Mandeville and Darwinism

"In what way did Mandeville lay the foundation for Darwinism?"


Particular views of Mandeville's lie in the idea of spontaneous order. Hayek defines this spontaneous order in this sentence.

"Society is the product of human action, not human design."

Darwin seems to have applied this aspect to biology. Him doing so resulted in the springing forth from 18th-century Scottish social philosophy (according to Hayek). This keeps on falling back to Mandeville.

 Mandeville wrote his Fable of the Bees, and him doing so resulted in it being read and it being used continually over the years to back up different economic (or in Darwins's case, biological) principles. ("...human action, not human design.")

Thanks for reading!

Luther's Thoughts on Pope Leo X, and His Knowledge of the Indulgence Salesmen's Words

"Do you think that Luther really believed that Pope Leo X did not know what the indulgence salesmen were saying?"


As to this topic, I have two main hypotheses.  The first is that he honestly thought he was defending the pope by saying that the pope didn't know what the indulgence salesmen were saying.  The second is that he simply hoped that he was correct in assuming as much.

Truthfully, I am unsure as to what Luther thought at this time in my study.  I will need to dive further into this topic in the future, and I highly suggest that you do the same.

Thank you so much for reading, and please give me some feedback on this essay!

Sacraments, Indulgences, and the Great Schism

"What was the Great Schism?  What factors brought it on?"



The Great Schism was a split between the Catholics in the west and the Orthodox Christians in the east.  The Orthodox Christians and the Catholics had different views on who had authority.  One thought that the pope in Rome should have religious authority, whereas one thought that the church in Constantinople should have the authority.

Those in the west and those in the east also had different ways of worship, spoke different languages, etc..  These differences only made the rift forming between them even larger.

Another big problem occurred in 1054 when some of the deceased pope's legates excommunicated a man named Michael Cerularius.  In the end, the churches in the east and in the west ultimately split, with only a small few wishing to rejoin.




"What are the sacraments?"



The sacraments are seven religious rituals of the Catholic church.  Baptism ("Christian rite of admission and adoption") (This practice generally includes water.), Confirmation ("sealed with the gifts of the Holy Spirit"), Holy Communion ("a gift of God made effectual by the preaching of the Word and the response of faith"), Penance (the confession of sins to a priest in order to receive forgiveness), Matrimony (I think you know this one.), Holy Orders ("the sacrament or rite of ordination as a member of the Christian clergy"), and Anointing of the Sick ("the sacramental anointing of the ill or infirm with blessed oil") are what these seven sacraments are called.  Each one of these plays an influential role in the lives of Catholics, and all have their place in history.



"What is an indulgence?"



Despite popular belief, an indulgence is not the buying of having your sins forgiven.  An indulgence is used when someone is attempting to remove their temporal punishment.  You see, in Catholicism there is both eternal and temporal punishment.  Eternal punishment is canceled out by the sacrament of Penance.  In other words, you are no longer in danger of being sent to Hell upon death.  You are however left with the temporal punishment which can be shortened or altogether removed by the use of indulgences.  Indulgences can also be used to shorten or eliminate a person's time in purgatory (a place between Heaven which you are sent to after death if you have any temporal punishment left to make up for).

 Indulgences are received when you do a worthy deed.  They do not require a monetary sum, nor are you "buying" the forgiveness of your sins.  Your sins are already forgiven through Penance, so why would you pay to have them forgiven when they already are?

Anyways, I hope this helps you to understand indulgences a little more.


Thanks for reading this essay, and don't forget to let me know what you think!

Pope Gregory VII and Henry IV, Moderate Reform, and Christendom

"What were the problems besetting the Church in the tenth and eleventh centuries? What was 'moderate reform'?"


The problems that the Church was facing during this time, is that instead of church officials appointing bishops, popes, etc., we see laymen (people other than church officials) appointing these people.  This results in the laymen sometimes appointing rotten individuals to church office.

Moderate reform came about when Pope Leo IX decided to put emphasis on papal authority.  He said that laymen should choose morally good candidates instead of those who would do harm.



"Describe the events that took place during the conflict between Pope Gregory VII and Henry IV.  What was at stake?"



The conflict between Pope Gregory VII and Henry IV came about when the Pope decided that kings had no right at all to appoint people to church positions.  The king did not agree with this, and hence went against the Pope.  Pope Gregory ultimately removed the king from power, and eventually Henry came begging for forgiveness.  Grace was bestowed, and then the king went against the Pope all over again.  Henry was removed from authority by Pope Gregory, but Henry was powerful enough to come back and send Pope Gregory into exile.  The Pope then died while he was still exiled and it is said that these were among his last words,

                    "I have loved righteousness and hated iniquity, therefore I die in exile."

What was at stake in the conflict between these two men was church authority.  Who had the jurisdiction to make church decisions, the Pope or the king?



"What was Christendom?"


Christendom was the idea of an international church society.  This is why church officials were able to enter Christian lands even without their nationality being that of the country.  Nationality was of no concern, for it was a society of the Christian religion, not a society of "who came from what place".  This was Christendom.


Thanks for reading, and please let me know what you think!  



   

Ethics: Zeus and Jesus

"Compare the ethical behavior of Zeus with the ethical teaching of Jesus."



The ethics between Zeus and Jesus are extremely different from one another!  I can't stress enough how different the ethics are.  Zeus is a rather lawless individual.  Zeus cheated on his wife, Hera, and he turned the woman, Io into a heifer!

The teachings of Jesus vary greatly with the behavior of Zeus.  Jesus taught that adultery was a sin, and he taught that you are to love one another as you love yourself.  Jesus' ethical teachings are the complete opposite of Zeus' anti-ethical behavior.

Thank you so much for reading, and please let me know what you think!        

Conflict Between the Sadducees and Apostles

"Why were the Sadducees and the Apostles unable to find a way to reconcile their rival opinions?"



The apostles and Sadducees were coming from completely different perspectives.  The Sadducees were still following the Mosaic law, while the apostles were following the laws that Jesus, the son of God had put down.  In both of these religions there is only one God and his laws are sovereign, which is why the Sadducees where unwilling to follow Jesus' teachings.  What they didn't understand (more like unwilling to undrestand) is that Jesus was God in the flesh.  The Sadducees did not want to change their views and opinions, so they simply denied that the teachings of the apostles were correct.

The Monks and Christian Writers of Old

"What kinds of contributions did the monks make to European society?"


     The kinds of contributions that the monks made were quite vast indeed!  The monks did everything from beer brewing, to copying manuscripts, and even spent time participating in agriculture!

     I would like to mention that the monks didn't only copy manuscripts of religious significance, but also some of the great writings pertaining to things outside of their religion.

     They also served as innkeepers for those who had been shipwrecked or were lost, and some monks were teachers as well.  Among these things, their monasteries would sometimes serve as hospitals for the sick.

     I have to say that the monks certainly made some fantastic contributions to European society!  Who knows where we would be had it not been for the monks!



"What was the attitude of most Christian writers toward the philosophers of ancient Greece?"


     The attitude of most Christian writers toward the philosophers of ancient Greece is probably not what you would expect.  The attitude of most Christian writers was actually quite welcoming toward them!  The Christian writers saw  many of the philosophers as hinting at the existence of the one true God of whom they believed.  They thought that the teachings of the ancient Greek philosophers should therefore be preserved for others to learn.  Of course there was a small minority that didn't believe this.  The minority thought that anything other than the teachings of the Gospel were not necessary to the Christian religion.  But this was certainly not the wide-held view!

Thank you so much for reading this essay, and please let me know what you think!  I would love to hear from you!

    


 

Comparison of Christianity and Other Ways of Life

     This week I will be writing an essay that compares the teachings of Christianity to the ways of life in some of the ancient civilizations.  (This includes their values and thoughts.)  Let's get started by comparing the teachings of Christianity to the values held by the ancient Greeks, and then I will compare the teachings of Christianity to the values taught in the works of Homer.

     The Christian teachings stated extreme respect for their god.  The same goes for the ancient Greeks who respected their gods a great deal.

     Another comparison that I would like to make is that the Greeks (as well as Homer) talked about the value of hospitality.  The Christian teachings also talk about the value of hospitality.  I am referring to one of their most cherished teachings, which is to treat your neighbor as you would yourself.

     The last thing that I would like to discuss is the way that some of the ancient thinkers thought compared to Christianity.  The first thinker that I would like to talk about is Plato.  He believed in things called the forms.  The forms were things things that we cannot see.  The Christian teachings also talk about things separate from this world.  For instance, the Christian teachings talk about God, Heaven, angels, and the Devil which  are all unseen things.

     And for my final example I will be using all of the ancient philosophers.  Other than the fact that all philosophers are human, (but my dog does seem to be a kind of philosopher considering the amount of thinking that she does...just kidding, haha!), all philosophers are trying to use logic to explain things, and Christianity also talks about thinking through things logically.

     As you can see, there are many similarities between Christianity, the ancient Greeks, Homer, and the ancient Greek philosophers.

     Thank you so much for reading this essay, and please let me know what you think!        

Epicureanism and Ancient Liberty

                 Ancient Liberty Compared to Today 

     As you can probably guess, the liberty of the ancient world (specifically Greece, which is what I will be focusing on today) was very different than today's world.  For instance, the ancient's idea of freedom was more focused on the whole community, whereas we are focused on mainly the individual.  The ancients seem to have thought more along the lines of,  "If I can participate in politics, then I am free." Whereas, we think along the lines of,  "If I can own a business, have a family, participate in whatever religion I see fit, go to and from where I live, etc., I have liberty."

     Let's take Sparta for instance.  In Sparta, people had very little freedom.  Spartan boys were taken away from their homes and went through military training up until they reached the age of twenty.  That's when they were entered into the citizen army and were finally allowed to marry.  They were not allowed to live with their families until they reached the age of thirty.  Once they were thirty years old, they could live with their families but they still had to eat at a public mess hall.

     Now we get to the part where they participate somewhat in politics.  Every Spartan male over the age of thirty was a part of an assembly of citizens.

     In Athens, we do not see such a strict military district, but we do see Athens focusing mainly on the community as a whole rather than on the individual.

     For instance, if there was a certain number of votes regarding to the banishment of a person from Athens, he would be banished.  The person may have not even done anything!  The people may have just seen him as a threat to their future.

     Needless to say, we find many things lacking in the liberty of the ancients, but then again, I'm sure that they would find things lacking in our liberty.  It's funny to me how every point in history finds it so easy to see the things wrong with the other point, but not of itself.  I hope that we will not forget the things lacking in our liberty as I find it wrong to criticize other times in history without noting that we also face difficulties in our own time regarding our liberty.

                       Epicureanism

     Epicureanism is based on the teachings of Epicurus.  The "mystery religion" was founded about 307 BC, and taught that pleasure is the ultimate good.  But not just being a pig about what you indulge in. Epicurus thought that a simple life and no pain was the greatest pleasure.  They believe that to much of a good thing is a bad thing because it results in displeasure, but that you should not deprive yourself of pleasure.

     Let's use drinking and eating as two examples.  If you have only a little wine, you will have pleasure, but if you have a lot of wine, you don't feel good the next day.  The same thing goes for eating to much.  You shouldn't eat to much because that results in displeasure, but you should not deprive yourself of eating.

     Epicurus believed that everything was made of atoms but we still have free will.  This is a challenge to the atomists who believed that everything is just made of atoms bouncing around and that no one really has free will.  They believed this because if everything is the result of atoms bouncing around, then our thoughts and actions are also just the result of this.

     Epicureanism teaches that gods do not interfere in human matters.  It also says that gods are made up of atoms.
   
     I hope that you have enjoyed this essay, and please let me know what you think!