rj
··When an act of violence or an offense has been committed it is forever irreparable… public opinion will cry out for a sanction, a punishment, a “price” for pain… the price paid [may] be useful inasmuch as it makes amends or discourages a fresh offense, but the initial offense remains and the “price” is always (even if it is “just”) a new offense and a new source of pain. LEVI
·Whoever forgives the murderer blinds himself to the vastest letting of blood – how then should he see the smallest mite? OZICK
·Cynthia Ozick’s analysis of Karl’s forgivability: You cannot forgive when there is next time. Forgiveness is cruel to the victims and blinds you.
·Epictetus’ bathhouse suggestion: Whenever planning an action, mentally rehearse what the plan entails. If you are heading out to bathe, picture to yourself the typical scene at the bathhouse – people splashing, pushing, yelling and pinching your clothes. You will complete the act with more composure if you say at the outset, ‘I want a bath, but at the same time I want to keep my will aligned with nature.’ Do it with every act. That way if something occurs to spoil your bath, you will have ready the thought, ‘Well, this was not my only intention, I also meant to keep my will in line with nature – which is impossible if I go all to pieces whenever anything bad happens.’
·Eudaimonia: Translated in your text as “happiness”. Means something more than happiness – in philosophy often referred to as “human flourishing”. Aristotle notes that what he [in translation] is calling happiness is also (p.61): The finest, the most beneficial, the most pleasant.
·For each thinker, why there are people who do not seem to conform to human “nature” (i.e. if human nature is bad, why are there good people, or if human nature is good, why are so many people bad) [you need to think about this question yourself – there will be different answers for the different philosophers]
·How Socrates convinces Polemarchus that justice is not benefitting one’s friends and harming one’s enemies: injustice cannot be a virtue because it is contrary to wisdom, which is a virtue. Needs to be at least moderately just in the sense of adhering to this set of rules. justice is desirable because it means health of the soul.
·How to become good, according to Confucius: we must choose law and order, which are second best.
·Inherent (per se) good
·Mengzi’s example of the child in the well: if you lack dismay you are not a person – anyone who lacks a moral sense of shame and the ability of right and wrong cannot be a person.
·Mengzi’s use of “Ox Mountain” Things: just like the ox mountain lost its trees, people can have originally good minds, BUT they can be lost along the way.
·Stoicism: The philosophy asserts that virtue (such as wisdom) is happiness and judgment should be based on behavior, rather than words. That we don’t control and cannot rely on external events, only ourselves and our responses.
·Telos: The purpose/end/goal of a thing. Ex. The telos of journalism is to report the news, the telos of medicine is health.
The highest end, according to Aristotle: for Aristotle this highest good is happiness or eudaimonia (which translates to living well).·The story and moral of Gyges’ Ring: people act justly only under compulsion. By nature, he claims, all living beings desire more than what they are actually due. man must be properly tested to see whether he acts justly for the sake of justice or merely for the sake of the reputation and all that goes with it. Who is happier the unjust or the just? We act good out of the fear of punishment.
·The suggested definitions of justice ultimately rejected in the Republic reading
·What is in our control, according to Epictetus: judgments, intentions, desires, and aversions—the internal world of mind governed by our own volition.
·What is not in our control, according to Epictetus: our body, possessions, relationships, wealth, fame, reputation.
·What thinkers thought human nature was good? CONFUCIUS AND MENXGI,
·Why we practice justice, according to Glaucon: – it belongs to the highest class of desirable things.
·Why Wiesenthal does not forgive Karl: even though Karl was showing true repentance, simon could not forgive him for the acts he did to the jews – they were too extreme – a lot of scholars make arguments against this. He felt like he didn’t have the authority to forgive.
·Xunzi’s arguments for human nature being bad: bad – human beings are born with a fondness for profit, a hatred, and dislike of others – also desire for sensual pleasure – our nature leads to destructive conflict.