the good life essay

In reading, The Trial and Death of Socrates, Socrates presents himself against “the majority” and endures prosecution for inventing new gods and not believing in old ones. Socrates lives a life that is opposite of much of the “the majority” ideals. “The majority” values goods, possessions, and uncontrollable attributes given to them by others such as a high reputation and honor. In addition, The Greek Philosopher was able to refuse the opportunity to escape his death sentence while he had sons at

and I will do the impossible in order to achieve my target. What does it mean to have a good life? It depends on your values. For some it just means living a happy life, having a nice family, and just enjoying life. Others think of a good life as being successful and rich yet everyone has there own opinion. It just depends on someone´s values. I personally believe that having a good life means building a life by the side of your spouse and children.

an attempt by Socrates to defend himself in court and defend his choice to receive the death penalty when found guilty. Although he makes very valid and strong arguments throughout one can only wonder why such a wise person would choose death over life. The following essay will analyze three quotes from Apology and Crito, find the correlation between them, and reveal any flaws that may exsist inside these arguments made by Socrates. In Plato’s Apology Socrates explains to the jury the reasons he

and many other ideas. Another ideal they pursued was the concept of a good soul and life after death. Plato’s world view of death revolves around having a good soul and if a person has a good soul they will have a good life after death; he shows this through rebuking materialism, his views of death, and the fact that he believes he has a good soul and in return he will have a good life in death . Plato shows that to achieve a good soul people need to reject materialistic ideas. Plato says, “You see

ON THE INDIVIDUAL, SOCIETY, AND INTERCONNECTEDNESS. POPE: As Aristotle said, From the moment they are born, the individual is an irreducibly social and mutually dependent being allotted with both rights and duties. Humans display a natural propensity to form and nourish an array of social relationships, and the idea of “atomized, competitive, mutually suspicious individuals forming agreements is essentially impossible”, to say the least. Today, this idea of interconnectedness is still highlighted

does not use. His addiction does not flow through his body. He will never piss positive. “I ain’t addicted to no drugs,” he’d say, “I am addicted to the lifestyle.” Why wouldn’t he be? He drove a nice car, he had a nice house, he was in good health. He lived the life. He is going to be put on probation, again. His officer will have to catch him in the act, again. It's always the same routine. Mr. Lifestyle looked the judge straight in the eye, “I am not going to stop.”

Atticus; The Good Daddicus Parenting, especially good parenting, can be defined in many different ways. Askmen.com tells us that a good dad, “makes all the difference in a child's life. He's a pillar of strength, support and discipline”. The main character in Harper Lee’s To Kill A Mockingbird exemplifies this “good dad” perfectly. Atticus Finch, the father of Jem and Scout, teaches his children to be respectful and courageous, while giving them freedom and independence. Atticus uses life lessons and

A man steals all his life but it is time for a change. A change can come with some challenges. This is the life of Jimmy Valentine. Jimmy was a bugler and a good one at that. Ben Price is a detective and is coming after Valentine because he has broken into some more safes right after getting out of jail. In his escape, Valentine changed his name to Ralph D. Spencer and tried to turn his life around. You know Jimmy was trying to live a moral life after the change because he hadn’t committed any crimes

Spinoza is profoundly immoral. Regarding the moral problem, good and evil…he doesn 't even comprehend what this means. What he comprehends are good encounters, bad encounters, increases and diminutions of power. Thus he makes an ethics and not at all a morality. This is why he so struck Nietzsche. Historically, the distinction between ethics and morality was set up to distinguish between an Aristotelian/Stoic emphasis on the good or virtuous life and a Kantian emphasis on the moral law. Spinoza and Nietzsche

personally so far. Epicurus viewed happiness or eudaimonia as a static pleasure and believed that pleasure was the greatest good, however to attain this pleasure, you would have to attain tranquility, freedom from fear, and absence of bodily pain. As for Aristotle, he viewed happiness as the best good and the ultimate good and claims that happiness is achieved only by living a virtuous life. "our definition is in harmony with those who say that happiness is virtue, or a particular virtue; because an activity