Does He or Doesn’t He?

Sextus Empiricus, a physician and Skeptic philosopher (c. AD 200) created a rather lengthy argument against the arguments for the existence of god(s) that, despite his stated belief that god exists, is intended to neither prove nor disprove the existence of god(s), but is instead intended to point out the problems inherent in other philosophical school’s logical reasoning for the existence of god(s). While the argument against the dogmatists’ arguments is craftily worded to avoid contemporary criticism, much less make an affirmative statement one way or the other, Sextus creates a very strong argument for the non-existence of god(s), while conflicting with the Skeptic goal of freedom from disturbance and avoidance of dogmatism.

Elucidating Electra

Within the myth of Electra, multiple elements of virtually all theoretical approaches to mythology are found. The various incarnations of the Electra myth generally go like this: Agamemnon marries Clytemnestra and together they have three children: Iphigenia, Electra, and Orestes. Agamemnon goes off to fight in the Trojan War; he and his men get stuck – the wind won’t blow so their ships won’t sail – so he sacrifices his daughter, Iphigenia, as restitution for killing a stag sacred to Artemis. Clytemnestra is so angry at her husband for killing her daughter that she takes up with another man (Aegisthus) and, upon Agamemnon’s return, murders him. The murder of the father angers Orestes and especially Electra. The god Apollo orders Orestes to avenge his father’s death by killing his mother and stepfather, which he does so with the help of Electra. In summary: father kills daughter, wife kills husband, son kills step-father and mother. While the psychological approach seems to apply most fully, to gain the fullest possible understanding and appreciation for this (or any other) myth, one must approach it from multiple perspectives.

Exploring Death in Epictetus

Epictetus’ teachings provide significant amounts of clear, easy-to-understand practical advice on living day-to-day life. One of the strengths of Epictetus’ teachings is in dealing with suffering, pain, hardships and other negatives of live. Epictetus views the various sufferings of one’s body as something to be viewed as outside of our control; in fact, one is to carry one’s pain with equanimity. For Epictetus, death is not to be feared, as it is inevitable. Epictetus also views suicide and euthanasia [1] to end unendurable suffering as acceptable and good. Throughout his teachings, Epictetus provides many logical foundations to help his followers endure suffering with equanimity, especially when facing death. However, despite his belief in the existence of god, Epictetus does not provide for any sort of rebirth or afterlife. In a philosophy heavy on providing people with the means to face the hardships of life with a certain level of comfort, the lack of an afterlife to provide hope and comfort to both the dying and their survivors is a serious weakness.

Redemption: The Ultimate Prize - Freedom

In the Fall semester of 2006 at the University of Colorado - Colorado Springs, I enrolled in a class entitled "History of TV Programming." In this class, which was surprisingly academic, we learned about TV scheduling, budgeting, programming, contracts, market research, and audience appeal, along with other related information.

There was a number of assignments and practicals we had to accomplish in the class, but one project really stood out: We had to invent a new television show and "pitch" it to the class as if we were pitching a show idea to a real television network. This was a group project, which I and my fellow classmates, DeEtte Atwood and Aaron Muncy, decided to work on together.

After much debate, we choose to jump on the "reality show" bandwagon and invented a show called Redemption, where convicted criminals compete for full pardons. Needless to say, our show idea garnered the most heated debates of all the invented TV show ideas.

Below is posted the PowerPoint presentation we created to pitch Redemption. Please note that other than our imaginably selected host, "Dog the Bounty Hunter," whose name and image is used solely for academic purposes, all names and backgrounds are fictitious and products of our imaginations.

Redemption: The Ultimate Prize - Freedom!

Greek Creation Myths: What’s Love Got To Do With It?

Without doubt, every culture has a creation myth of one sort or another, most with remarkable similarities and parallels. These myths – especially their parallels - reflect not only their originating culture, but also demonstrate elements of the cultures they came into contact with. By comparing creation myths of separate cultures, one can discern social and cultural elements of both cultures. One overwhelming parallel within otherwise differing creation mythologies is the concept of all creation involving some sort of love figure/character. In the Greek creation myth as presented in Hesiod’s Theogony, love in the form of Eros is not only the primary creative force, but also the primary origination of all self-awareness.

The Epicurean Foundations of Atheism

Epicurus (341BC-270BC, the founder of Epicureanism, a philosophy mostly known for its pleasure-based ethical viewpoint, discussed the existence and nature of god[1] extensively. However, his heavy emphasis on the atomic nature of the universe and importance of sense-perception for determining reality and truth conflicts with the very argument he uses for the existence of god. The tenets of Epicureanism create a cosmology, worldview and ethical system that has no need for god, by any definition, and may have created the rational foundation for later Atheistic thought.

The Means to the Ends of the Means

Throughout the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle discusses deliberation, choices, and results, specifically “means” and “ends.” For Aristotle, how one gets to a final result matters, not the actual result itself. The means to the ends are of utmost importance and are what require the most deliberation. The concept of deliberation and responsibility for the choices one makes (not necessarily the results of those choices) is a difficult, if not nearly alien, one for the modern day reader to comprehend. Yet it may be perhaps the most important of all points made by Aristotle throughout the Nicomachean Ethics. How, when so much of Aristotle’s teachings have survived and thrived through the ages, has this one failed to hold weight? Our success-at-any-price consumer-driven culture, our insistence on a “what’s in it for me” attitude towards good choices, is completely contrary to Aristotle’s view. In light of the Enron scandal (and others), it is imperative that our modern-day attitudes be reoriented towards Aristotle’s understanding of means and ends.