It is not possible to represent more vividly the horror, the vileness, and the profligacy of it. For what can you imagine uglier than being a coward toward men and bold toward God? Since mutual understanding is brought about solely by way of words, he who breaks his word betrays human society. It is the only instrument by means of which our wills and thoughts communicate, it is the interpreter of our soul. If it fails us, we have no more hold on each other, no more knowledge of each other.
In the quote below Rand explains why she rejects religion outright, and she believes man himself deserves the attention: Just as religion has preempted the field of ethics, turning morality against man, so it has usurped the highest moral concepts of our language, placing them outside this earth and beyond man’s reach. “Exaltation” is usually taken to mean an emotional state evoked by contemplating the supernatural. “Worship” means the emotional experience of loyalty and dedication to something higher than man… But such concepts do name actual emotions, even though no supernatural dimension exists; and these emotions are experienced as uplifting or ennobling, without the self-abasement required by religious definitions.
4. Explain the author’s main contentions and briefly discuss them using concrete evidence from the book. This may be in short quotes or in paraphrasing points. You may use outside reviews and commentaries to reinforce your interpretation. 5.
It would be very prejudicial and people would stop caring for who you care and just look at what your hereditary traits say. In my opinion, this movie portrays very effectively what our society would come to if this happened. It is very sad to see how technology can destroy human nature just because people seek a god-like perfection that is actually
• Discuss the author’s use of evidence to prove his/her thesis. • Does the author have a bias? Explain why or why not. • Write two thoughtful questions you would ask the author about his/her work. Why these questions?
• Purpose: What is it for? Why was the book or article written? • Usefulness: What does it do for your research? • Reliability: Is the information accurate? Do other sources support the conclusions?
I’m not interested here in whether you thought the book was interesting or boring. I’m looking for an exploration of how convincing you found the book’s conclusions. How well did the author support his/her argument(s)? How did the book support, contradict, or complicate what you learned about the subject in lectures and textbook reading? Did you detect any biases in the author’s approach?
If society has values set in place, it has to be for a reason. The reason would be wasted if we decide not to install them into the youth of today. How do you feel about cheating? It is universal that it is wrong, but if its not enforced on the children and explained how morally and ethically wrong it is. Will they ever know that forcing yourself sexually on another person is right or wrong?
94. Romney v. United States fought against this ruling and eventually realized that they could not win this battle which lead to the renouncing of polygamy. While I agree that all beliefs are not right as in the book which states “Thugs of India imagined that their belief in the right of assassination was a religious belief; but their thinking so did not make it so.Yes it does not make it right because they believe in polygamy but it’s very hard to take away something someone belief started from, is based on and ask them to still believe in the same way as the founders who beliefs they are carrying out. In today’s time Mormons still exist and each year missionaries go out to countries to convince people to transform to their beliefs. In the end I believe we can’t take away the Mormons main beliefs from them and we shouldn’t punish them for doing it as long as they it in their own society.
Christianity is under attack not only by those within Christianity, but also by those in cults and other faiths. C.S. Lewis, who was one of the best-known apologists of the 20th century, said, To be ignorant and simple now--not to be able to meet the enemies on their [1]ground--would be to throw down our weapons, and to betray our uneducated brethren who have, under God, no defense but us against the intellectual attacks of the heathen. Good philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because bad philosophy needs to be answered (The Weight of Glory, 50). 2 EXPERIENTIAL APOLOGETICS One form of apologetics is called “Experiential Apologetics”.