Heloise Morality

Other Christians I previously spoke to believe that, “the killer's actions are irreversible and that such a crime deserves an equal punishment”. These same people would cite the biblical passage that exhorts "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". However, if a crime deserves equal punishment, then why do we not rape the rapist or burn the arsonist? A civilized society must be based on values and principles that are higher than those it condemns. Biblically, we are called to live by higher values. In the New Testament, Jesus said that we may have heard it said "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" but He instructed us to "turn the other cheek" (Matthew 5:38-41) to love even our enemies (Matthew 5:43-45), to obey the Ten Commandments which tell us not to kill (Exodus 20:13) and not to put ourselves into the position of God by judging whether others live or die (John 8:7). Vengeance and retribution are to be left to God, who is the only One with the perfect capabilities of judgment. If the argument is that serious crimes

In the article, “Laying Claim to a Higher Morality,” Melissa Mae discusses the controversial topic of using torture as a part of interrogating detainees. She finds the common ground between the supporting and opposing sides of the argument by comparing two different sources, “Inhuman Behavior” and “A Case for Torture.” Mae includes clear transitions from each side of the argument and concise details to ensure that the essay was well constructed. The purpose of the essay is clear, and it is interesting, insightful, and unbiased.

In his essay “On the Scarlet Letter,” D.H. Lawrence criticizes Hester’s immoral behavior for her adulterous actions. Lawrence views her as a shameful member of Puritan society and centers his argument on her sin and its effects on the story’s plot. D.H. Lawrence’s use of different literary techniques strengthens his claim that Hester is not the heroine through his sarcastic tone, abrupt syntax, and biblical allusions.

John, also known as John the Savage, is the son of Linda and his father, who are both members of Utopia. He was born and raised on the Savage Reservation. John is an outsider both on the Reservation - where the natives still practise marriage, natural birth, family life and religion - and the apparently civilised Brave New World: a totalitarian welfare-state based on principles of stability and happiness, even if it`s a happiness of a superficial and bland nature.

Unlike Abelard, Heloise never wrote a unified and comprehensive piece of work. Instead we have to gather her philosophy from her few letters’ and our understanding of her from Abelard’s responses. From her writing Heloise seems conflicted in both major relationships of her life, both Abelard and with God. With Abelard she is upset that after everything she did for him, he does nothing for her “Tell me one thing, if you can. Why, after our entry into religion, which was your decision alone, have I been so neglected and forgotten by you that you neither speak to me when you are here nor write to me when you are absent?”(1) This portrays an interesting image of Heloise living a life pursuing God in the nunnery but not for Him, and not for herself but for Abelard, because he wanted her to. In doing this she puts Abelard’s interests before not only her own, but even God’s “I can expect no reward for this from God, for it is certain that I have done nothing as yet for love of him”(2). It is in this way that we can learn Heloise’s philosophy, of furthering the interests of others rather than your own. It is this motive that Heloise finds to be good, action performed for the best

Heloise was a noble girl under the care of her uncle, when Abelard heard of her. He decided he wanted to be her teacher and her lover, because she was the "best one to bring to my [his] bed." He believed that the" philosophical discussion" that the two could engage in would "provide added intimacy," rather than just finding someone to have a sexual relationship with. Abelard and Heloise became lovers, Heloise became pregnant with Abelard's child, the two married, and then, on Abelard's command, separated to live out monastic lives. The letters written by Heloise are extremely important to the history of the Middle Ages because, according to historian, Barbara Tuchman, women of the Middle Ages are known "through the pens

James Rachels' article, "Morality is Not Relative," is incorrect, he provides arguments that cannot logically be applied or have no bearing on the statement of contention. His argument, seems to favor some of the ideas set forth in cultural relativism, but he has issues with other parts that make cultural relativism what it is.

Their relationship started when Abelard was hired by Heloise’s uncle to be her teacher and live in his home with Heloise and himself. In the beginning of their relationship, Abelard was just Heloise’s teacher and mentor, but he had another plan for the relationship. He put his plan into action and the relationship turned extremely sexual. When Heloise’s uncle

In the second letter, Abelard asserts his authority over Heloise, and states that she can only contact him if she is seeking help for matters "that pertain to God." Heloise acquiesced to this because she realized that to Abelard, she was the weaker sex, and that he needed her to seek his advice to prove his authority over her and also because she wanted to continue to correspond with him. According to Professor Stephen G. Nichols, writing was equivalent to the "caress" that Heloise used to receive from Abelard. In the fifth letter, she appeals to Abelard's ego by addressing his need to

By establishing this relationship on a lustful foundation, Abelard and Heloise were creating a relationship leading to a sinful life. As stated by Abelard, “My love, which brought us both to sin, should be called lust, not love” (Letter 5, Abelard to Heloise 86). When two people are actually in love, the relationship built is symbiotic and mutualistic. Part of that establishment is for the sole purpose that it, in some way, benefits both party members. In the case of Abelard and Heloise, the relationship was not symbiotic; it led both Abelard and Heloise to live a life with one another built on lust. Even Heloise shows how the relationship is not entirely out of true love for Abelard. She states, “…we enjoyed the pleasures of an uneasy love and abandoned ourselves to fornication” (Letter 4, Heloise to Abelard 65-66). This facet directly relates to how the relationship between the two is not based on love, if it were then both Abelard and Heloise would not resort to unfaithfulness and strained love, neither shows pure commitment to the other.

Abelard and Heloise’s perspectives over the gender role in the society were also found in their discussions on the men-women relationship. As suggested by their agreement on the gender views, their reasoning over the relationship of lovers seemed to go no further from the notion that women are predestined to be an obstacle

The link between morality and human nature has been a progressive reoccurring theme since ancient times (Prinz, 2008). Moral development is a characteristic of a person’s general development that transpires over the course of a lifetime. Moral development is derived by a wide variety of cultural and demographic factors that appear to influence morally relevant actions. Turiel (2006) defined morality as an individuals “prescriptive judgments of justice, rights, and welfare pertaining to how people ought to relate to each other.” Individuals’ moral judgments are frequently considered to be a product of culturally specific controls that provide a framework for behavioral motivations that are sensitive to the effects of gender, education, religion and politics (Banerjee, Huebner & Hauser, 2010). While several approaches have been utilized to examine the interaction of multivariate contributors to fundamental moral differences such as: disputes about family life, sexuality, social fairness, and so on, research has suggested that ideological considerations have provided a potent and diverse explanation for the polarization of contrasting views (Weber & Federico, 2013).

The sanctity of human life is a basic value as decreed by God even before the times of Moses, Jesus and Mohammad. Commenting on the killing of Abel by his brother Caine (the two sons of Adam), God says in the Qur'an: "On that account We ordained for the children of Israel that if anyone slay a person -unless it be for murder or spreading mischief in the land- it would be as if he slew the whole people. And if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of

Morality only exists if we believe in God; therefore if God doesn’t exist there is no morality. There have been so many evil acts committed in the name of God that it is difficult to maintain that a belief in God equates to morality. There are situations that happen every day where decisions are made based off of human rights that contradict the word of God. Morality comes from within, it is an understanding of right versus wrong and the ability to choose what is right. Knowing all this a belief in God is not a requirement for a person to be moral. (Mosser, 2011)

Morality has been a term of debate for several years by intellectuals who have not come to the final conclusion of its definition. According to Damon (5), morality is an existing, multifaceted construct that may not be pinned down by any single definitional criteria which is flexible. The moral character has long been associated with happiness which is that state of having achieved one's desires although there are some disconnections. Several theories have been forwarded in connection to morality and happiness as far as the society is concerned. In this argumentative paper we shall give detailed analysis of morality and happiness and whether or not moral character is a requirement to happiness.