A Meaningful Life

Father: Although I believe Alexander has true belief in his own divinity, I can accept that he exploits it to use as propaganda to gain loyalty within the Persian Empire. Propaganda is necessary, although many Macedonians do not see the correlation to Alexander’s divinity. Without this dramatized status there is no blind following from the Persians. Alexander proved himself

Many people fail to realize that Alexander has had a definite affect on us today, although not as great as he would have had on people of the past. In most parts the world today, Alexander The Great is considered a legend; however, in some places, Alexander is considered a god. One of the most notable people in history, Alexander has reached an iconic status in our world today. He possibly may have even been referred to in the Quran (Surah 18:89-98). There are still many stories told about him including folktales, and movies. In modern Iran, Alexander is still known as an evil king who nearly destroyed the ancient Persian culture and religion. Although the effect of “Alexander Mania” has died down since the time of his reign, you can still see the mark that he has left on today’s world.

The documents, “Life of Alexander” by Plutarch, and the account of the Jewish rebellion in Maccabees provide different perspectives on life in the Hellenistic world. Plutarch’s account presents a more positive view of the world after Alexander’s conquests, one where cultural exchange was encouraged and conquered peoples and their nations were benefited from their integration into the Greek empire. He begins with listing specific examples of how Alexander taught other cultures more civilized ways of life, such as how he “taught the Arachosians to till the soil”(Plutarch, 434). Plutarch’s position is that these civilizations are better off with Greek influence now being present in their culture. He notes that “Those who were vanquished by Alexander are happier than those who escaped his hand”(Plutarch, 434). This was because Alexander rejected the ideas of previous Greek leaders and did not treat non-Greeks are lesser subjects and encouraged the mixing of culture and people. (Come

This is demonstrated in the chart compiled from various sources when it says that Buddhism in India was most directly influenced by Greek art and ritual. It states that Greek art and ritual were strong in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East. Lastly it also states that the Hellenistic period in the Middle East and Western Asia remained 300 years after his death. (Doc E). Hellenistic, defined as the spread of cultures, shows that Alexander did indeed blend and spread different cultures around him and this blend stuck around long after his death. Even a man living in the same place as his ancestors did when they were gifted with Alexander’s army and blend of cultures can see Alexander’s appreciation of cultures. “... was a very great man, brave and dauntless and generous to his followers … we worship the same gods. This is why we believe the Greeks are our first ancestors.” (Doc F). This man, thousands of years later and thousands of miles away, feels the effect of the Greeks on his culture because of Alexander’s love and respect for other

Alexander cared about his army and there needs. According to document D, “The army was crossing a desert of sand and the sun was already blazing down on them. They were in need of water. As they went on a party of light infantry which had gone looking for water. They found some and poured it into a helmet. They brought it back to Alexander, Alexander took the helmet and in full view of his troops poured it on the ground,”(Arrianus Doc D). This shows that Alexander the great was truly great because he showed concern for others. When he poured the water on the ground he showed brotherhood. Brotherhood meaning if he was not going to drink the water the army would not either. This trait is good to have so that one can be caring for others and it makes one a good leader so they will be able to succeed in life. Next, Alexander was aware of others. According to document C, “When the last organized resistance was broken, Alexander and his army went on a wild search. Alexander had ordered that all except those who took safety in the temple were to be put to death,”(Green Doc C). This shows that Alexander the great was really great because he showed concern for others by honoring those who took safety in the temple he saved their lives. When one does this they are saving many lives and am being very honorable just like Alexander was. This trait is important to have in life so they can succeed in life by honoring others and their choices. In summary, Alexander the great was truly great because he showed concern for

Throughout the history of humanity, there have been countless leaders, conquerors, kings, or people of note. They are all noteworthy because of their achievements, or maybe their lack of achievements in a time where history was being made. These men and women are remembered because they accomplished something worth remembering. One of the most polarizing characters of the ancient world is Alexander of Macedonia, better known as simply Alexander the Great. With a name like that, one knows that Alexander must have done something during his lifetime that would still be remembered centuries later. What made Alexander so extraordinary is just how driven he was, how he conquered most of the known world by the time he was thirty-two. Alexander wanted to seize the Macedonian throne, unite many people under one rule, exact revenge on Persia, and to take more land for his nation. He may not have achieved all his goals before his untimely death, but he accomplished so much that his legacy has lived on for thousands of years, and will continue to live on for thousands more.

The Greek Alexander Romance describes the life of Alexander the Great, focusing primarily on his great military feats as a leader of Greece and highlighting why he is remembered as a great Greco-Roman leader. Similarly, the Gospel of Matthew explains the life of Jesus Christ through his teachings and miracles, which underline why he is known as the greatest figure from Judeo-Christian culture. Alexander and Jesus easily compare because they died in their early thirties, were known as kings, and are remembered for impressive triumphs while on earth. Alexander sought to build his empire and essentially rule the world through victories on the battlefield and the conquering of neighboring countries. Jesus sought to destroy evil on earth by establishing God’s Kingdom and teachings in the hearts of all. Comparing the lives of these great Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian leaders highlight the differences in cultural opinion on the highest good in life, how one obtains that good, and what that means in connection to an afterlife. Judeo-Christian and Greco-Roman perspectives on elements of a meaningful life contrast in the sense that Judeo-Christian actions to pursue these elements are motivated by the desire for everlasting life in heaven, while Greco-Roman actions are motivated by the desire for perpetual fame on earth after one dies.

The people were devastated and afraid that they had lost him. The two ideas are relevant to each other and support the author’s idea; that Alexander was perceived as a God to his people. However, the switch in time periods makes the book more difficult to understand than if it was explained chronologically.

Best known for his writings of leading figures in antiquity and his essays on ethics and virtue, Plutarch’s biography on Alexander the Great and his vision would influence tremendously upon future western writers in regard to the interpretation of Alexander the Great. Plutarch’s Alexander’s fortune and virtue claimed that Alexander’s aim for his empire was “homonoia," the unity of mankind and “fusion” between civilizations. According to Plutarch, Alexander rejected the traditional “Greek” view that Persian were “barbarians," and instead proclaimed that Alexander was intentionally trying to establish a sense of oneness throughout his empire. In the more than two millennium since Plutarch’s biography and writing of Alexander, there has been a

Hardly any other historians have earned a reputation as virtuous as Alexander the Great. In just thirteen years, Alexander was not only discerned as a military genius, but became exceedingly notorious for conquering Persia and known as the King of Macedonia. Many hold him responsible for the unification of Greece and the Hellenistic age; the blending of cultures. After Alexander had extended the control of his empire past the Asia Minor, Egypt, Central Asia and on to Persia, he was competent to effectively manage and incorporate other cultures and people under his rule by disseminating Greek culture, embracing religion with encouragement, and respecting other cultures with gratification to customs.

Through upright military genius Alexander had overpowered the Persian Empire in little than a decade. The people of Thebes were rebellious against King Philip’s union of Greek states in the hope that the Alexander was either dead himself or too inexperienced to stop them. Their demolition was no oddity, but simply a foresee of the entire Alexandrian path to military practice that was so rewarding later in Asia. Alexander’s Megalomania and ambition for divine honor helped to spread the tradition of Hellenism and left hundreds of thousands of Asians dead in his ferocious wake. Alexander had depended on the particular value one places on military genius and conquest. Alexander was a man who desired no ‘Brotherhood of Man’ in Asia. His teen-year

Most people want to live a meaningful life. They feel that is important to live a life that is sufficient and worthwhile. The meaning of life has been debated among many people and philosophers throughout history. There have been several theories used to try to explain the true purpose of life in some subjective or objective perspective. Louis Pojman argued that religion gives every individual life meaning to it and those who choose not to believe have no morality or purpose in life. On the other hand, suppose someone would object Pojman theory and believed that life with or without God is not required for finding meaning in life. In the following paper, I will explain Pojman theories about religion giving meaning to life and what that life may consist of. Second, I wish to explain how an atheist would reject his premise and provide a response to how a person of faith would respond to and atheists argument.

Alexander had extreme ambitions of greatness, he was able to accomplish more in his short life than most men did throughout their entire lives (“Lined with Gold”). By always striving to achieve more, Alexander gained many different peoples trust building a very vast and powerful empire. Being able to achieve many things for your empire shows that you care about the way your people live, this shows heroism because you think about your people before your mind wanders to yourself! “Some people would say… that Alexander was a villain because he only cared about himself succeeding and would do anything to make it happen. In their minds Alexander had a cocky mindset and was abusive to many of his advisors (“Alexander the Great: Hero or Villain?”). It was also believed that Alexander never took the time to rebuild the lands he conquered (Maxwell 3). This could be interpreted that Alexander didn’t give a care in the world about what went on as long as he was conquering others. Overall, what someone does can be interpreted in many different

His dictatorial traits are further seen in the way that he extended his territory and as a result extended his term in office as a consul. Although Caesar was a good leader, it was his faults that brought him to an end; Whereas, Alexander the Great was killed because of jealousy and his good deeds. This was to a point that Alexander was considered to be almost equal to a god especially to the Romans who gave him the title “Great”. He was a great speaker and his speeches were motivated by the hope for good authority and the spread of western civilization. In his greatest speech ever as addressed to both the Greeks and the Asians, he meant to pave way for a new dawn, after a period of war. This great speech

Alexander III of Macedon, widely known as Alexander the Great, is opinioned by some people to have been a ruthless man who only had a thirst for conquest , but according to others he was a man of intellect and “statesmanlike vision” (Hammond Preface). In N.G.L. Hammond’s book The Genius of Alexander the Great, as stated in the preface, he tries to refrain from writing based on his own opinion of Alexander, and instead analyzes the few surviving narratives on Alexander’s achievements in an unbiased manner. He portrays the conquests, struggles, and greatest achievements of Alexander’s career, such as the building of his empire that stretched from the eastern Mediterranean coast through Asia Minor and the