Questions - part II Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Questions - part II - Essay employmentIn this paper, we will focus on two philosophers Boethius and Machiavelli. Through examining the two philosophers, we will be commensurate to understand the main tenets of the ancient modern contest. Part A The main tenets of the ancient modern debate revolve around several differences on the subject of human nature. It is clear that different philosophers have presented versatile thoughts and opinions regarding the so called human nature. Building on this point of gull, there has been a developing code of moral philosophy emerging from such theorists and what people accept as true in the present day. It is worth examining Boethius view points on the subject and compargon them with Machiavellis accordingly. Part B From a literal point of view, Boethiuss most excellent known work is referred as the consolation of philosophy. He wrote this work whilst in prison house composition awaiting his execution. Boethius finds himself in jail. At firs t, he is profoundly upset. The cause of his suffering emerges from his enduring project, effort to continue ancient classical knowledge, specifically philosophy. His work represents an imaginary conversation amongst himself and philosophy. In that case, philosophy is personified as a woman. The arguments in this scenario are that, in spite of the apparent disparity of the humankind, there is, within Platonic fashion, a high power and everything besides is secondary to such divine willnce. Despite Boethius suffering while in exile, it is recorded that philosophy appears and attempts to cure his suffering. Philosophy, which is personified as a woman, does this in various ways. First of all, she does this by reminding him of what he once knew about the true nature of human beings the nature of fortune, the nature of happiness, and the limits of politics to provide happiness (Boethius 49). In Boethius argument of the nature of fortune, happiness, and the limits of politics to provide happiness, he agonizes over the professed inappropriateness between the subsistence of God and the wickedness that exists in the earth. What is more, he agonizes between the existence of God and the superficial ethical eversion of the creation. In responding to such issues, Boethius declares that Gods kindness and Gods obligation to honesty does non necessitate that God get rid of every instance of evil. Then again, Boethius presents argument that there are at least different examples of goodness that appear to have need of the likelihood of some wickedness, ethical education with regards to the free will of humans and the true nature of happiness. Moreover, Boethius presents an argument that the nature of evil as self-destructive to wrongdoers and the nature of the ultimate good as the one which, every person naturally nip for, an indication that the earth is not decently inverted. As a result, Boethius would dispute the reality of premise in the modern formulation of the issu e of evil (Boethius 54). In his argument for the compatibility of the subsistence of God with the continuation of evil, he provides explanations as to why God would allow occurrences of evil and not do away with them. As a vitrine in the Consolation, he seems to take consolation in such discoveries. Reflecting on the above discussion, it is worth contemplating that the peeress philosophy brings to a n end the dialogue with both caution and encouragement,