PremiumQualityEssays logo

Toll free:

Exodus Essay Example

Exodus Free Essay Example

  • One of the key issues that bring conflicts between the enlightened thinkers and the scriptures of the old testament book of exodus is mostly based upon the authority that the bible expresses as the thinkers criticizes, they articulates that the ten commandment are very authoritative and commanding, another issue that have risen from this is that the American civil society has been drawing lines and restriction on religious practices, this has been assumed that the government and religion from earlier days has been a profound controversial issue. America is viewed as a secular world that does not conform to religious laws, over man made laws of this nation.
  • In the Axial ages our founding fathers and enlightened thinkers were strong believers of their own reasoning of cultural tradition, hence “NO” they believe in their own ideology and not of the ancient wisdom which they overshadowed with Christendom practice of the heathen and pagan coining the establishment of a secular nation (Machiavelli, 7). The enlightened further envisioned and induced the value of all culture and unity of man in one faction brewing a very raw ideology based on material and profanity. One Confucius helped confuse the early founder that they did not need religion to found a nation.
  • I believe that it is right to say that reliance on ‘reason’ alone and not ‘Religion’ has finally come to its bitter fruition, this is because the foundation of democracy was based on human reasoning as David Hume once stated “Our reason is the slave of passion”, it is believed that on the profanity state of reasoning that our founders founded democracy has finally catches up with us creating a gap between the rich and the poor due to greed and avarice, this is because religion would have offered better long lasting solution based on truth but the founders choose to follow Confucius theory and adapted a secular nation.
  • It would be blasphemous to articulate that we are good because we are both, and the need to be both realist and idealist so to overcome the Jeffersonian educational theory is immense in respect of the greed and avarice in the world, the need to embrace religion and have a higher being which we can give our undue attention and get the salvation that is more powerful beyond that of the human reasoning. From this aspect we can enjoy the bliss and harmony which would make the mind to be equilibrium with happiness.
  • The way our founders formulated the nation with secular laws based on man reasoning opposing religion to profanity brought about avarice and greed, the need for material property exceeded respect for life. The founders sought enlightenment and thought Christianity was pegged on authority and commands, they so sourced secular and coined mosaic laws that were transformed for own gains and benefit.

The Doctrine of the Mean, Confucius, 500 B.C.E.

  • In my own view on the reviews that Confucius moral philosophy of the Mean which was implemented to the founders of America and the similarity of Aristotle’s on the one hand and his idea of government and Plato’s on the other, they are practically the same based on the practical reasoning nature of man based on avarice and profanity (Machiavelli, 13). The means theory oust any good that can arise in the virtue that the Christian are observant of, for both of this thinkers articulate and believe in social order that have and acquires within it great social inequalities unlike Christianity.

Aristotle, Politics

  • According to both Confucius and Aristotle myth that is coined from the fact that equality to them overshadows gender and link superiority to the liberty and equality, attest that there is need for the recognition that some people are superior and other subordinates, and it is the profane nature that other falls in the line of slavery so that some of nature precedent may be fulfilled. This was major aspect that the founders of America articulated and made even Thomas Jefferson to practice this kind of governance which was confused on what equality is by respecting natural laws and condoning Christianity.
  • As both Confucius and Aristotle believed in the Doctrine of the Mean, Aristotle effected aristocracy kind of rule that complimented the two extremes ethics to the people to be served, this based from the fact that he came from a middle class family with superiority in the society (Machiavelli, 26). This type of rule which mixes directly in the rule of the rich and the poor, directly leads to tyranny and oppression to the poor and creating a gap in the social class due to superiority of the rich.
  • Confucius ideal governance would be monarchy designed from his ancestors of the pre-Chou dynasty, based on the Doctrine of the Mean between the two extremes in their ethics he chose monarchy kind of governance that would see the ideal man being oppressed and the superior gain. Although this form of governance is similar to that of Aristotle’s governance of aristocracy which is coined from Doctrine of the Mean that uses oppression to dictate rule though contrary to in the hierarchy manners of powers ladder. Plato form of governance is closer to Confucius on the oppression of the ideal man in the society.

Machiavelli (1469-1527) and Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) view on human nature

  • Thomas Hobbes had a pessimistic view on human nature as he regarded man as state of nature or as natural state. He further emphasized that human being are selfish with an aim of struggling against their fellow men therefore man’s actions are purely governed selfish desires. He also stated that human life is characterized by being poor, brutish, solitary, short and nasty. While, Machiavelli was pessimistic about how human nature is characterized by being greedy, fickle and ungrateful when dealing with fellow human beings (Machiavelli, 45).
  • Whether it’s true if education could help to perfect man’s nature as it was felt by Mencius and Xunzi according as compared to arguments of Machiavelli and Hobbes

Both Machiavelli and Hobbes holds for the idea that the indentified vices of human nature can not be addressed by educating man with an aim of perfecting his nature. Instead this extreme nature of human being would be addressed by formulating contractors among themselves to mitigate advances of being greedy and selfish as the contract will stipulate the terms of how people in agreement would help each other without being exploitative.

  • Whether Glaucon was Idealist or realist.

Glaucon was realist/optimistic. He urged that by human nature one should not injure one another as it is bad although most people regard injuring others as good this is mostly because they are rivals for other things but it is not because of their nature.

  • Whether both Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who believed in social contract theory, would agree with Glaucon’s position on man’s nature

Both Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau would not agree with Glaucons position on man’s nature. Because they are pessimistic while Glaucon’s is optimistic, their arguments are based on human nature being greedy, selfish and tend to hurt each other.

  •  John Locke believes that man is inherently good, he viewed people as intelligent and good and he was realist. He did not advocate social contract theory because he believed people are naturally good and there is no need of them to be controlled by contracts. Aristotle philosophy states that for someone to be happy he must adhere to good virtues and vices which are and involve them selves in moral evaluation in order to achieve happiness in life. Therefore, based on his arguments he concluded that a human being would only be completely happy when they are able to uphold their behavior and be moral in what ever they do (Machiavelli, 71). Jefferson was influenced by Locker and Aristotle in the problem of inequalities because he would view different people in the society as generally good despite of some being masters while others are slaves. These are just but classes which distinguish them but none of them is inferior to the other. This was applicable also to women in the society although they were viewed and being inferior there character and participation in the society is what determines whether they are good.
  • My views on the question of liberty and equality for the Native Americans, the African Americans, and status of women Jefferson was facing a contradiction.

Thomas Jefferson was the third president of America who is believed to be one of the best presidents of America, he never faced many sort of contradictions on the African American and women as they showed oppositions against him, but he advocated and  practiced some form of racism this is seen directly when he refused to assent to the bill of rights that will cater for the rights of the majority whom are the blacks and Indians, he was the one who proposed the idea of a formal Indian Removal and detested intellectual women.

  • What did Henry David Thoreau do when he saw Andrew Jackson’s attitude towards the natives, the Blacks, and the Mexicans? Did he think that Jefferson’s contradictions finally caught up with Jackson’s which paved the way for the Civil War?

Henry David Thoreau was a writer and philosopher in the 19th century  and was sympathetic to the Indians for the hostile treatment that they were receiving from the government ,this is  because he had some form of affiliation with them(Indians) ,Andrew Jackson was the seventh president of America adopted a policy that aimed at relocating the remaining Indians and maintaining a large white man dominance and support for salve trade ,  an event that saw a large of Indians being relocated with a lot of force from there recent places to other places an event that resulted to the civil war (Machiavelli, 87).

Henry wasn’t pleased with the way President Andrew Jackson was treating the Indians and Blacks therefore he conducted a lecture at lyceum the lecture was on sensitization on the people relation with the state that elicited mixed reactions on paying of tax, he also wrought some journals reacting to the government way of treating of the blacks and Indians.

Jefferson’s contradictions finally caught up with Jackson’s because Jefferson introduced proposed an idea that was to remove the Indians from America and also to maintain the slave trade as he took it to the congress were it was approved and was later to  be implemented by Andrew Jackson this automatically resulted to the civil war.