The Qualities of the Prince

                   Surprisingly, I agree with every single point in Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Qualities of the Prince. After reading this article, a quote, which is from Stan Lee, the writer of Spiderman, appears in my head. “With great power, comes great responsibility”. A prince is the next ascendant of the throne. He has the responsibility to rule, and to protect the lives of millions of citizen. We can consider “prince” as a work position. People may think a prince is given too many rights and privileges, but let’s consider them as the wage and benefits of his job. Ordinary people can separate their jobs and their lives. They can get out of their jobs completely after their working hours, but for a prince, he has to work unstop, 24 hours a day. Sometimes I feel sorry for the prince. Every action he does will be the attention of the people. When he did something good, people would not appreciate too much because they think it is the prince’s responsibility to do so. However if he did something wrong, people would blame on and give the prince a lot of pressure. The saddest point of this is that the “wrong doings” of a prince are not even wrong. They are wrong are only because they go against the people’s will. 

Anti-Nature vs Religion

                      After reading Friedrich Nietzsche’s "Morality as Anti-Nature" and Iris Murdoch’s "Morality and Religion", my point of view to virtue changes. Although Nietzsche and Murdoch's opinions seem to be contradicting, however I found some points in "Morality as Anti-Nature" true and some points in "Morality and Religion” true. First, I agree with Murdoch that religion can served as a tool to force or encourage people to conduct virtuous activities (a must-do duty). In sine extend, this point actually support Nietzsche's point of "morality is for the ill-will". However, the most important quality of a virtuous person is his action. A person who can do virtuous activities with may not a virtuous heart, but a person who does not do virtuous activities definitely does not have a virtuous heart. But then I also agree with Nietzsche too. I think too much religious boundary will limit or kill a man's passion. It is reasonable for a non-religious person to think that his existence is defined by his passion. For example, a religious man is very passionate to music. He may have the potential to compose, perform, or make huge influences to the music industry, but because he is a religious person, all of his works are only forced on sacred music. Then this man is bounded by his "religious duty". His passion on secular music is killed. 

Toward a Universal Ethics Reading Response

                     After reading “Toward a Universal Ethics” by Michael Gazzaniga, I have several thoughts in mind. He states that, “…there are certain universal, guiding moral instincts”(421).  He then provided some examples to support his point of view, such as all societies believe that murder and incest are wrong, children are to be cared for and not abandoned, that people should not yell lies or break promises, and people should be loyal to their family. However, I have to argue with Gazzaniga’s opinion. No one is born with an instinct, which can tell him what is right and what is wrong, and even so, right and wrong are always subjective. The instincts that we have now are given and shaped by our surrounding. We are like a white blank paper when we were born, and then family, culture, religion, living environment, and other personal experiences put colors on it and made who we are now. Along with the creation of our distinct characteristics, our own instincts were also brought to us. One of the reasons why many people share a similar  or common instinct is because they have a similar culture and living environment. Although you may argue that each person has his own life experience, but just be honest, you and I are actually not that special.

The Case against Character Reading Response

               After reading The Case against Character by Kwame Anthony Appiah, a strange feeling came up to me. I feel like a virtuous person is the most powerful person in the world, to an extend that they may be too powerful. Since virtue is a character, so every single decision and action that a virtuous person made is virtuous too. In that case, the people surrounded the virtuous person are forced to get along with the virtuous person and support all the decisions he made, because if the people refuse to do so, then that shows that they are vicious.

              As Appiah mentioned in his writing, "people were much less likely to help someone..." (Appiah 405), there are not many virtuous men exist in reality. People always tend to have some minor vices. Therefore in a norm society, the virtuous people are actually pressuring the crowd. The crowd may have to put themselves on a performance or give up their original intention of how to do things. The existence of virtue threatened the freedom of choice. To be "honest", the virtuous men expected too much on the normal people like you and me. They want us to be like them and dislike, disapprove of, despise, and pity those who succeed by wrongful attributions. Yes, it is very contradictory. Since we are not perfect, so we are forced to hate ourselves and rebel our inner thoughts. Although this may sound a little bit crooked, but unfortunately, this is what happening to us in daily life.

"Deep Play" Deep Response

      One thing that I learned from the "Deep Play" by Clifford Geertz is that people should pay more attention on small things that happen in life. Perhaps there is always something. someone, or some events seem insignificant to us, but if we look closer, it may bring you some unexpected observations and thoughts. The little Cockfight in Bali perfectly demonstrates a very serious social phenomenon to us. Today's society is so competitive that it gives people a delusion that if you want to be successful or set yourself apart from the ordinary people, you must "deep play".

                   Sang Lan, the 17-year-old Chinese gymnast who fractured her neck in a freakish fall at the Nassau Coliseum 13 years ago at the Goodwill Games. She was one of China's most talented vaulters who had placed first in the 1997 Chinese Nationals. Sang Lan is a perfect example of a "deep player". According to Sang Lan's pervious competitions and achievements, She almost had a assured chance to win. But none of the deep play can guarantee success. Every forms of play involve risk, competition, against oneself or others, and test one's skills, cunning, or courage. One might even argue that all play is a contest of one sort or another. And deep play is a most extreme from of playing. It is similar to a fatal gambling; you take it all or you lose it all. 

      Now, people no longer appreciate the "More work, more gain" theory; they think it is a waste of time to do that; they want to set themselves apart so badly. So they put everything they have, pride, knowledge, money, family, love, friendship, and health, on the table as a stake and roll the dice.