible (Adkins, 1960, p. 32). However, this should apply only to those with demerits that are automatic and cannot be controlled. For those that can be earned, like respect, obedience, among others, those who ignores them should be punished, to help make better world. This way, everyone will rejoice in his natural features, as he/she will be embraced, while at the same time they will be building a better world by pursuing merits, thus making the world a better place to live in.

Reference List

1. Pojman, L. (1999). Journal of Social Philosophy. Blackwell Publishers. Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 83-102.
2. Adkins, A. W. H. (1960). Merit and Responsibility: A study in Greek Ethics. Chicago. University of Chicago, p. 32.
3. Goodin, R. (1985). Negating Positive Desert Claims. Political Theory. Vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 575-598.