The writings of Socrates are secular, and Jesus blessed humanity with divine revelations. For the argument of the Socrates, there were and there are and there will be counter-arguments. The revelations of Jesus…
Download file to see previous pages...
Inner growth is possible only through spirituality. Philosophers like Socrates were aware of it and said that human beings must make sincere efforts for such growth and experience the divine.
Socrates (469-399) was a great intellectual, who constantly knocked at the portals of spirituality, but struck up at the final frontiers of the mind. He was an individual who cared for the bodily equipment, knew that a healthy body is one of the prime requirement for spiritual pursuits.
Jesus arrived on this Planet Earth, as a Realized Soul. He raveled in the state of bliss always; rather it was his permanent nature. To him, spirituality and science were one and the same. At that level, one is the knower of everything, conqueror of the time concept; Jesus arrived as the conqueror of the forces of nature, for a predetermined assignment prescribed for him by God.
Socrates and Jesus are incomparable. This is however, not to belittle the intellectual greatness of Socrates. But intelligence of a thousand individuals like Socrates is not march for a spark from the Spiritual Being whose secular name was Jesus! Yet they are similar in the sense that Socrates and his teachings were part of the same divinity and he was trying to reach the same goal as declared by Jesus.
The only option with the mind-level intellectuals is to surrender at the barrier of the mind and make profound efforts to transcend it and Socrates did the same but in his own style and understanding. With sincere efforts the grace of divinity it is possible, not otherwise and Socrates knew
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
What it has imparted us as a race is its value and capability of transforming man.Russell proposes that what philosophy does “is merely the attempt to answer such ultimate questions…critically, after exploring all that makes such questions puzzling, and after realizing all the vagueness and confusion that underlie our ordinary ideas”
91). The term “voluntary euthanasia” refers to a “physician putting a patient to sleep, not for the purpose of inducing anesthesia for surgery or otherwise relieving pain, but for the purpose of causing death by injecting a lethal drug” (ibid). In this paper these two terms are investigated as one issue.
The paper, however, also brings forward the contrary point of view of Leiser who thinks that the Death Penalty is not against the intrinsic human value as discussed by Kant. The paper will develop its own understanding by placing both point of views historically and concludes that Kantian conception can not be taken a-historically, i.e., as an abstract ideal.
This part focuses on the deformed images of God as well as humanity. The first part further raises many questions and the answers of these questions have been given in Second part of the book. The first part focuses on the emergence and development of the “Me Centred” approach.
One of the most notable and controversial assertions and the subject of this paper was his claiming that one cannot entirely depend on their senses to provide true information about their surroundings. This naturally elicited many criticisms especially from empiricists who held that the primary source of true knowledge was sensory experience.
It is the theory that mental and physical - which is represented by mind and body respectively - are actually separate and different things. "Discussion about dualism, therefore, tends to start from the assumption of the reality of the physical world, and then to consider arguments for why the mind cannot be treated as simply part of that world" (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosphy).
Throughout the known world, some form of the Golden Rule was a part of the general religious code for a great many of the people. The idea that the Golden Rule is a recognized factor in most of the world’s religions was stated by the 1993 Parliament of the World’s religions in a signed statement called Towards a Global Ethic: Initial Declaration.
He supports each soul, takes care of him, respects his autonomy, his self-interest in the correct sense, self-actualization and guides him to transcend the mind-barrier. The Individual Good is not to be construed in the secular sense. He
This super natural being is believed to be in charge of everything although the god varies according to ones belief e.g. Hindus’ god is represented by a cow, Muslims’ is Mohammed; they all converge to one God. Being a belief, it has
Non-Christians also have their own understanding of God. This also is well provided in religious books of non-Christians. The Qur’an by Muslims has diverse definition of God. The Hindus also have also their
8 Pages(2000 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Philosphy of God for FREE!