It is extremely crucial to have the ability to feel satisfied with very little in life. The poem An Ox Looks at Man, by Carlos Drummond de Andrade, is about an ox judging humans for forgetting a crucial element in life. The poem’s language suggests that while the ox is able to remain content with life, humans can never feel satisfied as shown by the ox’s description of human’s physical characteristics and emotional behaviors. The Ox’s assessment of humankind’s physical characteristics describes not only humankind’s state of mind, but the Ox’s as well. The Ox criticizes people by claiming that they have a “translucent inner emptiness.” The Ox claims that humans have a large void in our souls. Humankind’s inner emptiness is based on the fact …show more content…
Its criticism not only makes it more evident that humankind feels displeased, but it also makes it clear that the Ox is content with life. The Ox describes humans as being more “delicate than shrubs.” Instead of using this as a physical description, the Ox uses it as a mental comparison. The Ox believes that humans are emotionally fragile. Their emotional instability causes them to feel extremely agitated or upset at the slightest trigger. This sensitivity is the main reason why humans are unable to feeling satisfied like the Ox. They are unable to latch on to a single emotion for a long duration of time. The Ox, however, is able to remain in a state of placidity because it is able to hold on to feelings of fulfillment and self-actualization. The Ox also mocks humans because they are incapable of discovering the element that is so “visible and common.” The Ox already knows what this element is. He claims that it is within plain sight. Yet, humans are so blind that they are unable to find it. The Ox can feel relaxed and calm because it does not have to scramble all over the place, looking for this element. However, humans spend most of their lives trying to find this “thing” that will allow them to ease into a state of peace. The fact that humankind is oblivious to something so easy to spot makes it even more crucial that they find whatever it is that they are looking for. The Ox is already in a place where it …show more content…
It is supposed to be simple and crucial. Yet, humans are unable to realize this truth, thus causing the Ox to question if it truly is vital. Not only that, but humans are also causing the truth to “scatter” and “burn.” This truth is supposed to keep nature and life in tranquil state. However, since humankind cannot see the truth, they do not realize that they are ruining it. The Ox looks at humans because it is worried that they will deteriorate this truth that has been so vital to its life.
The Ox’s assessment of humankind’s physical characteristics and emotional behaviors shows humankind’s inability to reach a state of satisfaction as well as the Ox’s ability to reach a state of serenity. The Ox has found to way to view life as fulfilling, but it judges humans because it is worried that they will never discover this element in their lives. Most people believe that having more money will make them happier. However, the reality of it all is that, in the words of Akhenaton, “To be satisfied with a little is the greatest wisdom” because “a contented mind is a hidden
In the poem “Thou Blind Man’s Mark” by Sir Philip Sidney, the speaker is struggling with his desire for someone or something. They are fighting this feeling for control over his thoughts and mind. It is shown that both the speaker and desire are constantly fighting, with neither fully able to take control. This fact is evident through Sidney’s use of violent diction, personification of desire, and oxymorons.
Auden’s poem is a criticism of human perceptions and how we use them to detect, or suppress human suffering. In the first half of the poem Auden “compares versions of indifference by portraying youth and age, animals, and humans” (Shmoop, 2014). In the first few lines of the poem, Auden comments on the perceptions of the “Old Masters” and how they were never wrong in their discernment of suffering. He then compares the old masters perceptions to the perceptions of children and animals and how they are unaware of,
“We are all frogs or cows; we wander through life in a state of perpetual bafflement because empathy is so hard – harder than anger, harder than pity” (Fadiman, 1988, p. 300).
I believe that one of the ultimate questions that all members of the human species asks is ‘How can I find happiness?’ and reflected in this question is a desire to find a happy, fulfilling, quality life. Many people try to find such happiness through their careers, material possessions, and all manner of other pursuits. What a large portion of these people do not realize is that happiness and the elements necessary to achieve a quality life may not come from place, position, or possession but from attitude. In both Gilgamesh by Stephen Mitchell and Sunny Chernobyl by Andrew Blackwell, the reader can see these ideas explored in great detail.
There are certain things that are in the control of the humans, at the same time there are several things, which are not under the human’s control. Thus, to persist a happy life, the humans are required to put an end their desire such that the satisfaction of
The Party desires to control every aspect of Winston Smith’s life; his work, ideologies, attitude, thoughts, appearance, everything. The Thought Police, Big Brother, and Ingsoc are embodiments of everything that author George Orwell hates in government. 1984, a book written by Orwell, depicts a society called Oceania, in which unwary citizens are obedient to the Party, a totalitarian regime. Totalitarianism is defined as a political system in which a centralized government does not tolerate any form of political dissent and seeks to control many, if not all, aspects of public and private life. Another one of George Orwell’s books, Animal Farm, is an allegory about the Soviet Union, and in it farm animals subscribe to a belief system,
In the opening lines of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle states, “Every craft and every line of inquiry, and likewise every action and decision, seems to seek some good; and that is why some people were right to describe the good at what everything seeks.” Aristotle often wrote about happiness, but so did Epicurus. In a broad sense, Aristotle and Epicurus touched on similar points when discussing happiness. They both believed that happiness is the ultimate goal in life, and that all human measures are taken to reach that goal. While Aristotle and Epicurus’ theories are similar in notion, a closer look proves they are different in many ways. In this paper, we will discuss the differences between Epicurus and Aristotle in their theories on happiness, and expand on some drawbacks of both arguments. Through discussing the drawbacks with both theories, we will also be determining which theory is more logical when determining how to live a happy life.
In Whale Rider the character of Pai broke through her assigned gender role and prevailed in what would otherwise be an entirely male-dominated path of spirituality. While Whale Rider could certainly be identified as a feminist film regarding the “male-centered universe” that Hollywood has created, Whale Rider could also simply be seen as a women’s story about women. Pai is just a young girl seeking to prove herself and to prove that a woman can be a prophet as well.
As human beings we are naturally wired to seek happiness wherever we can find it. When we don’t, we may enter a stage of anger, anxiety, or distress. That’s why it is our personal goal to look for happiness and preserve it once we acquire it. Many have explored ways to find what triggers this feeling of “happiness” and what we can do to keep it; nonetheless, the evidence found is hardly sufficient to make a public statement on how to find happiness. For this reason, most of the time we speculate what might provoke this feeling of contentment. “Happiness is a glass half empty,” an essay written by Oliver Burkeman, highlights the importance of happiness and discloses how we can find delight through unorthodox methods. The prime objective of this piece of writing is to inform the audience about the effect of happiness on their lives and how their usual attempts of becoming happier can sabotage achieving this feeling. Furthermore, he wants to promote the benefits of pessimism and describe how it can help us in the long run. The author utilizes pronouns, logos, and pathos in order to prove his point and draw the audience into his essay, in an attempt of making them reconsider the way they live their lives and adopt this new pessimistic way that would greatly boost their level of happiness.
With these two leadership theories we can have a better understanding why some leaders can have an outstanding influence in follower’s, nevertheless I believe both theories could be more useful for leaders if in the future some of their weaknesses, explained next, could be overpassed. In Transformational leadership the influence processes for Transformational is still unclear in terms of the explanation of how can the influence of leaders affect the mediating variable and how outcomes and the influence process change from one situation to another. Most theories of Transformational leadership focus on the leader’s direct influence over individuals, not leader influence on group or organizational processes and this particular interest reflects in the fact that important behaviours, mainly in the group and organizational levels (influence is unidirectional), are missing. In Charismatic Leadership most of the weaknesses overlap with Transformational leadership so I will only mention the ones associated with Charismatic
Disgusted, the speaker sees how society has morally degraded itself in exchange for wealth and greed. The frustrated tone of the poem becomes further elevated when the speaker exclaims, "We have given our hearts away, a sordid boon!" (4). Blinded by the daily drudgeries of life, people have become impervious to nature, despite some of the grand displays that one can behold. The speaker describes beautiful images of nature such as the sea, howling winds, and flowers that no longer create an emotional response in people. Since the world has become so out of touch with nature, mankind is no longer able to appreciate the drama that takes place between the wind and the moon. Additionally, the speaker claims that society has become so indifferent to nature that, "Little we see in Nature that is ours;" (3).
In today’s materialistic world, the phrase that ‘money can’t buy happiness’ is tending to be proved hence otherwise. Social research and surveys have shown results based on an individuals income, health and the political scenario which is dominant in his or her region. It is quite obvious that the gap between the privileged and the not so is growing into a great divide giving rise to different class and status, thus defining ones social circle. It should therefore be understood how an individuals economic status affects their personal happiness throughout all aspects of life. Many tend to refer to this age-old quote especially when they tend to belong to sector of people who can’t afford the modern day luxuries of life. What they do not
The third component, however, is somewhat difficult to grasp and harder for some to accept; but it is also the most crucial when adopting the attitude of respect. If one fails to accept Taylor’s third element then one cannot adopt the attitude of respect. This is where Taylor is mistaken. Taylor fails, or at least neglects, to consider the importance of his third element. Instead, he places most of the emphasis on moving to deny human superiority and then concludes that by doing so only then can one respect nature. Yet, in order to allow Taylor’s fourth element, one must first concede that all Teleological Centers of Life have equal inherent worth. Therefore, when one accepts and believes the third component of the biocentric outlook only then can they adopt the attitude of respect. Subsequently, I plan to show that the third element and not the fourth is fundamental in adopting the attitude of respect.
Human beings have a need for self-actualization that involves growing towards courage, kindness, knowledge, love, honesty, and unselfishness. When we fulfill this need, we feel serene, joyful, filled with zest, sometimes euphoric, and generally happy. When we act contrary to our need for self-actualization, we experience anxiety, despair, boredom, shame, emptiness and are generally unable to enjoy ourselves. (Singer 327-328).
However, those people with the means are reluctant to sacrifice an excessive amount that they would descend in status (Mill 89). Those who are of lower faculties #, and thus have less enjoyment, are more easily satisfied (Mill 90). Compared to their inferiors, people of higher classes continue to seek happiness and are never truly satisfied. Mill links this continuous search with dignity (Mill 90). Due to the sense of dignity, “someone will not feel envious of those who bear imperfections because he does not understand the benefits of those limitations” # (Mill 91). In explaining this concept, Mill compares a human being dissatisfied to a pig satisfied and Socrates dissatisfied to a fool satisfied. The pig and fool reason that they are well-off, but the human being and Socrates know they are superior because they are further educated (Mill 91).