“Above all it is thus that we can acquire the virtue of humility, and that is by far more precious treasure than all academic progress. From this point of view, it is perhaps even more useful to contemplate our stupidity than our sin.” These words of wisdom imply that the success of learning is not to elevate a person’s ego, but rather teach them humility through enhancing their understanding of the world. This appears to be the ultimate outcome of thorough academic engagement that reflects a person’s ability to acquire a certain degree of critical thinking and reflexivity. I am inclined to agree with the main idea expressed by the quotation. In my opinion, humility is a virtue that helps an individual become motivated and complete. Through this key quality, one can understand how their grow further in terms of personality. A humble individual will never overestimate their own skills and performance, meaning that they will remain in a constant pursuit of improvement. Furthermore, humility is a virtue that directly counteracts pride as the deadliest of sins. By exercising humility, a person acts by God’s design.
When it comes to this quality, it is often opposed to success in both academics and career. More specifically, one may assume that humility negates confidence, preventing an individual from fulfilling their potential. For example, promising opportunities may be declined by a humble person simply because they do not consider themselves fit for this position. As far I am concerned, this point of view does not reflect the truth. Humility and success are not notion that are mutually exclusive. One the contrary, they complement each other, creating a strong unity, in which humility enables success and does not impede it in any way. In other words, this virtue should be opposed not to confidence but to arrogance. Humility creates room for self-analysis and critical thinking, keeping an individual engaged in the enhancement of their skills. It enables a realistic understanding of the strengths, as well as the points of growth, which ultimately contributes to the natural development of the academic success and career.
In James 4:6, it is said: “But he gives us more grace. That is why Scripture says: “God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble.” This message reflects the aforementioned vision of humility as the primary tool against the pride. The latter feeling is detrimental, it poisons the soul and pushes a person toward rash, unreasonable decisions. A proud person is often disrespectful of others, showing no love or compassion because of their clouded judgment. This characteristic does not align with an image of a successful and educated person that is evoked by Weil. An individual who truly excels in academics, learning the subject in all its depth and complexity will be humble and methodical in their development. This way, they truly fulfill their purpose as the conduits of God’s will favored by the Lord.
The virtue of generosity has been in place throughout western tradition although there were different arguments about the name. A broader perception reflects hospitality, charity, and love. The concept has always involved significant religious questions about the nature of God, Humanity, and the human-divine relationship. Generosity was initially perceived as a way of nobility in the early days of the 16th century. As asserted by the Free Methodist Church (23) “it was an aristocratic sense of being primarily in the linage of the noble or high birth”.
Analysis
The analysis of this study is aimed at studying the perception of generosity and trying to find out if generosity can be learned or it is just an inborn character trait. Generosity can be simply defined as a virtue of giving good things to other people by own free will and profusely. Generosity can also be conceived as a learned character trait with the involvement of a person’s attitude and action. Thus one becomes inclined to give out things freely. It is, therefore, appropriate to say that generosity is not just a mere random idea or a jumbled behavior but it’s more of a moral course of life. In a world full of contrasting morals, generosity involves rejecting vices like greed and selfishness at the same time entailing moral good that is expressed (Machan, 58).
Generosity does not only entail giving out things profusely, but it has more to do with giving out things that will benefit other people. The main idea behind it is to improve the well-being of the person receiving what is being offered. However, there is a difference between generosity and pure philanthropy. This is because at times people tend to be authentically generous with vested interests in mind.
The general idea of teaching virtues comes from the American Indian perception of the universe as living things relate intimately and they affect each other by attributes called “universal attributes”. All the noble living creatures that display virtues like courage, humility, and patience, keep these intimate relations for natural harmony. This is aimed at creating awareness that human relationship with nature is reciprocal (Carden, 45).
Reliable studies have indicated that it is quite possible to teach children, especially at an early age the value of generosity. Children can develop pro-social behaviors through modeling. If children are guided well at an early age they will develop generosity as if it were an inborn trait (Machan, 82). The theory of social learning states that moral judgment in children can be easily modified when a good adult model is used.
Studies also suggest that an individual can be neurologically manipulated to act generously. This procedure involves using oxytocin on the subjects. The researchers also found out those individuals who were given oxytocin via a neurotransmitter became more generous after the procedure (Machan, 87). This was a significant breakthrough in the world of science having the ability to instill a certain character trait that has been perceived to be an inborn character for numerous years.
Conclusion
Generosity should always be a genuine act for it to be learned and practiced. It should be practiced for the good of others to achieve one’s long-term good. At times generosity can be confused with philanthropy but the distinguishing factor is that generosity is supposed to be beneficial to the receiving party without any vested interest, while in philanthropy one can give out something that will be beneficial to the receiving party but have vested interests. Lastly, generosity does not necessarily have to be an inborn trait, but rather anyone can be trained or can learn how to be generous. It can even be instilled scientifically.
Works Cited
Carden, Stephen. Virtue ethics:Continuum Studies in American Philosophy, New York: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2006.
Free Methodist Church. The Science of Generosity. Web.
Machan, Tibor. Generosity: Virtue in Civil Society. Boston: Cato Institute, 1998.
This paper looks into Montesquieu’s treatment of virtue as it is practiced in an ancient republic. The paper indicates clearly what Montesquieu understands virtue to be and how it is cultivated. Further, the paper discusses in what ways Montesquieu’s account can be understood as an attack on what Aristotle had said in his Ethics and Politics.
In conclusion, this paper points out that some governments are more stable and thus more desirable than others. Balancing between public good and private good in a democracy is more complicated. Therefore, Aristotle’s premise that aristocracy is a better form of governance still holds water.
Practice of Virtue in Ancient Republic
In “The Spirit of the Laws, Montesquieu provides an explanation on how people come up with laws and how they develop the different social institutions within which they develop and grow. Montesquieu differentiates between two types of laws. On the one hand, there are the physical laws that are instituted or put in place by God.
As for human or social laws, Montesquieu argues, they are purely positive i.e. created by human beings based on their experience of the world and are subject to error (Montesquieu 10). Given social institutions are also based on positive thinking, Montesquieu points out that the same are bound to be limited by human error or oversights and hindsight in human thinking.
He argues that laws practiced by different nations or republics confirm the idea that human laws are purely positive and are subject to human error. Therefore, in trying to understand any human laws or laws that govern the republic, one cannot fail to contextualize or understand as per given context.
The context matters a lot because circumstantial issues dictate the kind of laws or the inclinations of a people. Different societies live in circumstances characterized by different climates, soils, and do different socio-economic activities (Montesquieu 14).
Therefore, in coming up with laws or principles to guide behavior, they necessarily peg them on their way of life. The laws or principles that guide behavior also are meant to respond to the situation and cannot be otherwise. It is for this reason that Montesquieu calls for a more appreciative approach even towards laws that may seem rudimentary or perverse. He argues that such laws understood in the context or situation in which a people live, they make sense or will be found to have served a given clear purpose.
One key thing that should be observed or appreciated about all republics is the extent to which they allow their law abiding citizens to exercise their own free will and act freely. However, we need to notice that every country or republic only allows freedoms as enabled by its context i.e. the situation informs the laws that provide a framework within which citizens are able to exercise their discretion or freedom.
Looking at republics this way, Montesquieu argues, one will be able to find sense even in the rudimentary laws and regulations put in place. Each law or regulation is put in place as informed by a people’s situation to give guidance in terms of what is possible and what is not possible. Therefore, it can be argued that positive laws help in determining what is considered as virtuous or good conduct given certain prevailing conditions.
Based on what has been presented so far, Montesquieu justifies or rallies for appreciation of rules and regulations exercised even under a monarch. His argument is that, even under what many may perceive as a backward form of governance, the established rules or codes of behavior make sense and serve a given purpose.
One would argue blanket that monarchism and other forms of authoritarian governance are likely to lead to despotism as the monarch or authoritarian regime misuses power. Such a notion holds true but Montesquieu advises that reform to any laws in such a republic can only be based on well-founded understanding of the laws or principles upon which such a government operates.
To reform the monarch or any republic, the reformer has to start by understanding the context or situation that informs the existence of principles upon which such an entity operates. Such appreciation helps towards understanding what exactly needs reform and in what way reform has to be constituted. Instituting reform from this kind of perspective ensures that the new structures fit into a context and respond to circumstantial or situational factors that define the dynamics in a given republic.
Montesquieu points out that governance can take three forms (Montesquieu 21). The first form of governance is the republic government. The republican government can either be democratic i.e. a government where the people (general populace) are key decision makers or aristocratic i.e. where an elite few govern the rest.
The second form of governance is practiced by monarchies and in a monarchy, the exercise of power is vested in certain tribes or families and instruments of government are hereditary. The final form of governance identified by Montesquieu is despotism. Despotism is a form of governance characterized by a monarch or any other leader not following established laws in ruling or governing the people.
Therefore, laws or established principles are critical in determining whether a government rules a republic effectively or not (Montesquieu 23). For Montesquieu, there is no good or bad form of governance as each form can become bad depending on whether the rule of law is established or not. Even in the most widely desired form of governance i.e. democracy, unless there are clear established laws that are followed, chaos and problems are likely to be the order of day.
Virtue according to Montesquieu
Each government can only work best if it pegs governance on given virtues. Virtue according to Montesquieu is not natural principles or codes discernible in nature. Rather, virtue as exercised is a conscious human choice or preference of one way of behaving or given interests over others. Like Aristotle, virtue for Montesquieu consists in moderation between extremes.
For instance, in a democracy, governments have to peg their operation on the virtue of balancing between what the majority want and the interests of specific individuals i.e. balance between opposing public interests on one hand and private interests on the other hand (Montesquieu 39). In the balance between public and private interests, Montesquieu points out that virtues consists in preferring or advancing public good or interests over personal or private good and interests.
Therefore, at the heart of good or well functioning democracies is the virtue of patriotism i.e. being able to put the country or nation first before other individual interests.
Such virtue i.e. the virtue that enables individuals to put public good first over private or individual interest, desires or good, education is very critical (Montesquieu 35). For Montesquieu therefore, virtue is cultivated through education. Through education, people are helped to appreciate the need to subordinate their interests to the interests of the nation. Apart from education, Montesquieu advocates for use of censor.
Montesquieu seems to have been greatly excited by monasteries and how they do their things. Monks, are helped through education and conditioning to love their order more than they love themselves. To keep untainted and uninfluenced by the outside world, monks seclude themselves and keenly censor everything that enters and leaves the monastery. The same can be applied in a republic through the government instituting education that imparts selfless patriotism and censoring everything that could be of influence to the citizens.
A government has to censor what the children or citizens in general learn. By censoring, the citizens are protected from outside influence and can thus stick to their tradition, principles or way of doing things. Other measures that can be taken to cultivate virtue have to do with property rights. Montesquieu reckons that unless there is equal distribution of resources, people will not remain loyal to their country (Montesquieu 24).
He thus advocates for legislation that governs acquisition of property to ensure equitable distribution of resources in a nation. Moreover, Montesquieu argues that nations ought to be small territories as opposed to big vast empires. In a small territory, people are able to identify with each other and private interests are more easily tamed.
The virtue of balancing private and public interests in a republic can more or less be understood in the context of Aristotelian moderation. Public interests and private interests are two extremes and to succeed, balance has to be struck between the two. However, the balance is not at the midpoint but rather tipped towards promotion of public good or interest over private good or interest.
The balance is critical because individuals should not advance their selfish interests at the expense of their fellow citizens (Montesquieu 43). However, there is also need to allow for some form of inequality given absolute equality is not possible. This means that even in the determination of public good, it does not follow that everybody will have his or her interests catered for in full measure. On the contrary, such equality is not possible thus need to focus on fair and rational proportionality.
Attack on Aristotle
The exercise of moderation makes even a monarch or an aristocracy a good government. An aristocratic government is acceptable in as long as the ruling elite are able to moderate between their individual interests and the public interests. Therefore, moderation would require restraint from the aristocrats such that they put public interest first over their personal desires and interests.
The same applies to monarch i.e. as long as they follow well established rules that define how power is exercised and executed, honor and sense of belonging associated with monarchs should guide each citizen, included the nobility, to act in a way that subordinates individuals interest to public interest or good.
Such governments are desirable and good as per the circumstances or context of a people. What should be abhorred are despotic governments in which a few impose their will, interests and desires on the citizenry or where the citizenry do not tame their aspirations thus jeopardizing the operation of law.
Montesquieu’s argument appears to be a direct attack on Aristotle. Both agree that virtue is in moderation. However, the two differ in terms of what makes a government good or bad. For Aristotle, justice or fairness as a key virtue that should guide political or governance can only be well executed by the aristocrats.
For Aristotle, the aristocrats have the wealth, education and virtue that enables them to rule properly. For Aristotle, democratic governments are bad because the citizenry are of inferior virtue i.e. they do not have the capacity and will to move away from extremes and choose the mean.
Montesquieu is in disagreement with this notion and argues that through education, all can develop or can be helped to appreciate virtues. Secondly, Montesquieu holds that good governments are those based on the rule of law; the forms they take are dependent on situations and circumstances. Each government operates based on given principles that best respond to situation or circumstances.
Possible rebuttal by Aristotelians
Montesquieu would be challenged by an Aristotelian on the basis that what he propositions is kind of utopia i.e. too idealistic. He argues that virtue can be cultivated through training and censorship. Realistically, not all people are able to achieve the same level of understanding. Therefore, it would be best to leave the best educated, those who have power to enforce virtue to rule. Secondly, discovering the public good or interest in itself is dependent on personal interests.
Finding a balance between the public good and private good is not easy and is likely to result into chaos. Therefore, democracies are not good governments. Such an argument would be pegged on the understanding that democratization has been encouraged all over the world. However, democratic processes e.g. elections tend to create more despotism or chaos in the world than if people subjected themselves to the rule of say aristocrats.
Works Cited
Montesquieu, Charles de Secondant, The Spirit of Laws, Ed. Cohler, M. Anne, Miller Basia Carolyn, and Stone Harold Samuel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989
No matter how diverse religions and philosophies might be, there always is a common thread with each of them. In every single religion of philosophy, there is a specific code of conduct that is considered to be self-rewarding and is promoted as an example for all adepts to follow.
Though there is a great gap between Confucianism and any other religion – in fact, Confucianism is often referred to rather as philosophy than religion – one can still observe the traces of the above-mentioned common pattern.
Like any other teaching, Confucianism offers the one and only correct code of conduct, which is supposed to help one shape an Ideal person within.
Analyzing some of the aspects of an “ideal person” concept in Confucianism, one can possibly draw parallels between the Confucian and the Buddhist models of correct conduct.
According to Bresnan’s interpretation of Confucius’ postulates, an ideal person from the standpoint of Confucianism is a “junzi,” or a “perfect man.” To be more exact, a Confucian ideal person has a strong connection to nature: “Man is a part of nature” (Bresnan 230).
However, merely being able to relate to nature is not enough to become a truly Confucian ideal of a person; according to the postulates of the teacher, one has to reach the state of a natural order.
Meaning the state of balance between a person and the rest of elements of the universe, the given concept might seem somewhat idealistic. On a second thought, however, the given concept of an ideal person leads to harmony among people, as well as harmony between people and nature.
In addition, a Confucian person is supposed to be dignified and righteous, as well as respectful towards parents and elderly people. Junzi, the “gentleman,” is, therefore, a man who treats the rest of people with respect, according to Confucius’ postulates.
Compared to Confucianism, Buddhism offers a rather different picture of an ideal person. Incorporating 36 ideal features of Buddha, the Buddhist concept of an ideal person is defined in much more details.
While the Confucian concept of an ideal person concerns social aspects, such as the treatment of the others, social ranks, etc., the Buddhist concept of a “perfect man” concerns personal development.
According to Buddhist philosophy, an ideal person is the one who has reached the Enlightenment. Hence, Buddhist concept of a “perfect man” presupposes that perfection comes from spiritual development rather than from the social one.
Hence, it can be concluded that Confucianism and Buddhist offer rather similar models for personal development.
Since the adepts of both strive for growing into an ideal person, it is clear that the process of learning will never be finished, since there will always be something new to learn as long as one cognizes the world and continues developing.
It could be argued, though, that in Buddhism, it actually is possible to cognize the absolute truth and reach the phase of Enlightenment.
In addition, the Buddhist Eightfold Path is actually split into much more steps; offering 32 stages of personal development, it can be considered a more complicated concept.
However, since both Confucianism and Buddhism strive for offering the path to becoming an ideal person, it must be admitted that both introduce an idealistic approach towards human nature.
Works Cited
Bresnan, Patrick. “Confucius and Confucianism.” Awakening: An Introduction to the History of Eastern Thought. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. 2012. Print.
One of the first large-scale research projects of the positive psychology movement was the VIA – Values in Action project. The issues addressed by this project are related to the nature, structure, degree of integrity, dependence on cultural conditions, values, as well as opportunities and ways of developing the character in the most successful way. The authors identify two different levels of analysis – virtues and strengths.
Main body
The virtues are those values that are recognized as fundamental and unconditional in all or almost all cultures and societies. In order to determine them, an analysis of the most authoritative fundamental moral and philosophical texts of different cultures was made. As a result, six general cross-cultural virtues were identified. They are derived from historical reviews of the development of both Western and Eastern ethical thought. The virtues are described as universal and most abstract concepts in the scheme (Miller, 2018). Their generalization also contributes to the misunderstanding of the scheme; for example, Miller (2018) noted, there is no specific relationship between character strengths and virtues, nor has the unity of all virtues been defined.
In further analysis of each of the fundamental virtues, the personality traits or strengths of character that concretize it was identified. The basis for their selection was the analysis of more specific literature, namely from the field of psychiatry, youth problems, character formation, research organizations, as well as psychology, philosophy, and religion. Strengths are lower-level psychological components, structures, or mechanisms that specify core values, or virtues, different ways, and means to achieve them. Niemiec (2019) proposed six functions that strengths served in opportunities and adversities and described each of them in detail. According to him, these six functions of priming, mindfulness, appreciation, buffering, reappraisal, and resilience offer perspective on the vicissitudes of life (Niemiec, 2019). Also, according to Seligman (2015), the absence of strengths may be a real mental illness.1 As he claimed, “while the 24 strengths are the ‘good’ in a person, their absence, their opposite, and their excess are the ‘ill’ in a person” (Seligman, 2015, p. 6).
However, the different factors of definition and classification of strengths are questionable. Miller presented a range of these factors, among which the incompleteness concern can be noted, indicating that the list of character strengths is incomplete and some important positive traits could be missing (Miller, 2018). In his view, there is also the conflict concern, which points out that some strengths can seemingly conflict with each other. However, McGrath (2019) stated that the degree to which completeness is a reasonable goal is vital to consider as well. Regarding the conflict concern, only the general character of the person matters, since specific actions directly depend on a given situation.
Conclusion
The following conclusions can be drawn from the review above. The current system of classification and measurement of character traits has controversial points but is generally recognized in the field. It is not trying to replace the DSM mental disorder classification system entirely, and most likely only complements it. In general, this scheme is aimed at the need to balance the predominant emphasis on deviations, problems, and diseases, typical for psychology in almost the entire XX century, with close attention to the positive aspects of personality and its functioning. Most likely, with the appearance of more research, this classification will undergo some changes in the future towards completeness and universal acceptance.
References
McGrath, R. E., (2019). Refining our understanding of the VIA Classification: Reflections on papers by Han, Miller, and Snow. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 14(1), 41-50, doi: 10.1080/17439760.2018.1528382
Miller, B. C., (2018). Some philosophical concerns about how the VIA classifies character traits and the VIA-IS measures them. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 14(1), 6-19, doi: 10.1080/17439760.2018.1528382
Seligman, E. P. M., (2015). Chris Peterson’s unfinished masterwork: The real mental illnesses. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(1), 3-6, doi: 10.1080/17439760.2014.888582
Footnotes
1 Seligman is referring to the words of Peterson C.
The dialectic between virtue and Fortuna is central to Machiavelli’s thought. What does he mean by virtue? What does he mean by Fortuna? How does their relationship influence human politics? Can humans ever overcome Fortuna? If so, how? If not, why not?
Niccolò Machiavelli’s writings show Renaissance ideas in their most original forms, especially his realistic and objective approach to human characters. Many critics believe that Machiavelli has a great influence on the new political system in which politics and ethics have a great rift. Machiavelli expressed his political arguments based on his observations and ideas. In his views, Machiavelli developed the political principles of virtù and Fortuna.
Main body
Machiavelli provided opportunities to scholars and readers to understand a political system purged of irrelevant influences of ethics in order to comprehend the basis of politics in useful use of power. Virtù captures Machiavelli’s idea of power and politics. The Italian word, virtù would mean ‘virtue’ in English and would express the usual meaning of moral goodness (Mansfield, 1996). However, Machiavelli had a completely different meaning of virtù when he addressed the Prince. Specifically, Machiavelli uses the idea of virtù to reflect different personalities that the Prince will acquire in order to “maintain his state and achieve great things” (Fischer, 2000).
From this statement, we can note that Machiavelli did not relate virtù with conventional virtue in society. According to Machiavelli, the Prince had to behave in any fashion as the situation required. Under a given political condition, the Prince could not divorce a moral viciousness from the scope of possible actions in which he had to undertake. In general, Machiavelli’s idea of virtù rests on his recommendation to the Prince that the Prince had to acquire a “flexible disposition” in order to protect his state and conquer new territories. Therefore, a leader could only suit the role by adopting different conduct of good and evil “as fortune and circumstances dictate” (Machiavelli 1965, 66).
The concept of virtù is also in Machiavelli’s The Art of War in which he highlights “the strategic skills of the general, which change in various battlefields as the prevailing war circumstances dictate” (Machiavelli 1965, 66). Machiavelli viewed politics and war as one in which the same virtù could apply. The ruler had to possess the same virtù as the war general. In other words, a ruler should know the suitable strategies for any prevailing circumstances.
In this regard, Machiavelli viewed virtù as power, which rulers had to possess for practical aims. The ruler had to use power competently. Thus, any ruler who had virtù must have mastered all methods, which involved the effectual use of power. Therefore, Machiavelli’s virtù was political power and not the conventional virtue of people who believed in moral good. In other words, virtù represents the core of success in politics.
Machiavelli introduced another principle of Fortuna in order to relate the effective use of power and virtù. In normal translation, Fortuna would mean ‘fortune’. However, Machiavelli viewed Fortuna as a threat to the safety of a state and could not support a political course. Scholars have debated the idea of Fortuna without much success or agreement. It is appropriate to claim that Machiavelli intended to use Fortuna in the same manner as virtù (King, 2004).
Conventionally, people considered Fortuna as benign and could provide both good and evil to people like a goddess of human beings. Machiavelli’s Fortuna is a harmful and rigid source of chaos, suffering, and misery to human subjects. Human Fortuna could help a man achieve success. However, Machiavelli noted that a man could not achieve success if the goddess opposed him (Machiavelli 1965).
Machiavelli explored the idea of Fortuna in Chapter 25 of The Prince. In this approach, Machiavelli recommended two concepts when faced with an event. In the first approach, Machiavelli claims that fortune is like:
“one of our destructive rivers which, when it is angry, turns the plains into lakes, throws down the trees and buildings, takes earth from one spot, puts it in another; everyone flees before the flood; everyone yields to its fury and nowhere can repel it” (Machiavelli, 1965, p. 92).
However, Machiavelli believes that people have the ability to control the furor of a raging river. In other words, people can take precautions and divert unwanted effects from nature. Machiavelli made the same observation about Fortuna as follows, “She shows her power where virtù and wisdom do not prepare to resist her, and directs her fury where she knows that no dykes or embankments are ready to hold her” (Machiavelli 1965, 90). Machiavelli shows that people can resist Fortuna, but only in situations where virtù and wisdom have prevailed and ready to face it. Therefore, Fortuna is like a woman whom rulers must control (Pitkin, 1984).
Machiavelli draws a strong comparison between Fortuna and blind forces of nature in order to reinforce the concept and show that success in politics relies on the effective control of the concept of Fortuna. Machiavelli claims, “it is better to be impetuous than cautious because Fortuna is a woman, and it is necessary in order to keep her under, to beat and maul her” (Machiavelli, 1965, p. 92). According to Machiavelli, rulers must keep Fortuna under control through violence because that is what it demands.
In fact, Machiavelli goes ahead and claims that “She often lets herself be overcome by men using such methods than by those who proceed coldly, therefore always, like a woman, she is the friend of young men, because they are less cautious, more spirited, and with more boldness master her” (Machiavelli 1965, p. 92). Therefore, such reckless behaviors of Fortuna need violence in order to control it or else, it will take advantage of men who cannot dominate it.
Machiavelli believed that Fortuna was a constant threat to humanity. Therefore, only effective measures could protect humans from the cruelty of Fortuna. In this respect, virtù provided the ruler with options of responding to Fortuna as circumstances dictated (Nederman, 2009).
Politics, according to Machiavelli and Plato, has two opposing approaches. Plato believed that a ruler must rule through moral virtue. Conversely, Machiavelli believed in virtù i.e., whatever was best for the state was acceptable. In The Republic, Plato shows that ethics and politics are one. On the other hand, Machiavelli believed that rulers had to protect and conquer new territories. This assertion justified the ruler’s action by doing whatever is appropriate to protect the state regardless of ethics (Skinner, 2002). However, Plato did not support unjust rulers.
In The Republic, Plato opposes a ruler who has absolute authority over the subjects:
“In practicing a skill, we do not aim to go beyond, but only to hit the right point. Virtue is a kind of skill, and this requires knowledge of what is the right measure. The unjust man, therefore, is not exercising much of a skill, is he? Nor is the tyrant doing much of a job at ruling” (Plato, The Republic. 349E, p. 35-36).
Plato insisted that a good ruler had to know the proper note whereas unjust rule often went beyond it, which often led to self-destruction and destruction of states.
In dealing with the idea of ethics and state, Machiavelli adopted earlier works of Latin and Greek scholars. Machiavelli believes that the duty to protect the state is paramount for leaders. For instance, he claims, “A Prince, therefore should have no care or thought but for war, and the regulations and training it requires, and should apply himself exclusively to this as his peculiar province; for war is the sole art looked for in one who rules” (Machiavelli, p. 70).
Contemporary leaders have adopted the ideas of Machiavelli in order to facilitate the utilitarian needs of their states. According to Machiavelli, virtù is important than virtue in relation to the needs of the state. We have to recognize that Machiavelli looks at elements of successful leaders and the consequences of failure to protect the state. He also presents mercy and cruelty in a manner that makes subjects believe that what may appear cruel is necessary for the state.
Virtù may facilitate violence in a society if it has to justify the end. In his explanation, Machiavelli warns leaders to separate moral issues from politics. From the arguments of Machiavelli, we have to note that cruelty and politics are one, and politicians may be dishonest for the sake of their own good or the state. Therefore, absolute honesty cannot help politicians, and Machiavelli tells the Prince to shun it. He notes, “for there is no way to guard against flattery but by letting it be seen that you take no offence in hearing the truth, but when everyone is free to tell you the truth, respect falls short” (Machiavelli, 1965). Machiavelli notes that a good leader should have some advisors, who can speak freely about issues and advise him on matters of the state. However, the leader must only make a self-judgment on such issues.
Machiavelli raises moral dilemmas to leaders but wisely avoids a trap by providing alternatives to rulers (Deitz, 1986). For instance, Machiavelli considers whether subjects should “fear or love a ruler, but he notes that it is difficult for a leader to be both feared and loved” (Machiavelli 1965). This suggests that a leader must not be in this dilemma. In this case, a leader must exercise self-control in relation to subjects in order to maintain power.
Politicians must understand what is off-limits for them i.e., subjects’ women and property. In other words, leaders who seek subjects’ women and property for their own benefits are actually brewing hatred and contempt from subjects, and such actions ruin leaders. However, this does not make Machiavelli a moral advocate. Instead, this is a moral obligation, which aims to protect the ruler from the wrath of its citizens.
Therefore, Machiavelli’s political ideas are far from ethics that a good leader should possess, at least according to Plato. Plato warns that the “creation of evil is not an accomplishment of justice, but a failure of justice” (335 D, P. 15-16). According to Plato, leaders should not advocate for war. Instead, war indicates a failure of the justice system. On the other hand, Machiavelli believes that leaders must protect and conquer new territories.
Plato and Machiavelli express two different political views because they lived in different times. During Plato’s time, ideals and principles of society created utopia conditions in which leaders focused on how states could be and not how they were. This created an ideal society.
On the other hand, Machiavelli presented the reality of his time. Thus, there was no ideal world in Machiavelli’s time that Plato discussed. Machiavelli is an unethical political thinker who looks at politics in terms of necessities of the state rather than issues of ethics in his political thoughts. If we have to look at the way and the end of Machiavelli’s political thoughts, then we have to note that such political thoughts of Machiavelli lack moral virtue.
Machiavelli notes that leaders must establish their principality, and this should be their ultimate goal. Such political thoughts are precise because they show what a leader can do in any given situation rather than advocating for good or bad moral while the situation demands otherwise. Therefore, a leader will act in the best interest of the state and preserve its principality. In this scenario, issues of good or bad conducts do not have any relevance in state affairs. Therefore, the conventional virtue of moral good that leaders should possess changes to the concept of Machiavelli’s virtu’, which can put a leader in a moral dilemma.
Conclusion
The relationship among virtu’, Fortuna, and political thoughts show that principality demands whatever is necessary from a leader, which can be at odd with virtue and fortune. Fortuna is a dangerous force that a ruler must overcome because it has the ability to destroy anything regardless of moral or immoral attributes. Therefore, a good political leader must not abide with the moral virtue, but use virtu’ in order to control Fortuna for the best interest of the state.
References
Deitz, M. (1986). Trapping the Prince: Machiavelli and the Politics of Deception. American Political Science Review, 80, 777-799.
Fischer, M. (2000). Well-Ordered License: On the Unity of Machiavelli’s Thought. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
King, R. (2004). Machiavelli: Philosopher of Power, New York: Harper Collins. New York: Harper Collins.
Machiavelli, N. (1965). The Chief Works and Others, A. Gilbert (trans.). Durham: Duke University Press.
Mansfield, H. (1996). Machiavelli’s Virtue. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Nederman, C. (2009). Machiavelli. Oxford: Oneworld.
Pitkin, H. (1984). Fortune is a Woman: Gender and Politics in the Thought of Niccolò Machiavelli. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Plato. (1578 ). The Republic. Geneva: Henri Estienne.
Skinner, Q. (2002). Visions of Politics: Renaissance Virtues, Volume II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Francis Hutcheson, a famous and respected Scottish philosopher, is well known for his contribution to the fields of political rights, liberalism, and human nature. His activities and theories had a significant influence almost all around the world, and they were especially crucial for moral sentimentalism. The philosopher’s writings are mostly concentrated on human nature and promote a natural benevolence as opposed to Hobbes’s egoism and Pufendorf’s reward and punishment system.
In his book, An Inquiry into the Original of Our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue, Hutcheson supports the sensibility and internality of beauty, giving one argument for each. First, since pleasure is necessary and immediate, and it discerns beauty, this discernment becomes sensible (Shelley, 2020). Then, Hutcheson does not entirely agree with Shaftesbury regarding the idea of the mind alone being beautiful and states that the five external senses are insufficient for the discernment of beauty. Thus, perception of beauty is only a specific kind of internal sense that is irrational and has nothing to do with knowledge.
As for the actual proof of its discernment, Hutcheson does not provide it in An Inquiry into the Original of Our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue. However, in An Essay on the Nature and Conduct of the Passions and Affections, he mentions that an internal sense is “one whose ideas arise only if certain other ideas have already arisen” (Shelley, 2020, para. 1.2). Another Scottish philosopher, David Hume, suggests that the usefulness of objects at least in part defines their beauty, while Hutcheson disagrees with this idea since taste judgments are disinterested and usefulness perception is interested.
As for me, I find Hutcheson’s theories and ideas quite engaging. I agree with his thoughts regarding beauty and usefulness and the lack of dependence between them. Indeed, some objects are just beautiful without being quite useful, while those that are actually useful may not be perceived as beautiful by certain people. What is more, the idea of beauty not depending on knowledge appeals to me. It is not necessary to be aware of an object’s history or purpose to find it beautiful or not.
The world of ancient Greeks is full of mythological implementation that is described in the cultural peculiarities and beliefs of these people. The meaning of arête (manly virtue) is also significant for ancient Greeks, as warlike people. On the other hand, the works of ancient imaginative literature are full of scenes of manly deeds of brave heroes. Homer, Euripides, Sophocles, and other ancient writers and playwrights tried to manifest the real virtues of a man. It was their destination. Moreover, such philosophers as Plato tried to estimate manly virtue by looking at the ideal society described in his works. Moreover, Plato insisted on the tripartite unity of a man in his courage and brevity. All these points along with some glimpses of other ancient writers are described in this paper. Thus, the manly virtue of ancient Greeks was an attribute of the male and female parts of the society that was implemented since childhood and related to the norms of ethics and aesthetics.
The concept of arête (manly virtue) appears in Ancient Greece with the emergence of the aristocracy (800-700 BC) and with Homer’s creation of The Iliad and Odyssey (750-700 BC) (Inyang 51). In this respect, it is vital to admit that the concept of manly virtue was considered not solely with men. It concerned also women. Sophocles and Euripides attempted to illustrate the moderate attitude of women in the ancient society of Greeks. Such general strokes need more evaluation from the artistic, philosophical, and historical viewpoints.
Greek Mythology is an Important Part of World Culture
First of all, it is vital to mention that Greece is fairly considered to be a cradle of philosophical, ethical, aesthetical, and cultural thought. Ancient Greece is graceful for its moral coloring of the society. It is here that civilization appears and impacts further generations of people living in Europe and across the world. Thus, an observer should pay more attention to the heritage of Ancient Greece. Multiple artifacts and historical data point out the highest role of social and moral virtues according to ancient Greeks. Their role for modern humanity is viable due to so many features and norms that the Western world loaned from the ideals of Ancient Greece. It is no wonder that science, art, and philosophy were interwoven in Greek society serving for making progress in it. That is why the reason was above all for ancient Greeks. Their tries and their efforts were directed to securing their attainments in art, social affairs, philosophy, and warfare. That is why the concept of arête was rather significant, as an innovation of Greeks.
Manly virtue (arête) is known to etymologically have grown out of two words Andreia (courage or manliness) and Andres (men) (Kochin 19). This notion identifies the excellence of men in their everyday life. It is not considered to be an automatically acquired virtue. It should have been demonstrated in practice. Manly virtue was rather a gorgeous virtue that was related to what Homer depicted in his brilliant works. Hence, the participation of gods in a man’s life is apparent when a person possesses manly virtue.
The winged words that came to Diomedes in Pallas Athene illustrate a behest coming to him from above, namely: “Be of good courage now, Diomedes, to fight the Trojans: for in thy breast I have set thy father’s courage undaunted” (Homer 53)… This episode directly outlines the main virtue that a man needs to prove his devotion and patriotic love to the country where he lives. On the other hand, it points out the straightforward destination of a man in warlike affairs. This is why Homer wanted to emphasize the feelings of the Greek nation due to his works.
Xenophon, one of the outstanding soldiers and writers of his time, considered manly virtue to be the main peculiarity of a man. The question is that at that time there was no point in the disorientation of what it was like to be a man. Physical attributes did not characterize manliness. Only practical deeds and heroism in war could describe a person, as a real man. Hence, turning to Xenophon, he was known to adore hunting, as “the best school of warlike prowess and manly virtue” (Grant 163). In this exercise, Xenophon saw some prerequisites for making a man out of a boy. There are some similarities between war and hunting. However, the difference is rather apparent while talking about killing people for the survival of Greece.
Polybius describes the similarity between two kings Philippe II and his son Alexander the Great. He states that arête was shared between them equally, but in the case of Alexander, it had manifested itself more graciously (Walbank 133). The concept of manly virtue was also made out as referring to kings. Its royal and noble characterization were discussed not only in literature but also in philosophy. However, it is about time to admit that arête had two explanations as a feature of a man. The first one concerns, as it has been mentioned already, the warlike participation, and the second feature surpasses the civic activity of a man (Kochin 19). It means that a man should represent his mastership in the social affairs of society. In other words, the mastership in rhetoric and oratory skills was also considered with manly virtue.
Oratory skills are greatly illustrated in episodes from The Iliad when Menelaus gathered his army. It is also distinctively illuminated in the philosophical observations by Aristotle. This philosopher tried to implement the idea that in an eloquent speech there are points on personal experience (Cummings 23). Thus, the conception for masculinity in Ancient Greece was divided into two: civic and heroic (Kochin 19). However, one should not think of the civic feature for manliness, as related categorically to being an orator. It is a conception that insists on man’s taking control over his desires and any bursts of emotions that might lead to shame. Plato comments on arête as coming through a long process of punishment and reward. Thus, the philosopher even remarks that manly virtue is the only way for men to be united: “…manly virtue – if this is the quality of which all men must be partakers, and which is the very condition of their learning or doing anything else” (Plato 170)… Such observation of a man bears in mind that it is not that easy to be called a real man with manly virtue. It is for those who can afford it at any time and under any circumstances. This is possible only when a man does not make transgression.
Aristotle highlights the meaning of arête as being a feature for the highest layers of Greek society in ancient times. The philosopher also makes remarks on a king’s devotion o his people: “…for injustice will not be done to the superiors, if they are reckoned only as equal to those who are far inferior to them in arête [manly virtue] and political capacity” (Cited in Cummings 60). Hence, the artistic implementation of arête should also touch upon the political and social affairs serving for particular improvements in the shape of the society. This task is paramount for aristocracy and kings, as a superior. The examples of the main characters in the works of Homer are thought of as the most appropriate to underline the significance of a primordial king’s possession of arête. His (king’s) example should stimulate subjects and people around to follow the principles of manly virtue.
While a part of a man is considered to have roots in civic and heroic conceptions, women were also described in their ability to possess arête. However, in the case of women, arête was concerned with moderation (sophrosyne) (Kochin 19). The figure of a woman plays a significant role in understanding the lives of people living in Ancient Greece. The thing is that women were helpers or assistants to men in Homer’s Odyssey. The example of Penelope is the most brilliant. On the other hand, one should rally thoughts over the concept of the play Antigone by Sophocles.
The idea of the play delineates and makes clear that the significance of century-long traditions is above the king’s command or decision. Creon, the king of Thebes, showed a personal irrational and inhumane attitude to Eteocles’s body putrefying outside. Antigone was rather moderate to all principles of living in Theban society, but her being moderate ended when having confronted such unfair decision of Creon. Her reply to Ismene justifies her, as one possessing arête. It is seen in the very beginning of the play:
Ismene: You’re too rash.
Has Creon not expressly banned that act?
Antigone: Yes. But he’s no right to keep me from what’s mine (Sophocles and Johnston 8).
Another example of a woman’s arête described in the literature is that of Medea by Euripides. Her being disgraced by Jason was the sticking point that made her revenge on him. The main objective that claims for Medea’s righteousness is that she, as a barbarian woman, left her people for Jason. She is described as a devoted and loving mother of their with Jason children. She followed the principles of living within the society of Ancient Greece. However, she was betrayed. This point Euripides points out to be the greatest disappointment of an honest woman. It is a cry of Medea who fairly admits to her children: “May you be blessed, but not here! What here was yours, your father stole” (Euripides 61). All in all, the examples of Medea and Antigone were also outlined by outstanding men of the time in terms of philosophy.
Plato straightforwardly blames the deed of Jason and glorifies the temperance of Medea while he admits: “As to adultery, let it be held disgraceful for any man or woman to be unfaithful when they are married, and called husband and wife” (Plato 193). In this respect, arête considers a man’s responsibility for the family and his manliness to secure faithfulness to his wife. The same is for women as well. Again the example of Odyssey and Penelope illustrate manly virtue in its ideal outlook.
On the other hand, Aristotle tried to lay more emphasis on the figure of a woman as one deserving special feature of character and physical state. Hence, the philosopher points out in a woman such features as “excellences of body, beauty, and stature; of soul, moderation and a love of activity that is not illiberal” (Cited in Kochin 19). The whole reasoning on the place of a woman in the society of ancient Greeks considered direct relation to goddesses. A figure of Athena is especially demonstrative for arête. She is always described with a sword in her hand. Her manly virtue goes together with her being a protector for heroes on battlefields.
Xenophon in his writings underlines a woman, as a “good partner” in every deed of a man (Xenophon 50). One more touch considers the fact that moderation is the main feature that should characterize a woman as having manly virtue for sure. Xenophon did not hesitate to describe a woman in her moderation. It is especially seen in his work Oeconomicus when the young bride says to her destined husband: “What would I be able to do together with you? What is my ability? Rather everything is up to you. My work, my mother said, is to be moderate” (Cited in Kochin 19). Plato provides an opinion that a woman ought to have such virtues, as being “temperate, brave and just” (Plato 19). This makes the whole discussion concentrated on the divine features of a woman who follows such standards of moderation.
The concept of the manly feature was greatly developed in the epic literature of ancient Greeks. Its roots are now thought of as having an applicable character for ancient society. Works by Homer tended to educate society and show how courage and moderation can be shared by men and women respectively. Homer showed the ideal picture of traits of character that should be proper to men. His artistic thought found continuation in plays by Sophocles and Euripides. The character of Antigone illustrates devotion and moderation to traditions. The character of Medea is an example of a woman’s temperance under the circumstance of betrayal. Both stories point out peculiarities of living within Ancient Greece.
Conclusion
To conclude, it is necessary to note that the concept of manly virtue (arête) defined a norm of being courageous and moderate for men and women. Manly virtue of ancient Greeks was an attribute of the male and female parts of the society that was implemented since childhood and related to the norms of ethics and aesthetics. In this respect, one should keep in mind that there were two types of arête among ancient Greeks: civic and heroic. For women, there were conceptions of moderation and temperance. The concept of arête had educational and behavioral functions that were developed in works by Homer. The next stage touched upon philosophical observation of arête in the literature compared to the reality of Ancient Greece. Works by Plato, Aristotle and Xenophon illustrate authors’ seriousness to manly feature, as the most necessary for civilized society. In this respect, the role of a king should have a regulatory character. All in all, manly virtue was absorbed not solely in literature but in philosophical reasoning on social affairs.
Works cited
Cummings, Lewis Vance. Alexander the Great. Santa Barbara, CA: Grove Press, 2004.
Euripides The Medea Or Euripides. Charleston, SC: BiblioBazaar, LLC, 2009.
Grant, Alexander Xenophon. Charleston, SC: BiblioBazaar, LLC, 2008.
Homer. The Iliad. New York: Wilder Publications, 2007.
Inyang, Benjamin James. “Nurturing Corporate Governance System: The Emerging Trends in Nigeria.” Journal of Business Systems, Governance and Ethics 4(2), (July, 2009): 1-62.
Kochin, Michael Shalom. Gender and rhetoric in Plato’s political thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Plato. Dialogues of Plato: Containing the Apology of Socrates, Crito, Phaedo, and Protagoras. New York: READ BOOKS, 2008.
Sophocles and Johnston, Ian C. Antigone. New York: RicherResourcesPublications, 2007.
Walbank, Frank William. Polybius, Rome, and the Hellenistic world: essays and reflections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Wu Zetian was the only female monarch in the history of China, who rose to power due to her distinguished personal qualities and ruled the country for around 50 years. In imperial China, women were inferior to men and were praised for traits that helped them serve their husbands and be worthy of them. Wu Zetian’s character and actions often contradicted the common perceptions of feminine behavior and can be considered as proto-feminist, changing the role of women in society.
Character of Wu Zetian
Wu Zetian was the only female monarch in the history of China. She ruled from 665 to 690 through her husband Emperor Gaozong and her sons Emperors Zhingzong and Ruizong, and then became empress regnant of the Zhou dynasty and ruled from 690 to 705 (Custer 2019). Her reign was characterized by the major expansion of the Chinese empire, a series of wars, important changes in social classes in Chinese society, and state support for Taoism, Buddhism, education, and literature (Peterson 2016). Though ruthless towards her enemies, Wu Zetian was a skilled monarch, and her rule was marked by profound efforts to strengthen the empire and political stability.
Throughout all her life, Wu Zetian had strived for and achieved considerable political power, gradually establishing her authority at court. She was the real power behind the throne for 23 years of her marriage to Emperor Gaozong and usurped the throne after the death of her children. Wu Zetian was described as a well-educated and charismatic woman and a strong political leader (Custer 2019). The traditional folklore portrays her as a determined person, ruthless in her endeavors to grab power, who did not care for who she hurt and what she did (Peterson 2016). She was even suspected of murdering her own child to eliminate her competitor (Custer 2019). Overall, her actions and character provided a contrast to the behavior of women typical for imperial China, and she was equally admired and criticized.
Women in Imperial China
Imperial China was characterized by a strict division of sexes, with women regarded as inferior to men. They were restricted from participation in various realms of social life and generally remained at home while business was conducted by men. Imperial policies prevented women from owning property, taking examinations, and holding office, they were educated separately, and their activities were generally limited to female-specific occupations (Cartwright 2017). The social life was structured according to the Confucian gender principles of the separation of male and female, with women being subordinate to first their fathers, then their husbands, and, finally, if being left a widow, to their sons (Hinsch 2018). Male qualities were considered predominant, and women were praised for their softness, submissiveness, lightness, and gentleness (Juanhui 2015). They were expected to excel in four areas: fidelity, cautious speech, industriousness, and gentle manners (Cartwright 2017). Overall, women in imperial China were supposed to be worthy of their husbands, and it was rare for a woman to have real and recognized power in a social or political arena.
Chinese Ideals of Feminine Behavior
The Chinese ideals of feminine behavior can be observed based on the material from the book Exemplary Women of Early China. It features the biographies of some of the most notable women in Chinese history and provides an overview of the representation of women’s roles in traditional Chinese society. The book is divided into eight chapters based on the characteristics of the featured characters: “maternal models,” “worthy and enlightened,” “sympathetic and wise,” “chaste and compliant,” “principled and righteous,” “accomplished rhetoricians,” and “depraved and favored” (Xiang 2014). The women described in each chapter possess a certain set of qualities that were seen as ideal characteristics of feminine behavior.
The women whose biographies are included in the chapter “The Worthy and Enlightened” are governed by wisdom and righteousness in their actions. The preface notes, “With complete knowledge of the principle of things, they grasp the precepts and rules of the world” (Xiang 2014, 26). Queen Jiang, consort of King Xuan of Zhou, approaches her husband, saying that it is because of her that he has started to neglect his duties, going to bed early and rising late. Her words have an effect, and he changes his habits to devote more time to government affairs (Xiang 2014). The wife of Dazi of Tao leaves her husband because he cares only for his personal wealth while neglecting his duties after trying to reason with him (Xiang 2014). Both women are governed by the sense of duty and put the common good over their personal wishes, which is regarded as sensible and virtuous behavior.
In the chapter “The Sympathetic and Wise,” women are described whose words and actions display wisdom and cautiousness. One of them, the wife of Duke Ling of Wey, correctly guesses who of her husband’s ministers has passed near their tower, describing his most loyal servant. After her husband tells her that she is wrong, she does not argue with him but congratulates him on having more than one loyal minister (Xiang 2014). Her behavior can be characterized as wise, insightful, and cautious.
The women in the chapter “The Chaste and Compliant” are praised for their loyalty to their husbands. The widowed wife of Wey comes to Wey to be married to its ruler but learns that he has died, so she stays in the city for three years and refuses to marry the new ruler of Wey, “remaining true to her diseased lord” (Xiang 2014, 71). The wife of the man of Cai refuses to leave him after he has been contracted a loathsome disease (Xiang 2014). Generally, Chinese women are valued for their devotedness to ensuring their fidelity.
The chapter “The Principled and Righteous” praises women for their righteousness and trustworthiness. The stepmother of Qi is summoned to the king to tell him which of her sons, both of whom are accused of murder, should be killed. She tells the king to kill her youngest son, explaining that the eldest is the son of her husband’s first wife that she promised to take care of, and she will not break the promise. The king, impressed by her good faith, spares both her sons (Xiang 2014). Overall, righteousness, wisdom, cautiousness, loyalty, and virtue are the main characteristics of the feminine behavior valued in imperial China.
Wu Zetian and the Ideals of Feminine Behavior
Compared to the ideals of feminine behavior praised in the Chinese literature, it can be noted that Wu Zetian’s actions only partially relate to them. Chinese women were encouraged to be worthy and enlightened and governed by the pursuit for the greater good in their actions (Hinsch 2018). Wu Zetian was protecting and enforcing her country’s interests while pursuing her own ambitions for power. Chinese women were not supposed to strive for power themselves but only help and support their husbands in their duties, putting common interests before their own personal wishes. Wu Zetian was ambitious and power-hungry, which were the characteristics typically encountered in men.
Another important characteristic of Chinese women was cautiousness. They were supposed to think before speaking and judge wisely. Wu Zetian was more hot-tempered and resolute in her actions, as can be concluded from her descriptions as a strong and authoritarian ruler (Peterson 2016). Her righteousness, however, was not questioned, as she was praised for it, along with her political wisdom and insightfulness (Custer 2019). Her loyalty to her husband also complies with the ideals of feminine behavior of that time to the extent where her political ambitions were not concerned (Custer 2019). She was the power behind the throne and significantly influenced her husband’s political decisions.
Overall, it can be concluded that We Zetian was guided by her ideas of her country’s prosperity along with her own ambitions for power, which was more typical for men than women of imperial China. Modern-day historians suggest that she was no more ruthless than male emperors of that time and was merely a victim of double standards (Peng 2015). In modern literature, Wu Zetian’s life activities and practices are thought to demonstrate proto-feminism and gender equality in sexuality, social status, politics, and women’s pursuit of power (Peng 2015). She can be considered as a woman who revolutionized the common perceptions of women and expanded the Chinese notions of gender roles.
Conclusion
In imperial China, governed by the Confucian principles of gender separation, women were supposed to be inferior to men and display virtue and righteousness without pursuing any political or social ambitions. Wu Zetian’s character and actions contradicted the common perceptions of women. Although wise and righteous, she was ambitious and strived for power, and she achieved it due to her distinguished personal qualities. Her behavior was more typical of men than women of that time and can be regarded as revolutionary in terms of the traditional Chinese ideas on gender.
Jianhui, Sun. 2015. “Ancient China’s “Virtuous” Women.” The World of Chinese. Web.
Hinsch, Bret. 2018. Women in Ancient China. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield.
Peng, Nadya, Tianyuan Yu, and Albert Mills. 2015. “Feminist Thinking in Late Seventh-Century China: A Critical Hermeneutics Analysis of the Case of Wu Zetian.” Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal 34 (1): 67–83. Web.
Peterson, Barbara Bennett. 2016. Notable Women of China: Shang Dynasty to the Early Twentieth Century. New York: Routledge.
Xiang, Liu. 2014. Exemplary Women of Early China. New York: Columbia University Press.
Elon Musk is one of the smartest and wealthiest people on the planet. The engineer is considered the genius of the modern world. Musk achieved everything himself through hard work. Despite a difficult childhood, he stubbornly went forward and reached great heights. The primary mission of the Mask is to help humanity and improve all areas of life. His main virtues are his desire to work and create something new, listening to criticism, not being afraid of risks, and achieving great goals other people would not understand.
Elon Musk faced many difficulties on the way to his current status, but this did not stop him. He started working at an early age, and at the age of 12, he created his first video game. Currently, the engineer works about 80 hours a week and follows the development of his two companies, which is admirable. Musk believes that working harder than others is the most critical key to success because life is short, and a person must do everything possible for a successful existence (Fernholz 16). He maintains that the ability to work should be so high as to achieve what some take years to complete in months. However, Musk says that not everything depends on performance (Higgins 35). The most important is the organization of hard work to achieve results. Musk works hard and does things that are different from many others. He believes that his competition in the market is less this way, and his constant work pays off better (Higgins 35). The engineer focuses on creating innovative technologies with a small number of these products. Additionally, his ability to work depends on his passion for his work. If a person hates his job, he will never achieve high results and will quickly give up. Elon Musk entered the engineering industry with innovations initially not accepted by society (Musk 57). As a result, he almost went bankrupt but could avoid it through hard work. Thus, he listened to the criticism, understood his risks, and successfully coped with them.
Despite earning money from his first projects, Elon Musk wanted more recognition for his technologies. In this regard, he was not afraid to take risks and sell his first companies for the sake of the new SpaceX and Tesla, which subsequently entered the world market. However, Musk’s ideas were initially on the verge of collapse, and he understood his risk when entering the market with new products. His ability to take responsibility even in such difficult moments is admirable. Elon Musk did not give up because of the initial failure of the company and put all his savings into the cause. It was a significant risk, as the entrepreneur did not know if his investment would pay off. However, at the same time, he advises taking on such responsibility at a younger age, when a person does not have to feed his family. At an older age, risk should be calculated more carefully, and savings should be left in case of failure. This approach causes respect for a person and highlights positive qualities in him. Additionally, Elon Musk’s risks were justified because he constantly asked for criticism, which he listened to carefully. Even though many people, including entrepreneurs, want to hear praise, Musk chose a different way to reap the benefits. In his opinion, criticism helps a person see his weaknesses and develop them. The complaint can be why a person stops believing in himself; nevertheless, Elon Musk could process a negative assessment into a catalyst for new ideas and tasks. He asked friends and investors not about positive experiences with his products but the negative feedback (Muegge and Reid 9). In addition, Musk clarified all the feedback from his customers, which helped him improve the business. Thus, he always thinks about big goals, consisting of small feedback.
Elon Musk’s ambitions are extraordinarily high and admirable. His desire to colonize Mars is not only a dream, but he is working hard toward it. His plans include the first human landing on Mars within ten years. Even though many people ridicule him for ambitions that they cannot achieve, Musk continues his work. Even if his company fails to achieve this goal, it will progress more than similar organizations with smaller goals. Elon Musk believes that the more time a person has and the smaller his plan, the weaker progress he will achieve. This approach is admirable since the engineer does not buy time and justify his inaction. Thus, Musk continues to work, ignoring ridicule from the outside. At the same time, he always treats negative statements with respect and does not enter into controversy. As a result, Elon Musk achieved big goals, allowing him to become one of the wealthiest and most successful.
Musk is admired for the many positive traits he brings to his work. First of all, he works hard despite the difficulties he faces. He constantly creates something new to improve humankind’s life and contributes considerably to technical innovation. He is thriving and famous since he always steadfastly accepts criticism and listens to every negative review. Moreover, he takes responsibility for his actions and understands that every risk can lead to the collapse of both companies. One of their main features of Musk is a global goal, which he seeks to achieve by all available means.
Works Cited
Fernholz, Tim. Rocket billionaires: Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and the new space race. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2018.
Higgins, Tim. Power Play: Tesla, Elon Musk, and the Bet of the Century. Doubleday, 2021.
Muegge, Steven, and Ewan Reid. “Elon Musk and SpaceX: A Case Study of Entrepreneuring as Emancipation.” Technology Innovation Management Review, vol. 9, no. 8, 2019. pp. 7-12.