Cognitive-Behavioral Psychotherapy
If I was going to give advice to anyone seeking any kind of treatment I would first want to lay both options out on the table. First we will discuss what cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy is and what it consists of or who it may be beneficial to. We do not know what our friend is suffering from but certain dysfunctions and disorders may have more of an impact than other types of treatment. This type of therapy has proven itself in the long run good for people who suffer from panic disorders and depression. More research must be done to pin point what it is exactly about this approach that works but something about it is being done right. By using the cognitive-behavioral approach you are restructuring the whole outlook of what that client has grown up to believe in. This approach is teaching them a whole new belief system and new ways of looking at certain situations. One specific approach is called rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT) created by Albert Ellis. Maybe our friend has a maladaptive thought process that is slowing destroying the relationships in his life and his life in general. The REBT approach is going to help you relearn the "shoulds", "musts", and "oughts" in different situations in your life; it takes a clear stand on human values and human worth. It will help a person have a more positive outlook on these areas. Another major approach in this area is Beck's cognitive therapy; this was originally designed to be used on patients or clients that experience depression but now is also used for anxiety disorders. One form of this approach is also used for more conditions including eating disorders, obesity, personality disorders, substance abuse, and schizophrenia. According Beck people make bad decisions because of their dysfunctional beliefs; and because of their dysfunctional belief they also have a dysfunctional way of processing information (Butcher, Mineka, & Hooley, 2013, p.574-576).
In the first phase of reconstructing persons dysfunctional beliefs the clients will become aware of what patterns of thinking may be the cause of the dysfunctions. They need to understand what are the "abnormal" patterns of thinking and what are the "normal" patterns of thinking. They will need to be able to identify the wrong patterns of thinking and even record these thoughts as homework for their next therapy session. With the help of medical health professionals they will be able to identify why their patterns of thinking are abnormal and how it is causing distress with the rest of their life. They may also be asked to test new ways and new patterns of thinking to be able to have a comparison as to why they think the things they do (Butcher, Mineka, & Hooley, 2013, p.574-576). To be able to accomplish this whole process successfully I would think the client (my friend) should find a clinical therapist that they will be able to have an open trusting relationship with. When you explore a person's beliefs system and have to teach them from right and wrong, you would have to have a trusting relationship. If I am the client and I do not believe in what you are trying to help me correct within my patterns or thoughts then the treatment will not be as effective. This type of therapy is going to be good for a person who likes to see things mapped out. For example a person who suffers panic attacks they may use a form of cognitive therapy by mapping out the first initial cause of there attacks, so lets say one cause is worrying about being in a distressful situation and having a panic attack, the next step along the lines of this disorder is identifying the initial psychical symptoms of the panic attack. Cognitive therapy has helped lay this out in a cycle, the threat, then the thoughts of the situation to come, the body sensations that will follow in psychical forms, and then lastly the outcome of the whole situations which is usually catastrophic (Butcher, Mineka, & Hooley, 2013, p.192). This type of therapy might be beneficial if they believe the thinking patterns they carry are astray from what is considered to be "normal" and nondestructive to yourself or others.
Psychodynamic Therapist
The second approach should also have a good explanation and background as to why my friend should or should not choose this method. This therapeutic approach began with Sigmund Freud and is practiced in two different forms being classical psychoanalysis and psychoanalytically oriented psychotherapy. Both forms deal with trying to dig emotionally deep within the patient to find suppressed memories, thoughts, or actions that may have lead to the current situations at hand. Some say this type of approach in therapy is neglecting the patient's current needs and wants; the sole purpose of this therapy is to find something deep within that person's history to pinpoint why they are being affected today with this disorder or dysfunction. Through a rigorous schedule of therapy that includes meeting with a therapist three times a week, together the clinical specialist and the client will work in determining if there are any issues in the patients past that even they may not be connecting with their current situation. Some of Freud's original treatment analysis comes from a therapy called psychoanalysis. This type of therapy has four basic techniques including free association, analysis of dreams, analysis of resistance, and analysis of transference. The first technique free association is when the therapist has the client say whatever comes to mind and not associating it with a particular subject. In the long run this is to study what the unconscious mind may be directing towards. Although the patient may think these words are random they may have a deeper meaning to them in the long run but that is for the therapist to determine. Another technique that is used to try to find clues within the unconscious mind is the analysis of dreams. It is said that a person's desires and feelings let themselves out through the ways of our dreams. By distinguishing the symbols within the dreams we may be able to uncover the connections they have with the dysfunctions occurring in that person present state of mind (Butcher, Mineka, & Hooley, 2013, p.574-576).
The third technique following more of the original theories of Freud is the analysis of resistance. This is when the therapist finds areas within the client's life or past life that they are very unwilling to talk about. It is the therapists task to uncover these areas of things or experiences that their client does not want to talk about and it is also the therapists task to figure out if any of these uncovered secrets have anything to do with the dysfunctions that person is currently experiencing. The last technique is the analysis of transference, this is when the relationship of the client and therapist is studied because it has been determined that the way a person may treat their therapist will reflect the relationship they may have had with their own parents or caregivers, this process is called transference. If there is a type of connection between the therapist and client that reflects issues in the clients past then there could be a start to the path of being able to cure the client of their dysfunctions. The therapist would have to get the client to understand the transference relationship to be able to start the client on the road to recovery. The original version of psychodynamic theories are rarely practiced today, it may take several years to be able to pin point what in the patients past is affecting their lifestyles of today. Several years is also a long time to hope for a solution to your current dysfunctions your are dealing with, another way to think of it though, is several years is a small price to pay for a lifetime of symptom free living if the condition is pinpointed and cured (Butcher, Mineka, & Hooley, 2013, p.580-581).This approach of therapy is going to work well on someone who does has a distraught past that may have an unsettling closure to it. Although, many people do not even know they have this type of past because the thoughts or memories have been deeply suppressed within that person mind. I think this type of approach in therapy can also be used with other types of therapy. It is not going to hurt anyone to talk about random thoughts and feelings or to talk about what we dream about. If anything it is more information and background for the clinical therapist who is treating the client.
Conclusion
The advice I would present to my friend is the summaries written above on both different types of therapies. No matter what a patient or client should remember that not all therapies work on everyone, and it may take trial and error to find something that will be effective for your own situation. Psychotherapy should not be about ethics and cultural diversity but this can be an issue and may be an issue for some people. Many minorities have the disadvantage is choosing they would like to be treated by. Whether it is for reasons concerning health insurance or monetary issues or it could be because there are not enough trained clinical therapist in their area but both issues could have an impact on what treatment my friend where to receive. After reading different topics throughout this unit I believe it is very important to make sure that my friend would feel comfortable with the therapist they choose. We all have natural instincts as far as first impressions go, the client should be able to tell from the first meeting with the therapist if they want to continue the treatment. This is also why they say the relationship that the therapist holds with the client is so important, because it is a factor in determining how successful the entire treatment plan will be. Goldfried and Davila made a great argument in their article that the relationship in the therapeutic technique that is used is as equally important as the therapeutic relationship that is built. A good relationship is needed for the beginning analysis in gathering information and background from the client to the end when the patient graduates from their treatment plan. If there is no good connection in all aspects of the relationship then how is the doctor going to keep the patient focused on what they are to be doing to cure themselves. We have also learned that by focusing on therapeutic technique only did not produce very positive or powerful results (Goldfried & Davila, 2005).
The key factors that my friend should keep in mind are first finding a therapist who has accurately diagnosed the dysfunctions of the patient. Most likely they already have an existing relationship with a clinical therapist, they should research how that therapist would like to proceed with treatment and also research the topic themselves through different resources about the different treatment options. As much as a psychotherapist would work in helping your situation the main issue is that you also know your body well and maybe the therapist needs to keep an open mind in what their client is suggesting as a treatment plan that would work best for themselves or their lifestyle.
References:
Butcher, J., Mineka, S., & Hooley, J. (2013) Abnormal psychology. (15th ed.) Upper
Saddle River, NJ.
Goldfried, M. R., & Davila, J. (2005). The role of relationship and technique in therapeutic change. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 42(4), 421-430. doi:10.1037/0033-3204.42.4.421
Sunday, January 26, 2014
Sunday, January 19, 2014
True Altruism
The act of helping has been around since the dawn of mankind. Whether this act is something we learn by nature or by nurture is the question. History and research has taught us that humans are capable of being prosocial beings and displaying prosocial behaviors. Being prosocial and displaying helping actions have taught humans that we can build relationships with these actions. Altruistic helping has followed history and research as it is regarded as a genuine act of love and care without holding any connections or accountability with the person who is being helped (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014). Altruistic helping has been proven to come more from our nature rather than what we learn from culture. Through nature we are altruistic beings and through culture us being egotistic beings. Many cultures have shaped what is considered "good" overall for the society.
Auguste Comte was a philosopher in the 19th-century who held two very different views in the matter of why we help others. The first form of helping he called egotistic helping in which the person who if offering to help has motivation behind that offer, they in turn want some type of payment for the helping services they will provide or have already provided. This payment may not come in monetary form but rather other types of requests. For example maybe you need to help your buddy move from one place to another. Maybe you also will be moving someday and in turn for helping him you expect him to help you when the time comes. The helper's goal may simply be to gain social acceptance with the helping actions they have provided (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014). Another type of helping that Comte had presented was altruistic helping in which the helper has no interior motivation for helping, meaning they want nothing in return for the service they are going to provide. The motivation behind these two different types of helping actions is caused by empathy. Empathy is when you mentally and physically feel what another person is experiencing (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014).
When you understand and feel what another person is going through it makes your motivation automatic with no time to think about what you would want in return for the help you are providing. Could there really be help in this world that does not have hidden motivation? A person may have a hidden agenda or goal that they are need to reach and helping certain people along the way my improve what you are trying to reach but would this type motivation be considered a "bad" thing and does altruism really exist at all. In this paper we will review the motivation behind the helping factor and whether or not empathy drives altruism. We will also discovery research completed with two-year old subjects who display true altruism. This alone may prove that humans are altruistic through nature alone.
When we discuss what may be the driving factor in helping one another there are a few different philosophies about human altruism which includes; nature, nurture, generosity, and empathy. Nature especially is something to be talked about because we are born from nature and live in nature. Evolution is said to be a part of our selfless behaviors, it is a special part about what makes us human (Wilson, 2011). Our ability to discuss and work with other people and animals gives us a higher advantage in our species surviving in this world. During human evolution our genes may have been shaped by our altruistic actions over thousands of years. The "social groups" who were able to communicate and provide pro-social behaviors than less prosocial groups may have been the ones who survived and evolved though the centuries (Wilson, 2011). Less prosocial groups of people would have been weaved out because more prosocial groups worked together to survive. Natural selection does not allow individuals alone to survive but rather a "group" of individuals and their overall levels of functioning. Through human evolutions we have adapted to become prosocial animals. Prosocial animals help each other and "look out" for the group they are associated with (Wilson, 2011).
Our physical selves are nothing our without our mental selves. Research has shown that humans will wither and die without the connections and interactions of other humans even if our physical selves are well taken care of. Humans need the touch, love and care of other humans. It is that simple (Castano, 2013). Research has shown us that the area in the brain that is ignited when we our self feel pain is the same area of the brain when we know someone else is going through the same type of pain. Empathy through nature helps us become altruistic beings. Humans are connected to other humans through compassion. Compassion could have a strong drive behind people who display altruistic helping. Felix Warneken has completed remarkable research on young children and chimpanzees in regards to our altruistic nature in helping behaviors (Castano, 2013). For example, if an adult drops an item on the floor, children old enough to walk would pick the item up the adult. This is good evidence that we are born to relate to others and "know" instinctively when another human needs help. Human beings have a unique power to them called consciousness, we have the ability to think feel and react as well as think feel and react to other people. Consciousness could be calculated into the equation of where we get our altruistic feelings from (Castano, 2013). According to Castano, altruism exists in our human nature and how we use our helping behavior is up to the individual themselves (Castano, 2013).
A unique way in deciphering if one is prone to altruistic helping would be how the automatically react in certain situations. For humans to be truly altruistically motivated they must not display any anti-altruistic feelings or behaviors (Beardman, 2012). A person might be considered anti-altruistic if they allow themselves to contemplate the situation and allow considerations on whether or not they are going to take a helping hand in the situation at hand. For example, if a person is anti-altruistic they will not engage helping in a situation were they may break a nail or ruin a good pair of shoes (Beardman, 2012). A person who is truly altruistic in their soul will not weigh life and limb in the process of helping another person in need. Beardman believed that the bigger issue in helping behaviors is if someone is neither altruistic nor egotistic in their helping behaviors. This person may have no regard for another human being and would only worry about helping themselves or advancing themselves in this lifetime (Beardman, 2012). Mental health professionals have practices of predicting behavior and explaining our actions and behaviors. One could develop accounts and motives for our behaviors and actions in different situations. This methodology could lead us in the advancement to identify altruistic or anti-altruistic patterns in ones lifestyle (Beardman, 2012). It could also advance our understanding in what creates those altruistic or anti-altruistic actions and pave the way forward to new understanding in how we came become more of a helpful human being for others and our society.
Eva Fogelman had completed research on different families that had helped Jews during the time period of World War II. She found that many of the families had similar common denominators. For example, the “helpers” usually came from a loving and nurturing home and the caregivers of that home displayed altruistic characteristics (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014). The role model for those particular families also displayed characteristics in the fact that they accept people who are different; they may feel that we are all equal in this world of diversity. Research completed with 231 Gentiles who saved Jews from dire punishments has a higher ethical values and greater empathy along with higher understandings of equity(Baumeister & Bushman, 2014). A scale has been created to try and measure whether or not a person displays having altruistic behaviors. This scale is called the Self Report Altruism Scale. Participants are asked a series of questions that include your helping behaviors over the past year such as filling out a donor ID card, volunteering for non-profit organizations or charities, giving money or items to charity (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014).
Altruism alone is the meaning of selflessness and having a higher regard for the overall "good" of the group as a whole. If humans need the care of other humans to be able to survive and flourish would it not make since that we are altruistic by nature not culture. Nature says go and culture says stop (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014). What if some cultures are thwarting us to go against our nature and focus on the bigger issue of our own self, you take care of the self first. The action of helping another person, place, or thing is within our nature. These positive acts whether that are though altruistic helping or egoistic helping should be embraced with love and care. It feels good to have the helping hand in different situations. It feels good to have people believe in your own self and be "liked" or "loved" by your culture or society. How else are we to prove as humans that we are "good" people and would like to be accepted and belonged by your society or culture? Altruistic helping exists among all human beings because it is written in our human nature. Culture is the main factor in shaping how we use our helping behavior and if we use it to our own benefits or not.
References:
Baumeister, R. & Bushman, B., (2014) Social psychology and human nature. (3rd ed.) Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning
Wilson, D. (2011). EVOLUTION OF SELFLESS BEHAVIOUR. New Scientist, 211(2824), i- viii.
Castano, E. (2013). On Social Connection, Helping, and Altruism. Social Research, 80(2), 383- 386.
Beardman, S. (2012). Altruism and the Experimental Data on Helping Behavior. Ethical Theory & Moral Practice, 15(4), 547-561. doi:10.1007/s10677-011-9309-4
Auguste Comte was a philosopher in the 19th-century who held two very different views in the matter of why we help others. The first form of helping he called egotistic helping in which the person who if offering to help has motivation behind that offer, they in turn want some type of payment for the helping services they will provide or have already provided. This payment may not come in monetary form but rather other types of requests. For example maybe you need to help your buddy move from one place to another. Maybe you also will be moving someday and in turn for helping him you expect him to help you when the time comes. The helper's goal may simply be to gain social acceptance with the helping actions they have provided (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014). Another type of helping that Comte had presented was altruistic helping in which the helper has no interior motivation for helping, meaning they want nothing in return for the service they are going to provide. The motivation behind these two different types of helping actions is caused by empathy. Empathy is when you mentally and physically feel what another person is experiencing (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014).
When you understand and feel what another person is going through it makes your motivation automatic with no time to think about what you would want in return for the help you are providing. Could there really be help in this world that does not have hidden motivation? A person may have a hidden agenda or goal that they are need to reach and helping certain people along the way my improve what you are trying to reach but would this type motivation be considered a "bad" thing and does altruism really exist at all. In this paper we will review the motivation behind the helping factor and whether or not empathy drives altruism. We will also discovery research completed with two-year old subjects who display true altruism. This alone may prove that humans are altruistic through nature alone.
When we discuss what may be the driving factor in helping one another there are a few different philosophies about human altruism which includes; nature, nurture, generosity, and empathy. Nature especially is something to be talked about because we are born from nature and live in nature. Evolution is said to be a part of our selfless behaviors, it is a special part about what makes us human (Wilson, 2011). Our ability to discuss and work with other people and animals gives us a higher advantage in our species surviving in this world. During human evolution our genes may have been shaped by our altruistic actions over thousands of years. The "social groups" who were able to communicate and provide pro-social behaviors than less prosocial groups may have been the ones who survived and evolved though the centuries (Wilson, 2011). Less prosocial groups of people would have been weaved out because more prosocial groups worked together to survive. Natural selection does not allow individuals alone to survive but rather a "group" of individuals and their overall levels of functioning. Through human evolutions we have adapted to become prosocial animals. Prosocial animals help each other and "look out" for the group they are associated with (Wilson, 2011).
Our physical selves are nothing our without our mental selves. Research has shown that humans will wither and die without the connections and interactions of other humans even if our physical selves are well taken care of. Humans need the touch, love and care of other humans. It is that simple (Castano, 2013). Research has shown us that the area in the brain that is ignited when we our self feel pain is the same area of the brain when we know someone else is going through the same type of pain. Empathy through nature helps us become altruistic beings. Humans are connected to other humans through compassion. Compassion could have a strong drive behind people who display altruistic helping. Felix Warneken has completed remarkable research on young children and chimpanzees in regards to our altruistic nature in helping behaviors (Castano, 2013). For example, if an adult drops an item on the floor, children old enough to walk would pick the item up the adult. This is good evidence that we are born to relate to others and "know" instinctively when another human needs help. Human beings have a unique power to them called consciousness, we have the ability to think feel and react as well as think feel and react to other people. Consciousness could be calculated into the equation of where we get our altruistic feelings from (Castano, 2013). According to Castano, altruism exists in our human nature and how we use our helping behavior is up to the individual themselves (Castano, 2013).
A unique way in deciphering if one is prone to altruistic helping would be how the automatically react in certain situations. For humans to be truly altruistically motivated they must not display any anti-altruistic feelings or behaviors (Beardman, 2012). A person might be considered anti-altruistic if they allow themselves to contemplate the situation and allow considerations on whether or not they are going to take a helping hand in the situation at hand. For example, if a person is anti-altruistic they will not engage helping in a situation were they may break a nail or ruin a good pair of shoes (Beardman, 2012). A person who is truly altruistic in their soul will not weigh life and limb in the process of helping another person in need. Beardman believed that the bigger issue in helping behaviors is if someone is neither altruistic nor egotistic in their helping behaviors. This person may have no regard for another human being and would only worry about helping themselves or advancing themselves in this lifetime (Beardman, 2012). Mental health professionals have practices of predicting behavior and explaining our actions and behaviors. One could develop accounts and motives for our behaviors and actions in different situations. This methodology could lead us in the advancement to identify altruistic or anti-altruistic patterns in ones lifestyle (Beardman, 2012). It could also advance our understanding in what creates those altruistic or anti-altruistic actions and pave the way forward to new understanding in how we came become more of a helpful human being for others and our society.
Eva Fogelman had completed research on different families that had helped Jews during the time period of World War II. She found that many of the families had similar common denominators. For example, the “helpers” usually came from a loving and nurturing home and the caregivers of that home displayed altruistic characteristics (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014). The role model for those particular families also displayed characteristics in the fact that they accept people who are different; they may feel that we are all equal in this world of diversity. Research completed with 231 Gentiles who saved Jews from dire punishments has a higher ethical values and greater empathy along with higher understandings of equity(Baumeister & Bushman, 2014). A scale has been created to try and measure whether or not a person displays having altruistic behaviors. This scale is called the Self Report Altruism Scale. Participants are asked a series of questions that include your helping behaviors over the past year such as filling out a donor ID card, volunteering for non-profit organizations or charities, giving money or items to charity (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014).
Altruism alone is the meaning of selflessness and having a higher regard for the overall "good" of the group as a whole. If humans need the care of other humans to be able to survive and flourish would it not make since that we are altruistic by nature not culture. Nature says go and culture says stop (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014). What if some cultures are thwarting us to go against our nature and focus on the bigger issue of our own self, you take care of the self first. The action of helping another person, place, or thing is within our nature. These positive acts whether that are though altruistic helping or egoistic helping should be embraced with love and care. It feels good to have the helping hand in different situations. It feels good to have people believe in your own self and be "liked" or "loved" by your culture or society. How else are we to prove as humans that we are "good" people and would like to be accepted and belonged by your society or culture? Altruistic helping exists among all human beings because it is written in our human nature. Culture is the main factor in shaping how we use our helping behavior and if we use it to our own benefits or not.
References:
Baumeister, R. & Bushman, B., (2014) Social psychology and human nature. (3rd ed.) Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning
Wilson, D. (2011). EVOLUTION OF SELFLESS BEHAVIOUR. New Scientist, 211(2824), i- viii.
Castano, E. (2013). On Social Connection, Helping, and Altruism. Social Research, 80(2), 383- 386.
Beardman, S. (2012). Altruism and the Experimental Data on Helping Behavior. Ethical Theory & Moral Practice, 15(4), 547-561. doi:10.1007/s10677-011-9309-4
Saturday, January 18, 2014
RACHEL'S PERSONAL PHILOSOPHY
Appendix
What is the meaning of life, and is the meaning of life the same for every person. We could almost all agree that a person would rather live a "happy" life rather than a life of sadness and doubt. Would we also not agree that the meaning of life should be a positive factor rather than negative? Would we not say that that one should be thankful that we exist at all, therefore we should make our lives what we can to the fullest of our ability. To be able to live a happy and fulfilled life there are some keys we need to discuss. For example: God's existence, taking responsibility for our actions, and how having these first two key components will give some type of meaning to our life. Philosophy is the love of wisdom, and knowing we do not know what our existence is supposed to mean but we can still ponder and dream about the best possibilities (Abel, 2010, p.1). I have picked many writings that I agree with, and can relate truths to Western philosophy. As Bertrand Russell argues, it does not enrich our physical bodies, it enriches our thoughts and minds. Most of the time questions are still left unanswered; it is just the concept of thinking to the fullest in life. By being able to have a broad range of thoughts about the universe allows us to be liberated from different types of prejudices of common sense, custom, and culture (Abel, 2010, p.21). By gaining knowledge and understanding to take the time to look into a situation before your initial reactions, it helps bring peace and contentment in a person's life along with happiness.
RACHEL'S PERSONAL PHILOSOPHY
God's existence
God is what gives human life meaning and significance. We are his children, and he created every single one of us. But what if you do not believe in God? If it is not God that you believe in but maybe some other type of supreme being has created our existence for some type of purpose. The purpose would vary from person to person. If you have any type of faith that a supreme being has created our existence then think about what you have done in the past or what you may accomplish in the future, any of those things or all of those things may have been the purpose of your existence. God knows the outcome of our lives, how we get to the end is up to us and up to the choices we make in life.
To expand on my beliefs that life's meaning and significance is solely upon that God does exist, and we are his children doing what he has already mapped out for us in his mind. Then we need to expand on the subject of God's existence, "All are by nature endowed with the knowledge of God's existence." Therefore, the existence of God is self-evident (Abel, 2010, p.39). Thomas Aquinas believed in the cosmological theory, he so smart on this one. As children we know the existence of God or some type of spiritual being is there without being taught so. I would call it an instinct in our hearts and minds as children. Through our social upbringings and what we are taught by the people around us, who raised us, will influence what we believe in as adults. As we grow older we have a brighter understanding of our own free will and we choose for ourselves if we are to have faith in the existence of God. I completely understand the argument of the non-believers bring forth saying there will never be a truth in the existence of God unless he is standing here before you that you can touch. I agree, it is not a truth it is a faith a person has.
Even if a person does not believe that God truly, and rightly exist would you not think it better to move on to some type of spiritual world after we die then to be thought of as nothing?
There have been many novels on the proof of God's existence, some interesting theories are arguments from people who have had near death experiences, some anthropic arguments thinks that the best facts to the existence of humanity is in fact, God. The moral argument, states that the objective and the existence of morality depends on the existence of God (Morse, 2011). David Hume argued that our world is one great big machine divided up into many little machines making the world go around; this comes from the teleological theory (Abel, 2010, p.55). This could be argued to be a fact. For example, take the human body and how we operate. I don't even know how my body works to the fullest extent so someone much smarter than me must have designed my living body and soul. By understanding that we are here on earth for a certain purpose that we must fulfill, helps to understand the existence of God's and how having faith in all of the above will lead to a happiness that a person could come to in their lives.
A person needs to have that faith that someone is watching their actions and someone will be there for them in the current life and the afterlife. When we understand what God's existence means then we can understand why there is certain "rules" to live by. God is something of with a greater thought cannot be thought. Anselm explains through the ontological argument that this being must exist because this being is something at which no greater thought can be thought. When we think of the consept of God we cannot think of a greater creature to exist that is above God. Therefore there is nothing but God that can be thought of a greater thought (Abel, 2010, p.33).
This could be a fact, I can't think of anything else greater that God's existence to exist therefore he must exist. Richard Dawkins suggest that living organisms are much more complex beings that any artificial objects therefore we must be a product of God (Abel, 2010, p.64). The same conclusion is brought up about God's existence after every opinion. We are complex human beings that have amazing workings in our bodies and minds; therefore we must be made up by a supreme being that is much more intelligent than we could ever think of being. Having faith that God does exist in our lives plays an important role on who we are and who we what to become throughout our life. It is an important role in how we make our decisions and how we raise our families in our households.
Taking responsibility for our actions
Taking responsibility for our actions is another key factor in Rachel's philosophy of life. If everyone on this planet took immediate responsibility for there actions there would be no need of a justice system. I would go commit a crime that is against the law and then immediately turn myself in to take responsibility for what was just done. John Rawls sees our justice system as a system of fairness. Everyone should have equal treatment in our justice system to find out the truth of the matter at hand (Abel, 2010, p.574). Not everyone in our society takes responsibility for their actions and maybe a part of that is the ignorance people have about what they did was wrong. Not only in the system of justice can a person take responsibility for there actions but also in the things we say and think. The system failed Socrates, he was sentences to death despite his innocence in the matter and refused to escape even though he was about to take responsibility for actions he did not do. Nerveless Socrates believed that a person should not willingly wrong or mistreat others, even if someone has wronged or mistreated them. He also believed that one should fulfill one's just agreements (Abel, 2010, p.491).
I have agreement with Socrates first moral argument but not the second. Our justice system in many ways can become corrupt and just because you have been handed down what one set of people is a set just agreement does not mean it was rightly put in place. In my views of love of wisdom in life, Socrates has a beautiful point that we should never willingly harm or mistreat others. That is not what life is about, love, faith, peace is what living a fulfilled happy life is about. Another issue to think about when taking responsibility for our actions is, that we live in a social society; while living in a social environment people takes notice to our actions and the way we react to our mistakes or accomplishments. Rawls had a good point of view; he basically states that in our social society that we live in today we rely on all different types of personalities and people to make our world go around. We need a mechanic for our vehicles, a repair man for any one of our appliances we have, along with many other different types of professions that we do not know how to do and require other people to do for us. Taking responsibility for our actions will provide more of a social connection to our society when it is needed (Habermas, 2010).
The meaning of life
When a person has some type of supreme being, and faith; along with responsibility in their life, it makes the meaning of your life a little clearer. We understand that we are created and put on this earth by God for a reason and we need to fulfill our destiny. In the path to fulfilling our destiny we have to make good choices to the best of our ability. By having the faith that we do in our supreme being, we already have an understanding of what is morally right and morally wrong. Throughout our life and in the bad choices we make we need to take responsibility for our action and learn from our mistakes. In learning through our mistakes to make better choices in the future we can achieve a type of peacefulness and happiness in the journey to the next life. The meaning of life is what you want to make the meaning of your life to be. I am under the assumption that a person does not want to live a life of misery and we all are trying to achieve the happiness and we sought. We are social human beings and a part of our happiness is from being socially accepted by other human beings. A lot of the problems we encounter in life come from mixed communication or what we say is not what we meant or what we meant is not exactly what we say. As with the meaning of our life there are different variations in what we think we are thinking, or what we think we are saying. As follows, sometimes we say what we mean and sometimes we mean what we say, sometimes what we say is not always what we mean resulting in confusion, deception or ignorance. Sometimes we do not always exactly say what we mean because we are afraid of how our own thoughts will be accepted socially (Stone, 2011). With happiness and the meaning of life comes a understanding of taking into account of how other people feel and also an understanding that you may not always know the right answer, we need to keep an open mind that what we are hearing and our interpretation of what people say is not always correct.
Conclusion
To live a meaningful, thoughtful, and fulfilled live of life long success that involves happiness and love; a person is to follow the three elements of the philosophy of life which id first to have a strong connection and faith in God or a supreme being. Next, always take responsibility for your actions; it is the morally right thing to do. By having these two things in your life it will help bring a clearer meaning of what life is about, and what we need to do to make our life meaningful. These keys points will at the very least help to lead an extraordinary lifestyle, and notice I have not mentioned money at all as a key to a good life. Money and material items are just as they sound, disposable. Although both things seem to be wanted in our lives they are not needed to achieve the happiness you seek.
References:
Abel, D., (2010) Fifty Readings Plus: An introduction to philosophy (2nd ed.) McGraw-Hill Companies: New York, NY.
Morse, D. R. (2011, October). God's Existence: Proof. Journal of Spirituality & Paranormal Studies. p. 181.
Maher, C. (2010). On being and holding responsible. Philosophical Explorations, 13(2), 129-140. doi:10.1080/13869791003759955
Habermas, J. (2010). The ‘Good Life’—A ‘Detestable Phrase’: The Significance of the Young Rawls's Religious Ethics for His Political Theory. European Journal Of Philosophy, 18(3), 443-454. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0378.2010.00424.x
Stone, M. H. (2011). The Meaning of Life and Adler's Use of Fictions. Journal Of Individual Psychology, 67(1), 13-30.
What is the meaning of life, and is the meaning of life the same for every person. We could almost all agree that a person would rather live a "happy" life rather than a life of sadness and doubt. Would we also not agree that the meaning of life should be a positive factor rather than negative? Would we not say that that one should be thankful that we exist at all, therefore we should make our lives what we can to the fullest of our ability. To be able to live a happy and fulfilled life there are some keys we need to discuss. For example: God's existence, taking responsibility for our actions, and how having these first two key components will give some type of meaning to our life. Philosophy is the love of wisdom, and knowing we do not know what our existence is supposed to mean but we can still ponder and dream about the best possibilities (Abel, 2010, p.1). I have picked many writings that I agree with, and can relate truths to Western philosophy. As Bertrand Russell argues, it does not enrich our physical bodies, it enriches our thoughts and minds. Most of the time questions are still left unanswered; it is just the concept of thinking to the fullest in life. By being able to have a broad range of thoughts about the universe allows us to be liberated from different types of prejudices of common sense, custom, and culture (Abel, 2010, p.21). By gaining knowledge and understanding to take the time to look into a situation before your initial reactions, it helps bring peace and contentment in a person's life along with happiness.
RACHEL'S PERSONAL PHILOSOPHY
God's existence
God is what gives human life meaning and significance. We are his children, and he created every single one of us. But what if you do not believe in God? If it is not God that you believe in but maybe some other type of supreme being has created our existence for some type of purpose. The purpose would vary from person to person. If you have any type of faith that a supreme being has created our existence then think about what you have done in the past or what you may accomplish in the future, any of those things or all of those things may have been the purpose of your existence. God knows the outcome of our lives, how we get to the end is up to us and up to the choices we make in life.
To expand on my beliefs that life's meaning and significance is solely upon that God does exist, and we are his children doing what he has already mapped out for us in his mind. Then we need to expand on the subject of God's existence, "All are by nature endowed with the knowledge of God's existence." Therefore, the existence of God is self-evident (Abel, 2010, p.39). Thomas Aquinas believed in the cosmological theory, he so smart on this one. As children we know the existence of God or some type of spiritual being is there without being taught so. I would call it an instinct in our hearts and minds as children. Through our social upbringings and what we are taught by the people around us, who raised us, will influence what we believe in as adults. As we grow older we have a brighter understanding of our own free will and we choose for ourselves if we are to have faith in the existence of God. I completely understand the argument of the non-believers bring forth saying there will never be a truth in the existence of God unless he is standing here before you that you can touch. I agree, it is not a truth it is a faith a person has.
Even if a person does not believe that God truly, and rightly exist would you not think it better to move on to some type of spiritual world after we die then to be thought of as nothing?
There have been many novels on the proof of God's existence, some interesting theories are arguments from people who have had near death experiences, some anthropic arguments thinks that the best facts to the existence of humanity is in fact, God. The moral argument, states that the objective and the existence of morality depends on the existence of God (Morse, 2011). David Hume argued that our world is one great big machine divided up into many little machines making the world go around; this comes from the teleological theory (Abel, 2010, p.55). This could be argued to be a fact. For example, take the human body and how we operate. I don't even know how my body works to the fullest extent so someone much smarter than me must have designed my living body and soul. By understanding that we are here on earth for a certain purpose that we must fulfill, helps to understand the existence of God's and how having faith in all of the above will lead to a happiness that a person could come to in their lives.
A person needs to have that faith that someone is watching their actions and someone will be there for them in the current life and the afterlife. When we understand what God's existence means then we can understand why there is certain "rules" to live by. God is something of with a greater thought cannot be thought. Anselm explains through the ontological argument that this being must exist because this being is something at which no greater thought can be thought. When we think of the consept of God we cannot think of a greater creature to exist that is above God. Therefore there is nothing but God that can be thought of a greater thought (Abel, 2010, p.33).
This could be a fact, I can't think of anything else greater that God's existence to exist therefore he must exist. Richard Dawkins suggest that living organisms are much more complex beings that any artificial objects therefore we must be a product of God (Abel, 2010, p.64). The same conclusion is brought up about God's existence after every opinion. We are complex human beings that have amazing workings in our bodies and minds; therefore we must be made up by a supreme being that is much more intelligent than we could ever think of being. Having faith that God does exist in our lives plays an important role on who we are and who we what to become throughout our life. It is an important role in how we make our decisions and how we raise our families in our households.
Taking responsibility for our actions
Taking responsibility for our actions is another key factor in Rachel's philosophy of life. If everyone on this planet took immediate responsibility for there actions there would be no need of a justice system. I would go commit a crime that is against the law and then immediately turn myself in to take responsibility for what was just done. John Rawls sees our justice system as a system of fairness. Everyone should have equal treatment in our justice system to find out the truth of the matter at hand (Abel, 2010, p.574). Not everyone in our society takes responsibility for their actions and maybe a part of that is the ignorance people have about what they did was wrong. Not only in the system of justice can a person take responsibility for there actions but also in the things we say and think. The system failed Socrates, he was sentences to death despite his innocence in the matter and refused to escape even though he was about to take responsibility for actions he did not do. Nerveless Socrates believed that a person should not willingly wrong or mistreat others, even if someone has wronged or mistreated them. He also believed that one should fulfill one's just agreements (Abel, 2010, p.491).
I have agreement with Socrates first moral argument but not the second. Our justice system in many ways can become corrupt and just because you have been handed down what one set of people is a set just agreement does not mean it was rightly put in place. In my views of love of wisdom in life, Socrates has a beautiful point that we should never willingly harm or mistreat others. That is not what life is about, love, faith, peace is what living a fulfilled happy life is about. Another issue to think about when taking responsibility for our actions is, that we live in a social society; while living in a social environment people takes notice to our actions and the way we react to our mistakes or accomplishments. Rawls had a good point of view; he basically states that in our social society that we live in today we rely on all different types of personalities and people to make our world go around. We need a mechanic for our vehicles, a repair man for any one of our appliances we have, along with many other different types of professions that we do not know how to do and require other people to do for us. Taking responsibility for our actions will provide more of a social connection to our society when it is needed (Habermas, 2010).
The meaning of life
When a person has some type of supreme being, and faith; along with responsibility in their life, it makes the meaning of your life a little clearer. We understand that we are created and put on this earth by God for a reason and we need to fulfill our destiny. In the path to fulfilling our destiny we have to make good choices to the best of our ability. By having the faith that we do in our supreme being, we already have an understanding of what is morally right and morally wrong. Throughout our life and in the bad choices we make we need to take responsibility for our action and learn from our mistakes. In learning through our mistakes to make better choices in the future we can achieve a type of peacefulness and happiness in the journey to the next life. The meaning of life is what you want to make the meaning of your life to be. I am under the assumption that a person does not want to live a life of misery and we all are trying to achieve the happiness and we sought. We are social human beings and a part of our happiness is from being socially accepted by other human beings. A lot of the problems we encounter in life come from mixed communication or what we say is not what we meant or what we meant is not exactly what we say. As with the meaning of our life there are different variations in what we think we are thinking, or what we think we are saying. As follows, sometimes we say what we mean and sometimes we mean what we say, sometimes what we say is not always what we mean resulting in confusion, deception or ignorance. Sometimes we do not always exactly say what we mean because we are afraid of how our own thoughts will be accepted socially (Stone, 2011). With happiness and the meaning of life comes a understanding of taking into account of how other people feel and also an understanding that you may not always know the right answer, we need to keep an open mind that what we are hearing and our interpretation of what people say is not always correct.
Conclusion
To live a meaningful, thoughtful, and fulfilled live of life long success that involves happiness and love; a person is to follow the three elements of the philosophy of life which id first to have a strong connection and faith in God or a supreme being. Next, always take responsibility for your actions; it is the morally right thing to do. By having these two things in your life it will help bring a clearer meaning of what life is about, and what we need to do to make our life meaningful. These keys points will at the very least help to lead an extraordinary lifestyle, and notice I have not mentioned money at all as a key to a good life. Money and material items are just as they sound, disposable. Although both things seem to be wanted in our lives they are not needed to achieve the happiness you seek.
References:
Abel, D., (2010) Fifty Readings Plus: An introduction to philosophy (2nd ed.) McGraw-Hill Companies: New York, NY.
Morse, D. R. (2011, October). God's Existence: Proof. Journal of Spirituality & Paranormal Studies. p. 181.
Maher, C. (2010). On being and holding responsible. Philosophical Explorations, 13(2), 129-140. doi:10.1080/13869791003759955
Habermas, J. (2010). The ‘Good Life’—A ‘Detestable Phrase’: The Significance of the Young Rawls's Religious Ethics for His Political Theory. European Journal Of Philosophy, 18(3), 443-454. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0378.2010.00424.x
Stone, M. H. (2011). The Meaning of Life and Adler's Use of Fictions. Journal Of Individual Psychology, 67(1), 13-30.
The Good Life
My interpretation of the good life is many things. First, I believe we should all have a faith that there is something greater that just our life span out there. A person's life is so short and there have to be another beginning to this end. We all need some type of moral rules to follow. For example, the Ten Commandments, there is only ten, just the basics. A person needs guidance from the moment we are born. If we do not have guidance even as a baby we would die. Ethical relativism is something that had just started in the nineteenth century when a set of philosophers visited many other cultures around the world and noticed that every culture has some similarities but also many differences. A Person should tolerate the differences with the culture but only to an extent (Sommers & Sommers, 2010). We all have our differences in what we do and how we feel. For example, I may make my biscuits different than you make yours. We have our differences in how we feel about youth and growing old just as Cephalus explains that he feels at peace and calm in his age but many others his own age feel there youth has been taken from them and they feel pain anguish.
The same differences go for how we act in our own culture. Cultures have differences in how they act in certain situations. A person should tolerate these differences as long as it does not go again the few major moral rules that all cultures should follow. For example the number one moral rules in the divine command theory would be thou shall not kill. But it does not say anything about what we should do with the people who have killed many other people, a murderer. Would it be just and
explainable if a person killed someone that was harming and killing others? Would it not be moral to stop someone like that and it is a greater good for all other people because you are now protecting a society by taking a killer off the streets? Back to the initial thought of we should tolerate other cultures, I think the best decisions would be as the philosophers stated that we should tolerate other culture as long at it does not go against the greater of the moral rules.
I think the good life consists of in a sense what makes you happy as long as what makes you happy is not harming others. We should all have a belief of a higher authority over us; we should follow the basic rules of morality: do not kill, do not steal, keep love, light and happiness in our hearts. I do not know if a life of unjust is better than the life of just as Glaucan believes to be so. As in the example stated earlier with a murderer, in the life of being just and bringing justice one should think the lifer should be taken of the life taker or murderer. But if we follow our basic moral rules that are colliding with one another. In the life of being unjust, letting the murderer live would unfair to the victim of the person's life he or she has taken. To be unjust we fend for ourselves and we do not worry about what is or is not fair to others who surround us.
In the human search for meaning Victor Frankl spent three years in a concentration camp. I think anyone who has survived that would have much wisdom in him. The Nazis had taken everything away from him down to near his last muscles in his body, including is whole family. Through his talks he speaks about that they can take everything that they think they could take away except person's choices in every situation (Sommers & Sommers, 2010). We are faced with choices every second of every day and no matter what situation you find yourself to be in only you have the choice of what and how you will react and what path you will chose or what decision you will have to make (Sommers & Sommers, 2010). In my own beliefs on the good life what he has stated is so very true. How we live our life and how we make our life the good life is based on the choices and decisions we make. Just because we may make bad decisions in our life does not mean we are not leading the good life. We need to learn from the choices we make to make better choices in the future. These choices we make should not always be for our own self gratification either. We should always look to how we can better our existence and our world.
It is hard to say what way to live or what beliefs you should have. I think if we all keep in mind that number one we only live once, kindness is a virtue, we should not harm other people, and we should tolerate differences to an extent as long as it does not being harm to other human beings. We should educate ourselves, because with education comes knowledge and different ways of thinking. Respect your elders, with age comes wisdom and knowledge, not always but most of the time our elders can teach us so much. They have been were we are and they may have a whole new light on how things can be done differently or better than they had accomplished. Treat other as you want to be treated. If you would not want someone mentally or physically harm you then why would you do so to someone else other than for your own pleasure. Live a good life.
References:
Sommers, C., & Sommers, F. (2010). Vice & Virtue in Everyday Life: Introductory Readings in Ethics. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
The same differences go for how we act in our own culture. Cultures have differences in how they act in certain situations. A person should tolerate these differences as long as it does not go again the few major moral rules that all cultures should follow. For example the number one moral rules in the divine command theory would be thou shall not kill. But it does not say anything about what we should do with the people who have killed many other people, a murderer. Would it be just and
explainable if a person killed someone that was harming and killing others? Would it not be moral to stop someone like that and it is a greater good for all other people because you are now protecting a society by taking a killer off the streets? Back to the initial thought of we should tolerate other cultures, I think the best decisions would be as the philosophers stated that we should tolerate other culture as long at it does not go against the greater of the moral rules.
I think the good life consists of in a sense what makes you happy as long as what makes you happy is not harming others. We should all have a belief of a higher authority over us; we should follow the basic rules of morality: do not kill, do not steal, keep love, light and happiness in our hearts. I do not know if a life of unjust is better than the life of just as Glaucan believes to be so. As in the example stated earlier with a murderer, in the life of being just and bringing justice one should think the lifer should be taken of the life taker or murderer. But if we follow our basic moral rules that are colliding with one another. In the life of being unjust, letting the murderer live would unfair to the victim of the person's life he or she has taken. To be unjust we fend for ourselves and we do not worry about what is or is not fair to others who surround us.
In the human search for meaning Victor Frankl spent three years in a concentration camp. I think anyone who has survived that would have much wisdom in him. The Nazis had taken everything away from him down to near his last muscles in his body, including is whole family. Through his talks he speaks about that they can take everything that they think they could take away except person's choices in every situation (Sommers & Sommers, 2010). We are faced with choices every second of every day and no matter what situation you find yourself to be in only you have the choice of what and how you will react and what path you will chose or what decision you will have to make (Sommers & Sommers, 2010). In my own beliefs on the good life what he has stated is so very true. How we live our life and how we make our life the good life is based on the choices and decisions we make. Just because we may make bad decisions in our life does not mean we are not leading the good life. We need to learn from the choices we make to make better choices in the future. These choices we make should not always be for our own self gratification either. We should always look to how we can better our existence and our world.
It is hard to say what way to live or what beliefs you should have. I think if we all keep in mind that number one we only live once, kindness is a virtue, we should not harm other people, and we should tolerate differences to an extent as long as it does not being harm to other human beings. We should educate ourselves, because with education comes knowledge and different ways of thinking. Respect your elders, with age comes wisdom and knowledge, not always but most of the time our elders can teach us so much. They have been were we are and they may have a whole new light on how things can be done differently or better than they had accomplished. Treat other as you want to be treated. If you would not want someone mentally or physically harm you then why would you do so to someone else other than for your own pleasure. Live a good life.
References:
Sommers, C., & Sommers, F. (2010). Vice & Virtue in Everyday Life: Introductory Readings in Ethics. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)