Buddhism Versus Greek Mythology Essay Example for Free

Buddhism Versus Greek Mythology Essay â€Å"[A human being] experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness, â€Å"said Albert Einstein. â€Å"Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty† (â€Å"Heart Quotes†). Einstein’s view on nature is similar to that of Indian Buddhists. Life-giving Indian weather inspired the Buddhist cyclic view of rebirth while the rugged terrain of Greece inspired their harsh outlook on nature. Buddhists believe man is one with nature while Greek mythology emphasizes the all-importance of man. Buddhists live in harmony with nature whereas the Greeks show violence towards it and all its creatures. However, as the Greek mindset shifted towards philosophy, so did it shift towards similar reverence towards nature. The defining distinction between these two perspectives on life is that the outlook on nature of Buddhists show values from the belief that all is in harmony with Atman, whereas the Greek outlook on nature shows that man is above nature. India is a country of lush plains, striking mountains, beautiful deserts, and dazzling bays. 2, 545 years ago, this incredible scenery served as the backdrop to Buddha’s life and eventual Enlightenment, from which Buddhist teachings would one day grow (Eckel 6). The impact of Buddha’s surroundings on Buddhist thinking is obvious, especially when one takes into consideration India’s dramatic seasonal climate changes. Every summer in India, the monsoons arrive. Every summer in India is monsoon season, a time of torrential downpours raging uninterrupted for months. Before these monsoons, the earth is dried and parched; food and water are scarce. It is, in every way, a season of death. Then, however, the rain arrives, harsh and relentless, but life giving nonetheless. The rain is the amniotic fluid catalyzing the re-entrance of life unto the barren earth. This annual cycle of death and rebirth presents the native people with a dire ultimatum: they must either obey nature or not survive. If they try to go against nature’s course, they will inevitably fail. Nature controls life. Observing this phenomenon, Buddhists learned from nature and realized that this cycle can be found everywhere. They realized that humans undergo an equivalent cycle called samsara, or reincarnation. - â€Å"He could no longer distinguish the many voices, the cheerful from the weeping, the children’s from the men’s: they all belonged together. The lament of the knower’s yearning and laughing, the screaming of the angry, the moaning of the dying- everything was one; everything was entwined and entwisted, was interwoven a thousand fold. And all of it together, all voices, all goals, all yearnings, all sufferings, all pleasures, all good and evil-the world was everything together. Everything together was the river of events, was the music of life. And when Siddhartha listened attentively to this river, listened to this song of a thousand voices, when he did not listen to sorrow or laughter, when he did not bring his soul to any one voice and did not enter them with his ego, but listened to all of them, heard the wholeness, the oneness- then the great song of the thousand voices consisted of a single word, which was ‘om’: perfection†¦belonging to the oneness† (Hesse 118-119). At the core of Buddhism lies an important lesson about maya and Enlightenment. To reach Enlightenment, one must understand all. One of the first steps towards such understanding is to understand maya, or illusion. Everything that one sees, feels, and tastes belongs to the world of maya. Even one does not exist but in the world of maya. Thus, if all does not exist, then all is equal. One is equal to everything in the surrounding world, especially nature. All are one in Atman, which is the heart of all of Buddhism. Everything is one. All of this separation from nature and from one another is simply maya, or an illusion. Consequently, in Buddhism, any injustice done to nature is an injustice to oneself. To reach Enlightenment, peace and oneness with nature are essential. Man and nature are one. Therefore, everyone and everything, especially nature, should be treated as so. â€Å"[Siddhartha said,] ‘This stone is a stone, it is also an animal, it is also God, it is also the Buddha, I love and honor it not because it would become this or that someday, but because of this because it is a stone, because it appears to me now and today as a stone, it is precisely because of this that I love it and see worth and meaning in each of its veins and pits, in the yellow, in the gray, in the hardness, in the sound it emits when I tap it,  in the dryness or dampness of its surface. [T]hat is precisely what I like and what seems wonderful to me and worthy of worship†¦I love the stone and the river and all these things that we contemplate and also a tree or a piece of bark. These are things and things can be loved† (Hesse 126-127). In harmony with the principle of reincarnation, any plant, creature, or other aspect of nature is a part of the cycle of rebirth. Therefore, any of these can one day become a man, for when something in nature dies, it undergoes the cycle of rebirth and can be reborn as anything. One day, it will become a human. Nature holds the ability within itself to be a human and, for that reason, should be considered as an equal. The true magnitude of nature’s presence in Buddhism is truly portrayed by the distinct mentioning of Siddhartha reaching enlightenment under a tree, specifically the Bodhi tree or the Asiatic fig tree (Gach 16). The scriptural account of the Enlightenment of Buddha gives this significance to nature when Buddha sits under the Bodhi tree for seven whole days. After the seven days, the Buddha gets up only to sit down again at an Ajapala banyan-tree for another length of time. He rises once again just to sit down once more at the foot of a Mucalinda tree (â€Å"Bodhi Leaf†). Nature is therefore made clear as one of the most important aspects of Buddhism. As Buddhists have such a deep reverence for nature, they believe in keeping peace with every aspect of nature. This does not just mean plants but also animals and other living creatures. However, that does not mean that all Buddhists must be vegetarians although it is strongly suggested to do so. It is said that the act of eating meat is a form of karma that will lead a person farther from Enlightenment. Therefore, the more meat one eats in one’s various lives, the more times one will have to experience the cycle of death and rebirth. On the other hand, some Buddhists believe in another view of meat eating. One is allowed to eat meat that one receives unless one knows or suspects that the meat in question was killed especially for one (Epstein). As far as sacrificial practices, meat is not sacrificed but instead herbs and incense are given up in prayer. Peace is a very important aspect of treating nature. Peace comes in many forms: peace towards environment, towards creatures, towards man, etc. A Buddhist definition of peace is â€Å"softening what is rigid in our hearts† (Chodron 17). In keeping with their attitude towards nature, Buddhists also believe that a man should not kill another man for any reason. In Buddhism, war is never the answer. In fact, the first few lines of the Dhammapada, a Buddhist scripture, state â€Å"For love is not conquered by hate: hate is conquered by love. This is a law eternal† (Chappell 81). Therefore, instead of fighting hate with hate, Buddhists believe in fighting hate with love. That is the only way to overcome and to reach Enlightenment. â€Å"’When someone seeks,’ said Siddhartha,’ then it easily happens that his eyes see only the thing that he seeks, and he is able to find nothing, to take in nothing because he always thinks only about the thing he is seeking, because he has one goal, because he is obsessed with his goal. Seeking means: having a goal. But finding means: being free, being open, having no goal. You, Venerable One, may truly be a seeker, for, in striving toward your goal, you fail to see certain things that are right under your nose. † (Hesse, 121-122) As previously stated, to reach Enlightenment, Buddhists believe all that is needed is understanding. The ultimate goal of Buddhists is to attain this understanding, this meaning, this Enlightenment. However, one must be aware that spending a life seeking is not the way to reach Enlightenment. To be a faithful Buddhist, one must understand that the key is not to seek. For, in seeking, as this quote says, the obvious is not seen. Buddhism then teaches that to reach Enlightenment, one must find not seek. Therefore, Buddhists do not seek to explain nature (Hanh 78). They are content with nature as it is- unexplained, for nature’s explanations can be found without seeking. â€Å"’Is this what you mean: that the river is everywhere at once, at its source and at its mouth, at the waterfall, at the ferry, at the rapids, in the sea ,in the mountains, everywhere at once, and only the present exists for it, and not the shadow of the future? ’ ‘That is it,’ said Siddhartha. ‘And when I learned that, I looked at my life, and it was also a river and the boy Siddhartha was separated from the adult Siddhartha and from the old man Siddhartha only by shadow, not by substance. Nor were Siddhartha’s earlier births the past, and his death and his return to [Atman] are no future. Nothing was, nothing will be; everything is, everything has being and is present† (Hesse 94). A final important aspect of Buddhism is the concept that time does not exist. Time is a man-made notion that does nothing but bring about worries. All sufferings in life can be attributed to time. Buddhists believe that once the concept of time is released, life will hold no more problems, worries, or stresses. Only then can Enlightenment be truly reached. When the concept of time is destroyed inside oneself, it allows for a completely new philosophy to surface. Greece is a country lined with hostile, jagged mountains, in which there are very few arable location surrounded by threatening seas. There is no cycle, no preconception, no structure. To the Ancient Greeks, it seemed that nature was not kind; nature was no friend to them. Therefore, their logic decided that they should be no friend to nature. Such was the physical and mental location of this people, and the beginning of many differences between Greek thought and Buddhism. Greeks living about six hundred years ere the birth of Christ were very religious, as well as very diverse spiritually. All the answers to their questions were found in different religions. Ancient Greeks passed down their religious traditions orally through myths. A myth is â€Å"a story about the gods which sets out to explain why life is as it is† (Gaarder, 22). Greek mythology was an integral part of Greek culture. The ‘miracle of Greece’ is a phrase that describes the awakening of Greek culture and its effects on the rest of the world. One way the Greeks accomplished this was through their focus on man’s importance. They put mankind at the center of their world so that man was all-important. The Greeks even created the gods in their own image, complete with very human qualities. This was the first time in history that a god was made into a recognizable, tangible form. Erstwhile, gods had no lucidity about them. â€Å"Greek artists and poets realized how splendid a man could be, straight and swift and strong. He was the fulfillment of their search for beauty. They had no wish to create some fantasy shaped in their own minds† (Hamilton, 9). Man was put on a pedestal and made the most prominent being in the world, so that he was made into a deity. Any human could be the son of a god, thereby half-divine, an idea unheard of before this time. This idea of man being the ultimate authority is in complete contradiction to Buddhism, where man was equal to nature, not above it. â€Å"And soon as the men had prayed and flung the barley, first they lifted back the heads of the victims, slit their throats, skinned them and carved away the meat from the thighbones and wrapped them in fat, a double fold sliced clean and topped with strips of flesh. And the old man burned these over dried split wood and over the quarters poured out glistening wine while young men at his side held five-pronged forks. Once they had burned the bones and tasted the organs they cut the rest into pieces, pierced them with spits, roasted them to a turn and pulled them off the fire† (Homer 93) Myths were also used for other purposes than learning. â€Å"But a myth was not only an explanation. People also carried out religious ceremonies related to the myths† (Gaarder, 25). Like most other religions at the time, the Ancient Greeks’ religions consisted of brutal rituals and rites that contrasted greatly to the thoughts of Buddhism (Connolly 87). Buddhism teaches of kindness to animals whereas Greek religion utilized animal cruelty as part of their holy worship to the gods. The gods of Olympus, who were created in the ultimate image of the Greek people, used the forms of innocent animals to manipulate and get what they wanted. In many instances, Zeus used the guise of animals when he wanted to capture a woman and gain her trust. â€Å"[T]hat very instant [Zeus] fell madly in love with Europa [ H]e thought it well to be cautious, and before appearing to Europa he changed himself into a bull† (Hamilton 101). However, rather than setting an example to revere animals, this teaches people to use animals in any way possible to reach the desired end. Even more opposed to Buddhism was the fact that a Greek hero was someone who had extreme strength or other physical features that he could use against animals. Hercules is one of the best examples of this notion. He is considered the greatest Greek hero ever to live. Through a tragic sequence of events, he killed his sons and wife, but was doomed to live on in order to undergo a series of trials to redeem himself. His first predicament was to â€Å"kill the lion of Nemea. Hercules solved [that] by choking the life out of [the lion]† (Hamilton 231). Hercules also had to drive out the â€Å"Stymphalian birds, which were a plague to the people of Stymphalus because of their enormous numbers† (Hamilton 232). This shows that, unlike Buddhists, Greeks could not live in peace with nature, but instead hated nature. Ancient Greeks did not want anything to do with nature, let alone be a part of it. Hercules also had to capture many animals in these trials such as the â€Å"stag with horns of gold†, â€Å"a great boar which had its lair on Mount Erymanthus†, â€Å"the savage bull that Poseidon had given Minos†, â€Å"the man-eating mares of King Diomedes of Thrace†, the cattle of Geryon†, and â€Å"Cerberus the three-headed dog† (Hamilton 232-233). Hercules inspired the Greeks not by staying in peace with nature but instead by forcing it to conform to his will in a harsh, cruel way. Hercules made sure he was above nature, a predicament the Buddhists avoided and even condemned. In summary, Greeks wanted to overcome nature whereas Buddhists wanted to be one with nature. â€Å"So by the beaked ships the Argives formed for battle, arming round you, Achilles –Achilles starved for war-and faced the Trojan ranks along the plain’s high ground[†¦T]he Achaeans kept on gaining glory- great Achilles who held back from the brutal fighting so long had just come blazing forth. Chilling tremors shook the Trojans’ knees, down to the last man, terrified at the sight: the headlong runner coming, gleaming in all his gear, afire like man-destroying Ares† (Homer 503, 505). As previously stated, Buddhists lived by the doctrine to fight hate with love. If Ancient Greeks had a concise doctrine about war, it would have been to fight hate with more hate. Ancient Greek civilization centralized around their love of carnage. The majority of Ancient Greek myths revolved around war or other forms of fighting. The Iliad is a 537-page myth about one war and it glorifies all aspects of war. The heroes of The Iliad are not monks or The Buddha like in Buddhism. Instead, the heroes of The Iliad are Achilles and Hector, two soldiers magnificent in warfare and bloodthirsty through and through. In addition, Achilles is most illustrious in The Iliad when he is the most sanguinary. â€Å"[Diomedes] went whirling into the slaughter now, hacking left and right and hideous groans broke from the drying Thracians slashed by the sword-the ground ran red with blood. [†¦]Tydeus’ son went tearing into that Thracian camp until he’d butchered twelve. [†¦]But now the son of Tydeus came upon the king, the thirteenth man, and ripped away his life. [†¦]Patroclus tore [Pronous’s] chest left bare by the shield-rim, loosed his knees and the man went crashing down. [†¦ Then Patroclus] stabbed [Thestor’s] right jawbone, ramming the spearhead square between his teeth so hard he hooked him by that spearhead over the chariot-rail, hoisted, dragged the Trojan out. [†¦Patroclus then] gaffed him off his car [†¦] and flipped him down face first, dead as he fell. Next [†¦] he flung a rock and it struck between [Erylaus’s] eyes and the man’s whole skull split in his heavy helmet. [Patroclus] crowded corpse on corpse on the earth. † (Homer, 292, 426-427) Even more horrific to the eyes of Buddhists would be the battle scenes in The Iliad that truly show the awe and glory the ancient Greeks saw in war. The Iliad was a myth that served more as entertainment than anything else. This shows that Ancient Greeks were amused by this kind of literature. Buddhists believe in not seeking to explain nature. By contrast, Ancient Greeks did precisely this with their myths. â€Å"[A myth] is an explanation of something in nature; how, for instance, any and everything in the universe came into existence: men, animals, this of that tree or flower, the sun, the moon, the stars, storms, eruptions, earthquakes, all that is and all that happens† (Hamilton 12). Ancient Greeks wanted to know how everything happened around them so they could manipulate their environment more easily. This is a central division between Ancient Greeks and Buddhism. Whereas Buddhists believe that time does not exist, Ancient Greeks were engrossed by time. All throughout The Iliad, Homer stresses how long the war has been going on and how it worries and distresses everyone involved. Unlike Buddhists, the Greeks do not disown the belief of time. They stay true to the traditional man-made vision of time instead of throwing out their problems by abandoning the idea of time. â€Å"[The natural philosopher] Heraclitus (c. 540-480 B. C. )[†¦] was from Ephesus in Asia Minor. He thought that constant change, or glow, was in fact the most basic characteristic of nature. [†¦ ]‘Everything flows,’ said Heraclitus. Everything is in constant flux and movement, nothing is abiding. Therefore we ‘cannot step twice into the same river. When I step into the river for the second time, neither I nor the river are the same’† (Gaarder 34). Slowly, Greek culture started to move away from religion and more towards philosophy. It evolved from a â€Å"mythological mode of thought to one based on experience and reason† (Gaarder 27). People could make ideas for themselves and create new beliefs instead of going back to the myths. The world started a shift from relying on religion to analyzing the world with science and philosophy. Surprisingly, this is where similarities between Greek and Buddhist culture were born. At first, the two religions of the ancient Greeks and the Buddhists clashed greatly. However, through the move away from mythical religion the Greek beliefs were brought closer towards the religion of Buddhism. Heraclitus here used the same metaphor for his philosophy as Siddhartha used for his. Although the passages were said in different situations and with different words, both quotes have the same general philosophy that time does not truly exist. A river is usually a sign of separation; a river acts as a divider in most cases. However, this river brings two very different cultures together in a very powerful way that is clear to all. Nature is everything outside and inside a man or a woman or a child. Nature is every breath taken, every step forward, every glance made, every wind blown, and every flower planted. The two cultures of Greece and Buddhism showed great contrasts in the beginning but one resounding similarity was found in something as simple as a river. India shows a cyclic weather that inspired the thought of rebirth while Greece shows a harsh terrain that inspired animosity between man and nature. As a consequence, Buddhists thought that nature and man are one while Greeks were taught to be above nature and manipulate it in any way possible. Buddhists lived in ultimate peace while the ancient Greeks lived in love of carnage. The Buddhist outlook on nature is derived from the belief that man is one with nature whereas the original Greek outlook is derived from the thought that man is above nature. Nature is the essence of the world, the aura of everything around people. These two cultures, although vastly different, impacted human belief and intellect forever.

Language: The True Tale of the Great Gatsby Essay -- The Great Gatsby

Language: The True Tale of the Great Gatsby The Jazz age was a time of glamour, sparkle, parties, music, the extreme rich, the extreme poor, and the exultation of lawlessness; F. Scoot Fitzgerald was no exception. Fitzgerald was enamored by the life of money, status, and beautiful people on a hopeless spiral into self destruction. The moral decadence of America became a prevailing theme in the works of Fitzgerald, taking birth fully within The Great Gatsby. This novel is brought to life by narrator Nick Carraway who is a moral Midwestern man, infatuated, much as Fitzgerald was, by the parties and pizzazz of the east. Gatsby is a mysterious rich man, taken by love, but caught up in the deviant nature of the days. The morals of the entire cast in this ballet are as whimsical as the sheets of Jazz music that emanated from the musicians of the day. This constant change of character was always more eloquently explained by the language Fitzgerald used, than the actual plot of the story. The language that Fitzgerald used within te story, was more indicative to the actual story than the plot itself. While the character analysis of many of the characters may seem incomplete, by simply analyzing the words that were used to describe the characters and their surroundings, one can derive an in-depth hypothesis about each. One can first see this use of language by looking at the point of view that the characters are seen in. Nick, the narrator, comes to Long Island, completely drawn by riches. Without even realizing it, Nick equates money to beauty and happiness. Fitzgerald’s use of language through Nick, always describes daisy as entrancing, beautiful, charming, tempting, sumptuous, and many other sexual, beautiful words; ... ...arn more about the character themselves. It is this that makes Fitzgerald the great author of the Jazz age and The Great Gatsby the great book of this age. Many people have argued that if it weren’t for jazz music, the culture of that age would not have been born. It is not the plot that is the primary bearer of symbolism and themes within The Great GatsbyI, rather it was the language. The language, that like jazz, told a whole story in a few scales. Jazz was the soul of the culture, it was their feelings and emotions on scales and scores. The case is the same with language of The Great Gatsby. The language is the soul of the novel, the lungs through which the theme breathes its life. Works Cited F. Scott Fitzgerald. The Great Gatsby. New York London Toronto Sydney Singapore: First Scribner Paperback Fiction Edition Published by Simon & Schuster, 1995*

21st century religious fundamentalism and 20th century European Fascism Essay

Religious fundamentalism is the belief that social and political life should be organized on the basis of what are seen as essential religious principles that are supported by a belief in the literal truth of scared texts.1 Fascism, on the other hand is a totalitarian ideology that centers itself upon the leader and possesses the ‘anti-factor’ whereby it rejects a whole lot of other ideologies such as liberalism and communism. At first glance, there seems to be not much connection between 21st century religious fundamentalism and 20th century European Fascism; however a more detailed comparison between the two ideologies will reveal similarities that caused the former to be viewed by some as the â€Å"new fascism† and differences that made this view irrelevant. In the first half of this paper, I am going to compare and contrast the various similarities and differences between 21st century religious fundamentalism and 20th century European Fascism and then show that to deem religious fundamentalism as a new form of fascism is really unjustified. In the remaining half of the paper, I will make an argument for my belief that 21st century religious fundamentalism should indeed be considered as an ideology and also the basis of its mass appeal. Due to the complexities and varieties of 21st century religious fundamentalism and 20th century fascism, the similarities and differences listed below can be seen as generalizations and thus proven wrong by certain sects of religious fundamentalism or certain style of fascism. However, this is inevitable as this is the only way to compare the similarities and differences between these two complex ideologies. The first similarity between 21st century religious fundamentalism and 20th century European Fascism is the emphasis in both ideologies upon charismatic leadership. Many of the fundamentalists believe in the embodiment of ‘truth’ by their leader who will in turn implement it.2 For instance, in the Catholic faith, the pope is seen as the Vicar of Christ and can do no wrong.3 Furthermore, Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of Islamic Iran was recognized first as Ayatollah (a ‘reflection of Allah’) and then Grand Ayatollah. 4Fascism is based upon the cult of personality built around its leaders and it is effectively crafted to exploit this cult. For instance, Hitler effectively cultivated the Fuhrer cult through Nazi propaganda machine under the expertise of Goebbels and through films such as ‘Triumph of Will’ by Leni Riefenstahl.5 Perhaps fascism’s huge emphasis on charismatic leadership is best embodied by Mussolini’s proclamation, â₠¬Å"Fascism is Mussolinism†¦what would Fascism be, if I had not been?†6 The second similarity between these two ideologies is the intolerance shown by both ideologies upon conflicting elements that goes against their principles. For instance, some sects of religious fundamentalism such as evangelicalism or Islamic fundamentalism exhibits little tolerance for other faiths and in some instances even prosecute and victimize minorities that believes in other faiths in a largely Islamist or Christian country. This intolerance also translates into the belief that religious views can be coercive and religious views ought to have a role in politics thus cementing the power of the religious fundamentalists in their country. This is comparable to the racism and anti-semitism present in European Fascism whereby the proclaimed enemies of the ideologies were shown no mercies and prosecuted and victimized through no faults of their own. The most extreme illustration of this is the holocaust which was brought about systematically by the Nazis. These two similarities certainly contributed to 21st century religious fundamentalism been branded by some as â€Å"the new fascism†. However, the more important contributing factor should be the increasing role that religion is playing in world politics. Judaism has produced its own militant â€Å"nationalist† terrorists; Buddhists show a militant and violent side in their politics in Sri Lanka against Hindu Tamils. 7 A few American evangelists have engaged in murder and violence on the abortion issue.8 Islam-inspired terrorism also received much publicity especially after the 911 attack. Furthermore, religious fundamentalists have tried their best to exert their influence through proper channels of government. For instance, American fundamentalists fielded candidates for elections.9 Thus the increasing influence that religious fundamentalists are trying to exert in politics and the adverse violent happenings that they brought in the 21st century doubtlessly brought echoes of the 20th century European Fascism which brought about not only the 2nd World War but also the holocaust. However, to brand 21st century religious fundamentalism as the ‘new fascism’ is not only incorrect but also unjustified. In the following paragraphs, I will proceed to show the differences between 21st century religious fundamentalism and 20th century European Fascism. 21st century religious fundamentalism does not contain elements of racism, anti-semitism or the belief in the possibility of a master race. It also holds no faith in eugenics. Furthermore, it is also an ideology that does not preach upon imperialism, militarism or world domination. All the above elements are defining attributes of 20th century European Fascism. The mere evidence that religious fundamentalism does not believe in all these attributes made the branding of it as a new form of fascism unjustified. Many religious fundamentalists believe that political power should be subordinated to religious power whereby the Bishop, the Rabbi, or the Ayatollah should be able to make the final decision on social issues.10 The best case scenario for religious fundamentalists would be as in the case of Iran where they actually govern however, compromises are made between religious fundamentalists and secular authorities.11 This belief that political power should be subordinate to religious power is of course the direct opposite of fascism whereby churches (religion) should be subordinate to the state. 21st century religious fundamentalism also possess other aspects in their ideology that is absent in 20th century European Fascism. Some of these attributes are otherworldliness and messianic spirit (where fundamentalists are concerned with the sacred and devote energy only in activities consonant with the words of God), against science (rejecting critical interpretations of the Bible and Darwin’s evolutionary theory), belief in the supernatural, moralism and the subordination of women.12 After showing the differences between 21st century religious fundamentalism and 20th century European Fascism, I will like to conclude that to brand the former as â€Å"new fascism† is not only unfair but incorrect. Next, this paper shall argue for 21st century religious fundamentalism to be accorded its rightful status as an ideology. Before I start defending my belief that religious fundamentalism is an ideology, I will like to provide the definitions of political theory and political philosophy. This is because of the commonly interchangeable usage of ideology, theory and philosophy and thus a clear distinction between the three terms will be helpful to my argument. Political philosophy is defined as a â€Å"disinterested search for the principles of the good state and the good society.†13 Political theory has been defined as â€Å"disinterested search for knowledge of political and social reality.† 14 Thus many scholars claimed that political philosophy is a normative theory while political theory is an empirical theory.15 Political ideology contains both the normative and empirical propositions.16 Thus, I will now start my argument by looking at the characteristics of an ideology and how religious fundamentalism actually fits these characteristics and rejects any suggestions that religious fundamentalism is only a ‘philosophy’ or a ‘theory’. â€Å"Ideologies arise in conditions of crisis and in sections of society to whom the hitherto prevailing outlook has become unacceptable†17 This accounts for the resurgence of religious fundamentalism in the late 20th to 21st century(similar to how European Fascism evolved) where social problems in western countries such as Britain and America have caused evangelicals to organize pressure groups to petition against abortion laws and other problems such as pornography. This further explains the popularity of political Islam in the Middle East as it is the only other viable solution to the secular ideologies propagated by the West. â€Å"An ideology is more than just ideas; it is also actions based upon those ideas.†18 21st century religious fundamentalism can be seen to fulfill this criterion as many examples show this. One example will be the establishment of Iran as an Islamic state and in its latest issue of Iran daily; Iran reiterated that it will still maintain its fundamentalist ways despite pressures from the United States.19 Another example will be Evangelicals forming pressure groups to translate their ideas into actions. â€Å"Ideology includes both empirical and normative elements-empirical assertions that certain conditions exist, and normative assertions that a certain political order is to be preferred.†20 21st century religious fundamentalism does possess this quality and one instance will be how Islamic fundamentalist view the Israel issue where they see Israel as a western creation due to no fault of their own and sought not to recognize the status quo but to take steps to revise it. Another example will be Islamic fundamentalists’ view of the United States role in the Middle East. â€Å"Ideology tends to be exclusive, absolute, and universal.† 2121st century Religious Fundamentalism contains various different sects, for instance, evangelicalism and Islamic fundamentalism and thus could not lay claim to this criterion. However, there are indeed common attributes within religious fundamentalism such as the inerrancy of the â€Å"Written Word† and the subordination of political power. Furthermore, within the different varieties of religious fundamentalism, one can points out that evangelicalism and Islamic fundamentalism is by itself, exclusive, absolute and universal. Lastly, â€Å"Ideologies seek to elicit a response of commitment and obligation on the part of the adherents.† Again, this criterion is easily satisfied by 21st century religious fundamentalism. This can be seen in the 911 suicide bombing of the twin towers by terrorists inspired by Political Islam. To pursue ‘jihad’, Islamic extremists are willing to give up their lives for a greater good. On a more moderate note, ideologies certainly influence evangelicals who try to fight against social laws that their ideology deem inappropriate. After showing the ability of 21st century religious fundamentalism of fulfilling the various criteria of an ideology, I can safely conclude that 21st century religious fundamentalism is an ideology and not a political philosophy or a political theory. In this last part of the paper, I will provide the basis of its mass appeal. The basis of 21st century religious fundamentalism’s mass appeal must be its political vision of the world and the kind of a new society that it can bring to the world. Faced with social problems such as rising crime rates, teenage pregnancy and abortion rates in the Western countries, evangelical activists draw strength from its ideology and attempt to fight all these social problems through the formation of pressure groups pressuring and cajoling the government to make improvements in all realms of lives, from abolishing abortion to anti-pornography laws to religious education in school. These actions by evangelical activists from their perspective can be seen not only as morally rewarding but also efforts made that adhere to their religious beliefs. Political Islam’s appeal in the Middle East can also be attributed to the erosion of traditional values brought about by modernization.22 Furthermore, complicated by the colonial experience, the failure of secular nationalism, the Israel creation and unhealthy US interferences in the region, political Islam remains a very attractive alternative to western ideas.( the reason been that Islam cover all aspects of lives and offer solutions to just about everything) In conclusion, this paper has shown the similarities and the differences between 21st century religious fundamentalism and 20th century European Fascism and also argued that to call religious fundamentalism â€Å"new fascism† is not only incorrect but unjustified. This paper has also argued for 21st century religious fundamentalism to be considered as an ideology through the demonstration of it fulfilling the various criteria of an ideology. Lastly, this paper has provided the writer’s perception for the basis of 21st century religious fundamentalism mass appeal. Bibliography Andrew Heywood, â€Å"Politics†, second edition, palgrave foundations, 2002 Aristotle A. Kallis, â€Å"The Fascism Reader†, first edition, Routledge, 2003 Graham E. Fuller, â€Å"The Future of Political Islam†, palgrave, 2003 J. Christopher Soper, â€Å"Evangelical Christianity in the United States and Great Britain†, Macmillian, 1994 Reo M. Christenson, â€Å"Ideologies and modern politics†, first edition, Fletcher and Son Ltd, 1972 Roy C. Macridis and Mark Hulliung, â€Å"Contemporary Political Ideologies, Movements and Regimes†,sixth edition, HarperCollins College Publishers, 1996 http://www.iran-daily.com/1384/2526/html/ Iran Daily Newspaper copyright,2005, 20/03/06 1 Andrew Heywood, â€Å"Politics†, second edition, palgrave foundations, 2002, p. 63 2 Roy C. Macridis and Mark Hulliung, â€Å"Contemporary Political Ideologies, Movements and Regimes†,sixth edition, HarperCollins College Publishers, 1996, p.233 3 Hulluing, p. 233 4 Hulluing, p. 234 5 Aristotle A. Kallis, â€Å"The Fascism Reader†, first edition, Routledge, 2003, p.294 6 Reo M. Christenson, â€Å"Ideologies and modern politics†. first edition, Fletcher and Son Ltd, 1972, p. 60 7 Graham E. Fuller, â€Å"The Future of Political Islam†, palgrave, 2003 p. 78 8 Fuller, p. 78 9 Fuller, p. 78 10 Hulluing, p. 233 11 Hulluing, p. 233 12 Hulluing, p. 233 13 Christenson, p. 7 14 Christenson, p. 7 15 Christenson, p. 8 16 Christenson, p. 8 17 Christenson, p. 9 18 J. Christopher Soper, â€Å"Evangelical Christianity in the United States and Great Britain†,Macmillian,1994, p.26 19 http://www.iran-daily.com/1384/2526/html/ Iran Daily Newspaper copyright,2005, 20/03/06 20 Christenson, p. 11 21 Christenson, p. 11 22 Fuller, p. 68

What You Eat Is Your Business - 894 Words

Obesity is a rising epidemic that has long plagued the citizens of America. Unfortunately, the fight to end obesity has opened a gateway for governmental control over the personal lives of American consumers. At first glance, many Americans might be convinced that congress’s efforts to eliminate this concerning health issue is favorable to society as a whole. But on closer investigation, it is easily seen that the governments influence on such a personal matter produces the antithesis of beneficial and ultimately aids in nurturing obesity. In Radley Balko’s essay â€Å"What You Eat Is Your Business†, he is rightfully insists that the anti-obesity regulations and restrictions set by the government wrongfully alleviates American consumers of their individual responsibility for their own well-being by transforming health care from a private to a public issue, stripping them of the personal incentives needed to learn about, charge, and be rewarded for their physical health. By playing the country’s personal nutritionist through its restrictions and modifications on food, the government seemingly wipes out the need for education on healthful dieting habits. Unfortunately, without this knowledge citizens become increasing reliant on the government to set its standard for what they should eat, instead of being able to make the proper decisions for themselves. An outstanding example provides by Radley Balko in his writing â€Å"What You Eat is Your Business† is the recent wave of schoolShow MoreRelatedWhat You Eat Is Your Business Essay1140 Words   |  5 PagesRadley Balko’s essay â€Å"What You Eat Is Your Business,† Balko argues that what we put into our bodies is our business, not the government’s, and that personal responsibility should be primary in our nutrition choices. I agree wholeheartedly. However, while I do agree that personal responsibility is paramount, in the new age of the Affordable Care Act ( which had not been implemented prior to Balko’s writing), it is becoming hard to say that the government should stay out of my business, when healthcare isRead MoreWhat You Eat Is Your Business868 Words   |  4 Pagesâ€Å"What You Eat Is Your Business,† by Radley Balko In the article of Radley Balko, he considers obesity a problem in the nation. Balko believes that it is unhealthy for children to be eating bad food but it’s their choices to eat that food. Balko is saying that if people are eating unhealthy and are having health problems everyone shouldnt have to pay for their health problems. Balko says, â€Å"In other words, bringing the government between you and your waistline.† Basically he is saying that theRead MoreWhat You Eat Is Your Business1315 Words   |  6 Pageseven the family of 4, finding time to eat a healthy meal fells like it can be impossible. Some might argue everyone can find time to eat a healthy meal, but as a full time college student with a family of 4 with another kid on the way. Even the little time I do have at home doesn’t change that I have not had a chance to get to the store for two weeks to buy food. Given the little time and lack of food, the options can be slim, but fast food addictions can cause you to make bad choices too. So when doesRead Moreâ€Å"What You Eat Is Your Business† reflection1000 Words   |  4 Pagesâ€Å"What You Eat Is Your Business† reflection The common thought of most Americans living in the United States that it is the greatest country on planet earth, and second is not even close. They believe this notion because of the freedoms this great nation was founded on: The freedom of religion, the freedom of speech, the freedom of assembly. These freedoms turn into more simplistic generalities that are assumed and exercised by Americans daily, such as the freedom of choice. Although the freedom ofRead MoreWhat You Eat Is Your Business By Radley Balko863 Words   |  4 Pagesor that Americans have many diseases that contribute to being obese. â€Å"What You Eat is Your Business† by Radley Balko expresses that people are at fault for making such unhealthy food choices. Others argue that the food industry is to blame for being so unhealthy. According to David Zinczenko in â€Å"Don’t Blame the Eater† he blames the fast food industry as well as the consumer. Zinczenko asks â€Å"shouldn’t we know bet ter than to eat two meals a day in fast food restaurant’s?† (392). So, who is to blameRead MoreAnalysis Of What You Eat Is Your Business By Radley Balko833 Words   |  4 Pagesâ€Å"What You Eat Is Your Business† by Radley Balko Your Are In Control It has become common today to dismiss the idea of personal responsibility, however, Radley Balko,   author of â€Å"What You Eat Is Your Business,† has not. The article, published on Monday 23, 2004,on the website Cato Institute, reminds us of the importance and significance of personal responsibility in dealing with obesity.   Additionally, he argues that   government’s   attempt to   restrict American diets and without consumers being   heldRead MoreWhat You Eat Is Your Business By Radley Balko And Junking Junk Food By Judith Warner1223 Words   |  5 PagesWhether or not a person wants a burger and french-fries’ or a salad from the salad bar, the decision should be up to him/her. Two articles share views on food, â€Å"What You Eat Is Your Business† by Radley Balko and â€Å"Junking Junk Food† by Judith Warner. These two authors wrote articles about how they felt about food and how it’s related to obesity. However, Radley Balk o would not approve of Judith Warner’s views on food for the reason that the two authors have different viewpoints on the aspect of theRead MoreWhat You Eat Is Your Business By Radley Balko And Don t Blame The Eater By David Zinczenko Essay775 Words   |  4 PagesWhen it comes to the topic of obesity, most will readily agree that it is a growing dilemma. This argument has many writers bringing different responses. Two explanations are debated in What You Eat is Your Business by Radley Balko and Don’t Blame the Eater by David Zinczenko. Both pieces create a good stance on the topic of obesity. Balko’s piece, however, has a better all around flow, organization and consistency. In Don’t Blame the Eater, David Zinczenko composes his opinion on the fast foodRead MoreNever Eat Alone1360 Words   |  6 PagesNeCaroline Madden Prep for Profession Jonathan Flom 18 March 2013 Never Eat Alone Never Eat Alone by Keith Ferrazzi is extremely applicable to the performing arts business. The book emphasizes on the importance of knowing your own brand, connecting with others, and relating to others on a human level. To be in the acting business, you need to know the package you are going to present yourself with, you need to be able to work well with others, and in the audition room make a human connectionRead MoreThe Problem With Obesity And Obesity995 Words   |  4 PagesHave you ever drank a pop or soda? I’m sure most people would answer yes to that question. But a better question is do you really know what is inside the can? Everything we put in our body effects us. From vegetables to doughnuts, everything carries nutritional facts with it. Some are better than others. But one thing is for sure; the nation is in a crisis with obesity. Weight gain is on a rise and more and more of the population is getting bigger and bigger. This can be credited to the nutritional