Philosophy of Life
Humans have a distinguishing nature, which defines the way they think, act, and feel. The human nature has influenced the culture that humans have kept with each other. In my observation, humans have a distinct culture that defines their operations and activities. For many years, many studies have been carried out to establish the human nature, which defines all human beings. Various views on the nature of human beings have been developed to explain human behaviors and mannerisms. Aristotle and Plato argued that humans may be explained as conjugal animals because they couple when adults to build household. It is also argued that humans are political animals with the potential of developing complex communities besides being mimetic (Oruka, 1996).
Recent years have seen the development of modern views on the nature of humans, such as, a being with potency to think, develop, and replicate. This modern view considers human beings as having the physical and spiritual the potential to do a lot than they think they can do. This implies that humans have the ability to do great things, and do much good than harm if they have the right conditions. Humans are the greatest beings because they are created to do good to themselves and others.
I. My Beliefs on Humankind
Life has taught me to take on a number of beliefs on various issues in life. This is because of my personal experience and observations that I have made from my own life, as well as, the lives of others. I hold the view that humankind can be best understood from the common beliefs, practices, and cultures that they maintain. This is as opposed to taking a skewed view of humankind based on ethical, spiritual, or personal perceptions about the human life, and humankind. This is important in ensuring that the definition of humankind is not biased. However, I hold diverse views on the following subjects:
Nature of humankind
I hold the view that the nature of human being is to do good by showing some concern to others. This implies that given an appropriate environment, humans would only engage in good acts, which are self-rewarding and add to the values of others. In this context, humans do not have an evil nature. Those who engage in evil, do so because of some challenges, problems, or bad experiences that they have faced in life. I find this view common in all rational human beings because all human beings would do good to others out of their own free will and without coercion.
There exist a few ideas I relate with in explaining the nature of human beings. The first idea is that all human beings given free will endeavor to do good for themselves and others. This view is qualified by the many appropriate things done by humans, as well as, the many wrong things done for the good. Secondly, I relate with is that doing a good must always be rewarded. This view may be explained as an action-reaction association between the doers and receivers good things. Besides, change in the environment or experience influences humans at times to come out of their nature and commit evils. In other words, evils done by humans are consequences of a mistake, failure, or background problem. Lastly, human beings always wish not to get tired when doing good to others.
Diagnosis of what is wrong with humankind
What is wrong with humans is that they at times engage in evil, though they are made with the nature of behaving appropriately. This is the greatest problem that humans have because humans have engaged in evil deeds in the effort of doing good to themselves or others. For instance, humans have engaged in evil acts like stealing or killing others to make money that can satisfy their needs and make them live a satisfactory life. The purpose of seeking the money for a better living is an act of good intention, but the real act of stealing, killing, or bribery is an evil act since it works against the good of other humans who work hard. This has been a major issue related with many of the evils done by humans.
Prescription for putting it right
The society must be taught and informed of the need to be humane and have the right values towards humanity's life and existence. In addition, it will also be important to teach the society to understand that the means of behaving well does not justify the evils that are done deliberately by humans to their fellow humans. This will minimize the human caused evils in the world.
Remaining unresolved issues
The remaining unresolved issues relates to establishing the nature of the human mind and reasoning. Much research studies are underway to establish the mind and its moral and ethical obligation, which influences human behavior and mannerisms.
II. Personal Philosophy
My faith about Catholic development and the role of crisis holds that the Catholic view stands the test of time: God is the only one who can address crisis resolution. The Catholics admit the existence of crisis with emphasis on the need to solve some while some are solved by God. This is a practical and a better approach in understanding conflicts as they come.
My personal philosophy is the need to be good to others regardless of reward and consequences my actions. This philosophy implies that life is best when it is made of appropriate deeds, and with people who avoid doing any evil deeds. The Hindu and Catholic philosophies also relate to this. The Catholics advocate for harmony and peace in the society, which can be achieved through my philosophy. The Hindu doctrine requires people to be humble and embrace good to themselves and others (Raith, 2005).
III. My Roles as Mother
As a mother, I handle a number of roles in the house and other places while taking care of my children. In my role, take care of my children in the house by ensuring that they have eaten, are in proper health, and providing an appropriate social atmosphere at home. The goal of ensuring they have eaten is to ensure they maintain a good health. The goal of providing a warm social atmosphere for my children (through talking with them) is to promote proper social development among these children. These aspects are important in the growth of my children, and are critical in preparing them to be responsible individuals in the society.
I have gained much insight from this activity. While taking care of my children, I have learnt that they always intend to do right. However, lack of knowledge and curiosity often leads them to make mistakes. I have also learnt that children have the natural feeling of establishing when they have done right or wrong. For instance, my child would turn the face dull when he knows he had made a mistake even before I realized it. This indicates that children have some intrinsic ability to distinguish the right and wrong, and would only need further guidance. My personal vision as a mother and wife is to raise a healthy and prosperous family of today and tomorrow (Evernden, 1998).
III. Organizational Values and Business Ethics
VA hospital's workplace values include the values of care, love, and hope. The Hospital has emphasized on the need for its staff to embrace high level of care to the patients, develop a love for all, and give hope to each other. These values have made the hospital's workplace one of the best places in the country. The hospital mission is to provide the best healthcare services in the region so save…
Human Nature The Traditional Western view of human nature has its roots in the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle, both of whom espoused the primacy of reason over passion. Those views in turn impacted the Judeo-Christian belief systems. Among the harshest critics of the Traditional Western view of human nature are feminists, who feel that "the rationalist view, and the Judeo-Christian religious view based on it, are sexist," (101). This accusation
Human Nature A Comparison of Hobbes' and Plato's Philosophical Views Trying to understand how a philosopher arrives at the reasoned opinions they put on paper is essential to also understanding what they wrote. The how is often a matter of the people they have borrowed from, but that can be an unreliable method of determining the origins of their philosophy also. Two in particular are difficult to judge using the influences they
Life After Death Is there such a thing as life after death? This is a question which has attracted the attention of philosophers, scientists, and religions for centuries. The difficulty with the question of life after death is that there exists no genuine persuasive proof on the question one way or another: attempts to prove the phenomenon are seldom universally persuasive. In examining some realms in which the question of life
Philosophy (general) Given that experience is argued to be the foundation of knowledge (according to Locke) how - if at all - does Locke make room for what Leibniz would call 'necessary truths'? Gottfried Leibniz made many criticisms of the work of John Locke, while acknowledging its sophistication and importance, observing that 'although the author of the Essays says hundreds of fine things which I applaud, our systems are very different' (Leibniz,
This tends to create a negative view of the oppressed and increases the resistance to their cause. If I were to personally create a philosophy of nonviolence, I would also, like King, focus on the positive effects of such a form of resistance. The basis for my philosophy would be the qualities that make us human. Most importantly, we are human and as such we are able to reason and
He exemplifies by saying that anyone witnessing a child about to fall in a well would immediately turn to rescue the child without seeking any advantages in doing so. But while this position has been argued on the grounds that "such an example is not intended to prove that all men will actually take some action in such circumstances" (Allinson apud Chan 1996), Chan has defended Mencius by emphasizing