Ontology

 

One of the most significant factors concerning ontology is that it involves the study of the nature of reality, and its categories. It is a philosophical concept that seeks to determine those entities that exist, and how these entities can be categorized or grouped. A consequence of this grouping is that it brings about a situation where they are placed within a hierarchy of beings, which can be studied in such a way that determined their similarities and differences. A consequence is that entities that are believed to exist are placed under examination to such an extent that they come to be defined based on their nature. This is an important aspect of ontology because it shows it as an essential means of providing meaning to those definitions of reality that involve things. In this paper, there will be an attempt to examine ontology based on a social perspective, arguments against it, and how it has formed a symbiotic relationship with other disciplines.

A definition of ontological arguments is that they involve a situation where they make assumptions concerning the social reality. This is especially the case where it defines claims of what exists, how these entities look like, and how they interact with one another. In essence, ontology is an attempt by philosophers to better understand what human beings believe is essential aspects of their social reality (Schaffer, 2015). An advantage of ontology is that it can be applied in such a way that makes it possible for both an objective and subjective approach to be applied to a situation. This ensures that there is the advancement of definitions of a diversity of beliefs without having to determine them in the same way. Instead, social phenomena can be analyzed in as thorough a manner as possible based on the current need. Therefore, an objective approach is one that defines social phenomena and what they mean in a manner that creates a level of independence from social factors that would otherwise have made it difficult to achieve a definition. The subjective approach to ontology, on the other hand, seeks to show that social phenomena and their meanings come about because of the actions of social actors, who essentially ensure that they provide the meanings that make these phenomena essential aspects of their lives. In this way, objectivity and subjectivity are essential to ontology because they help in the achievement of a better understanding of social phenomena based on different contexts.

Despite the arguments that have been made above concerning the importance of ontology as a means of interpreting social phenomena, there are a number of objections to it that have been proposed. Among these arguments is that existence is not a predicate, essentially suggesting that the belief in existence does not necessarily translate to reality. In addition, there is the argument that the existence of such a being as god is one that is essentially meaningless and incoherent and despite the best ontological arguments cannot be proven. There is also the assumption that ontological arguments are essentially answers that are yet to be proven, meaning that they set out observations or presuppositions before they are proven to actually exist (Proops, 2015). These arguments, however, fail to consider the validity of the ontological approach as an essential means of making sure that there is a better understanding of reality. This is especially considering that they all seek to advance the belief that ontology is obsolete based on the assumption that it is not scientific. They are a means of seeking to destroy the reputation of ontology without providing the evidence that the arguments being made are actually not based on reality. By attempting to beat up ontological arguments of social phenomena, the objections seem to fail to provide proper arguments that can be accepted with good conscience. Therefore, the objections can be considered to be faulty in their assumptions because they take on a hostile approach to ontology without coming up with feasible arguments to counter the claims made by this concept.

One of the most important aspects of ontology is that it has been able to form a symbiotic relationship with other disciplines. This is the case where this approach is one that varies according to the extent to which the individual applying it wishes to place a reliance on other disciplines. The nature of the disciplines that one wishes to rely on is also important because it determines the direction towards which the ontological arguments that are intended to be made will head. Among the most important ontological methods that are applied is the logical or linguistic method, which essentially places a reliance on theories of meaning (Howarth, 2013). A consequence of this approach is that it brings about an understanding of the manner through which entities that exists are determined and defined. It can be applied to either natural languages or to artificial logical languages in an attempt to determine the kinds of entities that exist. Consequently, the discipline that is adopted as a means of supporting an ontological assumption has the ability of making sure that it points the direction towards which the arguments for it will head. This can be considered an advantage because it allows for the achievement of a level of diversity when it comes to the development of assumptions, and this is in such a way that makes the connection between ontology and different disciplines more feasible.

In conclusion, the ontological approach to the definition of entities that are an essential part of social phenomena is important in the achievement of their understanding. The above discussion, which has sought to bring about an understanding of ontology based on a social perspective, arguments against it, and how it has formed a symbiotic relationship with other disciplines, is essential in showing how this approach is quite effective. This is especially the case considering that the above arguments have brought about a situation where ontology can be considered a most feasible means of understanding social phenomena without the restrictions placed by assumptions based on science.

Social Constructionism

 

Social constructionism essentially involves the manner through which individuals in society view their world. It is a means through which the world view of these individuals can be understood within their own context rather than being judged based on the world views of other communities or cultures. Social constructionism has had an influence of people all over the world and this has been the basis upon which cultures have developed over the centuries. In this paper, there will be an analysis of social constructionism as an influential context when it comes to matters concerning identity, desire, or behavior.

One of the most significant factors that come about because of social constructionism is the assumptions that are made concerning the identity of individuals. In the contemporary world, there are a growing number of individuals who do not possess a specific social identity and instead only view themselves as human beings. This is especially the case in situations where a girl kisses another without identifying as lesbian.[1] Under such circumstances, perfectly straight individuals end up undertaking sexual actions with members of the same sex and this does not have an effect on their identity as straight people.

The influence of social constructionism can be seen in the manner through which such emotions as desire are perceived in society. In the contemporary world, especially in the West, sexual desire has come to take a new meaning because rather than individuals simply being attracted to the opposite sex, there has been an increase in the number of incidents of fluidity. Therefore, even those individuals who identify as being lesbian or gay end up being attracted to the opposite sex and vice versa.[2] A result of this situation is that the rigid perspectives that society had placed on sexual relationships are increasingly being eroded and are instead being replaced by a situation where individuals do what they believe to be right.

The behavior of individuals has also come to be influenced by social constructionism. The influence of social media in this matter cannot be underestimated because the latter has become an important player in the development of new social constructions. The behavior of some individuals has changed to such an extent that it has led to the development of instances where people behave differently in order to not only become a part of a social group, but also to attract attention. An instance of this is where girls kiss one another in order to attract the attention of boys.[3] In addition, there are instances where gay people, especially in a conservative Muslim country like Indonesia, have to hide their sexuality because of their religion, because in Islam, homosexuality is considered a sin.[4]

In conclusion, social construction is an essential part of societies because it helps to govern the evolution of identity, desire, and behavior. Through this process, it becomes possible for societies to develop their own cultures, which essentially move from the fringes to the mainstream as more individuals buy into the new ideas. The ability of individuals to ensure that they adhere to the social norms of their own communities leads to a situation where social constructionism becomes a prominent part of their lives and how they conduct themselves.

 

 

 

Bibliography

Boellstorff, Tom. "Between Religion and Desire: Being Muslim and Gay in Indonesia." American Anthropologist 107, no. 4 (2005): 575-85.

Rupp, Leila J, and Verta Taylor. "Straight Girls Kissing." Contexts 9, no. 3 (2010): 28-32.

 

---

[1] Leila J Rupp and Verta Taylor, "Straight Girls Kissing," Contexts 9, no. 3 (2010): 29.

[2] Ibid., 31.

[3] Ibid., 29.

[4] Tom Boellstorff, "Between Religion and Desire: Being Muslim and Gay in Indonesia," American Anthropologist 107, no. 4 (2005): 578.

Biblical Creation Myth and Native American creation stories

 

Most of the creation stories across the world have a considerable number of similarities. These similarities can be considered to be based on a common origin of these stories as well as the link that is present when it comes to humanity. The significance of these stories to their respective cultures cannot be underestimated because it is a means through which they portray the common origins of all the individuals in their societies. In this paper, there will be a discussion of the similarities between the Biblical and Native American creation stories with the aim of showing how they are connected.

One of the most significant similarities between the Biblical and Native American creation stories is the presence of the serpent. The serpent is considered to be a great power by the Native American stories, specifically that of the Pawnee. According to this story, the great Serpent presided over the endless sheet of water a part of which the Evening Star created land. The serpent in this story is considered to be an evil being and it was the power of the Morning Star, the consort of the Evening Star, which led the serpent to feel into the depths of the waters over which it presided (Bierlein 60). In the biblical story, the presence of the serpent is also important because it is a manifestation of what is evil and tempting. The serpent in the biblical creation story plays the role of tempting Adam and Eve to incur the wrath of God through their eating the forbidden fruit. In both stories, therefore, the presence of the serpent heralds evil and the manner through which it is either driven away or given a harsh punishment is symbolic of warding against evil.

Another prominent aspect that is seen in all Native American creation stories that is similar to the biblical story is that human beings, and all other creatures, are created in pairs. This is the case with the Sioux story, which promotes the idea that the original human beings were created at the same time, one male and one female, by the Great Spirit (Bierlein 59). This story is similar to the biblical one, although the latter involved a situation where man was created first and after a God realized that man was lonely, decided to create a mate for him using man’s own rib. These stories are very similar and they promote the idea that no human being can exist alone without the companionship of the other sex. They also seek to show that both sexes, whether male or female, are important to one another and have the same status. The Sioux story exemplifies this observation because it shows that both male and female were created at the same time by the Great Spirit in order to display their equality.

The presence of a garden is another noteworthy similarity between the Native American and biblical creation stories. The Pawnee creation story states that Evening Star had a celestial garden in which she planted a large variety of crops. It also states that she asked her consort Morning Star to water her celestial garden, and his acquiescence was the origin of rain (Bierlein 60). The biblical story tells of the Garden of Eden, which was essentially a paradise for the original human beings. God placed them there following their creation so that they could take care of the garden while at the same time enjoy their existence within it. Therefore, the presence of the garden in both stories is a probable sign of the need by the respective societies to describe the origins of agricultural practices. It is also the location within which the original creations were placed by the creators after they were brought into existence. The garden, which is described in both stories as being a beautiful place, seems to be the description of an ideal paradise that the respective communities desire to become a part of.

The story of the flood is also an important similarity between these two creation stories. In the bible, the story of the flood takes place following the numerous sins that human beings have committed. It is a punishment meted out by God in order to cleanse the world of evil and to ensure that human beings are able to start afresh. The biblical flood also comes about because of the fall of angels, who, because of their attraction to the daughters of man, end up coming to earth and marrying them. The result of the union of these two beings is the rise of evil giants who bring their evil all over the world. This story is similar to that of Arikara, which states that the Great Sky Spirit, Nesaru, makes the decision to ensure the downfall of evil in the world by causing a flood (Bierlein 61). This is especially considering that the evil was caused by an evil race of giants, who Nesaru believes have to be destroyed. Just like God in the bible, Nesaru makes the decision to ensure that human beings are saved. Thus, both stories portray an image of the creator as a just and merciful being.

The biblical creation story and the Algonquin Native American creation story have similar incidents of antagonistic brothers. The Algonquin story features two brothers, Glooskap and Malsum, who despite being siblings are completely different. While the former is inherently good, his brother is completely evil and is jealous of him. Malsum, because of his jealousy towards his brother, seeks to find his weakness so that he can kill him. He eventually discovers this weakness and ends up killing Glooskap (Bierlein 61); leading to a situation where he is the only brother remaining. This is similar to the biblical story of Cain and Abel, where the former is essentially jealous of the favors that his brother receives from God. He ends up murdering his brother in a jealous fit and the result is that God curses him and sends him away. Therefore, while these two stories end differently, their basic aspects are the same and they portray the way that human beings respond to each other’s successes.

In relation to the issue of antagonistic brothers, a similar concept between Native American and biblical creation stories is the concept of good and evil. Good and evil are prevalent themes in these stories and they seek to show that they are an essential part of existence. The Yuma creation story states that in the beginning, the creator god Kokomaht came into existence and he was essentially good, and Bakotahl, who separated himself from him and he became the embodiment of evil. These two have rivaled one another since this period, with each creating their own creatures that have adopted their various aspects (Bierlein 63). This story is similar to the biblical creation story, which speaks of the serpent as the embodiment of evil. The serpent is used to describe the devil, which is the antithesis of God and seeks to ensure that human beings are taken away from God’s presence. These two stories show that good and evil are integral aspects of life and that they have existed side by side since the beginning.

In both the creation stories, there is the existence of primeval waters and nothing else. This is an important aspect that can be compared because it shows considerable similarities between these creation stories of diverse origins. This is especially considering that in the Yuma and Pima creation stories; nothing exists except water and darkness. It is only after the creators in both stories decide to undertake creation that it becomes possible for order to be brought from chaos (Bierlein 63 - 66). Furthermore, it becomes possible for light to come into existence, and this is an important feat because most creatures are not able to survive without it. A similar tale is told in the bible, where God existed in a world where there was only water and darkness. He separates the waters into two so that one part can form the sky and the other the seas. In both stories, it is the creator that brings about order and once the order is brought about, it becomes possible to undertake the other tasks of creation, such as the creation of plants and animals, as well as human beings. Therefore, the creator is portrayed as being a force of order that establishes the world from the original chaos.

The rebellion of man is another similarity that can be seen between the Native American and biblical creation stories. This is especially the case in the Inca creation story, which proposes that the creator god Con Tiqui created a race of human beings. After their creation, he was very good to them and provided them with all of their needs. However, despite his kindness and goodness, the humans forgot about their creator and instead rebelled against him; leading to a situation where they sought to proclaim their own power. Con Tiqui decided to punish these individuals through stopping the rain and making them to work very hard for their needs (Bierlein 70). This story is similar to the biblical story where Adam and Eve rebelled against God’s instructions when they ate from the tree of knowledge. After God found them out, he sentenced them to a life of hard labor as punishment for their sins and this punishment would be inherited by all their descendants. Both of these stories seek to explain the reasons behind the way of life that human beings lead as well as promoting an understanding of the relationship between them and nature.

In conclusion, there is a diverse number of similarities between the biblical and native American creation stories. These similarities are essential in the understanding of the attitudes towards life that the people who propagated these stories led. In this paper, there has been an analysis of the similarities between the biblical and Native American creation stories with the aim of showing how they are connected; a process that can be considered to have been successful. It has brought about a situation where there is a greater understanding of how two very different cultures in different parts of the world viewed their way of life and considered their origins. Through this understanding of the similarities shown in the creation stories, it becomes possible to come to the realization that all human beings have a common origin and the different creation stories are essentially different versions of the same story.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

Bierlein, John Francis. Parallel Myths. Ballantine Books, 2010. Print.

 

Elizabeth Barrett Browning: Sonnet 7

 

Elizabeth Barrett Browning’s poem is one that seems to promote an image where a woman is expressing her love for a man. It is likely that the poem is a reflection of the manner through which Browning loves her husband, and what her love has been able to do for her. This is especially considering that before she met her future husband, she had been a sickly individual, and it was only after she got married that she had an improvement in her health status (Browning, The Letters of Elizabeth Barrett Browning 16). The information concerning her personal life can be considered useful in understanding this poem because it shows that she is an individual that makes use of her personal experiences in her work. It also promotes an image of an individual that is able to ensure that she creates a reflection of her personal life in her work in such a way that she brings her audience as close as possible to the reality of what occurs between two individuals that love one another. Thus, she is able to ensure that there is an increase in the emotional effect of her work on her audience.

One of the most significant aspects of this poem is that it promotes an image of an individual that is deeply in love; which ensures that there is a joyous tone throughout the poem. This is seen through the way that she describes her meeting with her lover using terms such as hearing “the footsteps” of her lover’s “soul” next to her (Browning XX, line 1). This is an extremely important statement because it shows that she is an individual that was extremely lonely until such a time as she met her lover. In addition, in the same line, she adds “I think” (Browning XX, line 1), meaning that despite the joy that she is currently feeling, she is still uncertain concerning the direction towards which her life is heading. Her statements suggest that while she is joyful about the events that are taking place in her life, she is also concerned about their consequences. Furthermore, she seems to attribute her continuing to live to her lover, as seen in the case where she suggests that he saved her from “obvious death” and provided her to discover the joys “Of life in a new rhythm” (Browning XX, lines 6-7). These are extremely important lines because they promote an image of an individual that seems to have been extremely lonely until such a time as she met her lover. The statement “obvious death” is highly symbolic because it implies that the persona lived in an environment and society where nobody understood her, until such a time as her lover came to her life.

The imagery used in the poem is also extremely important in understanding the state of mind of the writer. This is especially the case where the image of being in the “brink of obvious death” is brought up. It shows that the writer is an individual that was very close to death and that if not for her lover, she would have ended up dying. However, with her recovery, an image of the celebration of life is promoted, since the individual involved concedes that while there are troubles in life, as seen in her sickliness, there is still so much to live for. The use of juxtaposition can be seen in “country, heaven” (Browning XX, line 10) and this is extremely important in the advancement of the idea that because of the love that she feels for her lover, she is no longer willing to die. Instead, the world has become a better place for her to such an extent that it can be compared to heaven. Therefore, in the poet’s mind, it seems to heaven and country are essentially interchangeable aspects of the same thing; meaning that joy can not only be found in heaven with God, but also in the regular human life, despite its troubles (Stott and Avery 37). Therefore, while this poem seems to be one that celebrates life and love, and the joys that they bring about in the lives of individuals, it also touches on its grimmer aspects; essentially acknowledging that it is the latter that make the joys so precious.

In conclusion, the poet seems to acknowledge the power of love and the way that it can have a positive effect on the lives of individuals. This is especially the case considering that the mood of the poem increasingly becomes positive from line to line. It shows a perspective that advances the need for individuals to take advantage of all opportunities that they have in life, despite its grimmer aspects, to find joy in it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

Browning, Elizabeth Barrett. "Sonnets From The Portuguese." Massachusetts: Barre Publishing (1977).

Browning, Elizabeth Barrett. The Letters of Elizabeth Barrett Browning. Vol. 1. Macmillan, 1898.

Stott, Rebecca, and Simon Avery. Elizabeth Barrett Browning. Routledge, 2014.

The State of Nature

 

The state of nature is one of the most debated opinions concerning the nature of human beings by philosophers. This is an extremely important concept because it seeks an understanding of the manner through which humans before the formation of societies behaved. The analysis of the state of nature considered the reasons behind why individuals ended up becoming part of societies, which essentially brought about a situation where there was the creation of the nation-state. A consequence of such a situation was that individuals shifted from a state of nature to a state of society, and the problems that the latter entails. Among these problems are the restrictions that the society puts on the natural rights of individuals, to such an extent that they essentially become subject to a political system. In this paper, there will be an analysis of the state of nature, with reference to the opinions of John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau being compared and contrasted.

Among the most important philosophers to undertake to explain this concept are Locke and Rousseau, both of who consider individuals before the formation of societies had better lives than is the case with those who live in societies. Locke and Rousseau both consider the state of nature as having been more conducive for individuals, because they were able to exercise their freedoms better. Locke argues that individuals were able to live the way that they wanted without harming one another because they in the state of nature, they made use of reason. The governance of reason meant that they are able to ensure they attained all their needs without resorting to exploiting one another, as is the case in society (Locke 3). This argument is further advanced by Rousseau, who considers the state of nature as having been the creation of a situation where individuals were not able to harm one another because they did not know each other well enough (Rousseau 50). The arguments made by both Rousseau and Locke show that they take a common stance when it comes to the state of nature, where they believe that individuals had more freedoms, and could act in such a way as to ensure that their interests were catered for.

Locke and Rousseau, despite the similarities of their arguments, also have a number of differences. Locke promotes the idea that in the state of nature, individuals were governed by reason (Locke 3). He essentially suggests that in the state of nature, humans have the capacity to think and determine what it best for them because of the presence of natural laws. This argument is one that seeks to show that the state of nature and the governance of natural laws are essential in the advancement of the rights of individuals. It also considers that this state to be the most conducive because it allows for the supremacy of natural laws over those of society. This is an argument that does not agree with that proposed by Rousseau, who proposes that in the state of nature, individuals are neither good nor bad. Instead, they live in an environment where they are not able to distinguish what it right from wrong. Moreover, Rousseau is of the opinion that individuals in a state of nature are essentially blank slates, who end up being influenced by societies, which are essentially determinants of whether individuals will be good or evil (Rousseau 46). Therefore, Rousseau seems not to believe that the state of nature involves the governance of reason, and this is especially considering that individuals do not know good from evil.

The origins of the political community are explained by both Locke and Rousseau and this is done in relation to the state of nature. Locke is of the opinion that human beings are born free and that they become involved in the political community out of the desire not to be alone. He suggests that humans are created by God in a manner that encourages them to seek companionship, meaning that they are inevitably drawn into a society that essentially develops into a political community (Locke 28). However, despite being a part of the political communities, natural law should take precedence, meaning that it is essential for the natural rights of individuals should be respected at all times. Rousseau, on the other hand, states that the formation of the political community or civil state is responsible for the erosion of the state of nature (Rousseau 167). He considers the latter to be real freedom that is the essential right of all individuals, but with the formation of political society, this freedom is disrupted because of the dominance of one group of individuals over another. The result is that most individuals end up not having the freedoms provided by the state of nature to undertake the actions that they need to in order to bring about the advancement of their own personal needs.

Despite their differences, both Locke and Rousseau provide very pertinent arguments concerning the state of nature. However, the account provided by Rousseau is one that is more convincing because it provides a perspective concerning the state of nature and how this state is affected by the formation of society. One of the most important arguments that Rousseau makes, and is more convincing than that of Locke, is that in the state of nature, individuals are essentially blank slates, meaning that they are unaffected by any form of corruption (Rousseau 50). Instead, they live in an environment where they are governed by their own needs, neither being good or bad. This is an important argument because it shows Rousseau’s belief that society is what brings about the disruption of the state of nature, to such an extent that individuals are pushed towards behaving in a manner that is against their nature (Widerquist and McCall). Furthermore, Rousseau’s argument shows that it is society that has an influence on the development of individuals into either good or evil, because they become affected by the restrictive practices that are a part of the social environment. A result of such a situation is that one group of people achieves dominance over another because they have the ability to enforce their will (Rousseau 259); essentially going against the state of nature where all people are not only equal, but are also free to do as they please.

The natural state of mankind can be considered an essential concept because it seeks to ensure that there is the promotion of the rights of individuals in society. This is especially considering that it involves individuals having natural rights that are inalienable, even within the social structure. The recognition of natural rights is fundamental in the establishment of means through which to ensure that individuals are not only able to live according to their own desires, but do so based on the governance of reason. Reflecting on the natural state of mankind is essential in the establishment of a conversation concerning the effects of society on the rights of individuals. It also helps to bring about a conversation about the need to ensure that there is a respect of the natural rights of individuals in such a way that enables these rights to be recognized even within a social environment, where the restrictions against them are numerous. The attainment of a just society, where individuals have a right to ensure that there is the advancement of their interests by the political class through the application of reason, is essential in the advancement of the state of nature. Therefore, rather than the state of nature being one governed by chaos, a reflection on it is an important means of bringing about a respect for the natural rights of individuals.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

Locke, John. Second Treatise of Government: An Essay Concerning the True Original, Extent and End of Civil Government. John Wiley & Sons, 2014.

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The basic political writings. Hackett Publishing, 2010.

Widerquist, Karl, and Grant McCall. "Myths about the State of Nature and the Reality of Stateless Societies." Analyse & Kritik 37.1-2 (2015): 233-258.