My Blog

Consider the following pairs and how they would fit into Aristotle’s categories of friendship: Thomas/Victor, Victor/Arlene, Arnold/Suzie, Lucy/Velma. Near the end of the film, Thomas asks Victor,“Do you know why your Dad really left?” Victor replies, “Yeah. He didn’t mean to, Thomas.” What didn’t Arnold mean to do? What does this exchange reveal to us about Victor and Thomas? How would Aristotle categorize their friendship?

Aristotle’s categories of friendship are pleasure, utility, virtue. Through out the film “Smoke Signals”, I would say Thomas and Victor have a friendship of virtue because Thomas seen Victor go through being a nice kid to all of a sudden switching up his mood when his father left him and his mother when he was just 12 years old. This haunted Victor all though his life and Thomas can see that in him. Thomas following Victor to go collect things where his father died and coming back home changed Victors mind on how he thinks about his father and other people around him as well. Thomas helped Victor come to this conclusion on the ride back home. Although Thomas didn’t show a big of a emotion finding out how his family died he still had to struggle not having family how Victor didn’t have a father. Following each other in there journeys it comes out to Victor and Thomas relating to there past.

Victor and Arlene have a friendship of virtue as well. Being mother and son both seeing how Arnold acted and left them, they both seen each others reactions. From the beginning when Arlene was trying to make a change for the better of Victor, by trying to be better parents to Victor. It didn’t play out how arlene wanted it to. This caused Victors father Arnold to leave them both even though he didn’t mean to. When Victor comes back with his fathers ashes, Arlene hugs Victor because she can see how the trip made him think differently of his father.

I would say Arnold and Suzy had a freindship of Virtue. Although they were only in each others lives for a short amount of time Arnold would always tell Suzy stories about Victor and being back home. Victor expressing him self to Suzy helped him get through what was bothering him in the inside and Suzy can see this by the stories he would tell her. In

Lucy and Velmas case I couldn’t really tell what there friend ship was since there roll was short in the film.

When Victor tells Thomas his dad didn’t mean to leave, this meant Arnold didn’t mean to leave Victor and Arlene. You can tell this was true because before Arnold left them he hugged Victor when Victor was chasing after the truck. Plus having a picture of the family in his wallet and the stories he would tell Suzy about back home. This told Victor that Arnold didn’t really mean to leave him or his mother, Arnold just had a lot of guilt built up in him. This reveals the reason why Victor doesn’t hate Thomas anymore like before. Victor always thought his dad saved Thomas and not him when the house was in flames. Plus it seemed like all the stories Thomas would tell Victor about his dad were all good. I think Arnold was trying to repay back Thomas in a way since he’s the one that caused the house to burst into flames and kill Thomas’s parents. I think this would still be a virtue friendship between Victor and Thomas like a explained above.

Word Count: 594

Do you agree with Aristotle’s proposition that there are three types of friendship: friendship of pleasure, friendship of utility, and friendships in virtue? Can you identify people in your life that fall into any of the three categories?

I somewhat agree with Aristotle’s proposition about there being different types of friendships and maybe have seen some of these friendships play out them selves. Although I can not give many examples in some because I don’t open up to people like others would.

Friendship of Pleasure means both parties gaining an enjoyment in something they both like doing but as soon as this comes to an end the people split paths because they find no interest in each others doings. For example if both people like going to parties together and one person finds something more productive to do rather than go to parties all the time, most likely they will not be talking to each other like they used to when they both went to parties.

Friendship of Utility means being useful or beneficial in exchange to one another. An example of Utility I have is when ever I get put into a group for an assignment or anything else we benefit off each other because we all want the best out come for ourselves. As soon as its over I think of it as nothing much more than what it was, just something you do as a group.

Friendship of Virtue means being in each others lives, the goodness of it, and caring about what happens to each other. An example for virtue I have would be my friendships I have with some of the closets people to me. I say close as in they have seen my highs and lows in life and I to them as well. In most cases we can relate to each other because we came and grew up in the same place.

Even though I agreed with Aristotle’s friendship types and understand what he meant about this, I personally wouldn’t call it a friendship in some cases for being pleasure or utility. Its more like, I just know that person because I had to do something with him or her, but I wouldn’t call it a friendship.

Word Count: 372

Are the virtues merely a means to happiness? What is virtue? How does one become virtuous? What does Aristotle mean when he says that virtue is a state of character? Give examples and explain.

Virtue means being morally good in any situation, handling with excellence. I feel like virtue can be anything that has positivity involved with in it like being honest, kind, or forgiving. For example one can become virtues by simply respecting elders is something many people say. Another example is being honest no matter how much you want to lie. Although sometimes lying might be the best thing to do in some cases like fearing for your safety or someone else’s. Still Aristotle sates one should tell the truth no matter what.

Virtues is what makes up happiness. Virtues by themselves like happiness kindness, and honesty are good as itself. I think what Aristotle is trying to say is whatever character you play in the world as a human, one must follow the rules of being that character. For example being a good citizen, helping out people around you doing doing good activities for your society. If one can just focus on being a good person than it would come without one even trying. Being virtues takes practice/ training just like practicing in any other subject or sport. People can learn this by watching others and following in there foot steps, sort of like mimicking. You have to take all the right actions and eventually you will get use to doing these acts of kindness. Although one might think in a cituation doing something is the right thing but might be reckless instead. You have to make sure you look over and think of all the outcomes and possibilities and then one should pick the best way to handle it.

Word Count: 303

What are the Dalai Lama’s main commitments? What are their benefits? Do you share any of his commitments?

Dalai Lamas main commitments are global level issues. He states that the world should focus more on “education of the heart, teaching love, compassion, justice, forgiveness, mindfulness, tolerance and peace.“

Education of the heart can be taught in a class just like any other subject. Maybe more in the early stages of a kids growth. And again in college as it might be a good topic since they are already teaching things like parenting or something about children growing up I seen. The topic can also get brung up in classes just like this Ethics class. I think this can make a big impact especially with children learning about forgiveness, compassion, peace. But of course it would have to be explained more simpler to make sure its understood for children.

He also says everyone should be accept no matter what there beliefs and non beliefs are. I understand where Lama is going with this and support his commitments from acceptance to education of the heart. Although I don’t think this will ever happen. The reason I say this is because there are always people who want to be identified as being different from everyone else. Whether its what they were taught or how they grew up and what they saw to make them the person they are to this day. For example I agree with Lamas commitments but I wouldn’t want to change the person I am because thats what makes me who I am at the end of the day.

word count: 270

Focus on a particular component of the eightfold path and apply it to your own life. Do you think that right action would mean less suffering? Refer to both readings in your explanation of the connection between virtue and the cessation of suffering.

If I apply right livli hood to my own life which means “that one should abstain from making one’s living through a-profession that brings harm to others, such as trading in arms and lethal weapons, intoxicating drinks or poisons, killing animals, cheating, etc., and should live by a-profession, which is honorable, blameless, and innocent of harm to others.” I feel as if it would be harder in life for me than it already is. Doing the right thing all the time coming from places with poverty will be a real hard thing to do. For one if I apply these rules to my life I will always be getting stepped on and taken advantaged of and thats something I always hated in life espacially coming from what we call the streets. Another example would be that there is not enough opportunities for lower and middle class people to succeed and live a less suffering life. This changes there paths to doing illegal things or being the person that they are to lessen some of the suffering. Steps of the Noble Eightfold path are like rules that have to be followed if you want to end suffering Buddhist say.

I will probably never have the cessation to stop doing a bad habit if it the habit is helping me. I don’t necessarily think virtues will always bring less suffering because of the society I live in. For example if I’m living in poverty and I’m not given as mush chances as somebody else in a higher class because I talk the way I talk, dress how I dress, move how I move, and think how I think. Not because I choose to but because that’s how I grew up. If I don’t think this way or talk how I talk I will most likely be getting stepped on or suffer more than I am in society. So by stealing that piece of bread I’m ending my suffering because I had no choice.

Buddhist might say well one can always work for what they want and by doing so you buy that piece of bread so this will cancel out doing bad to end suffering. Although not all people are lucky enough to be given this chance. Or they see someone else do it another way which would be an illegal way that gets them more money and ends less suffering. Thats whats going on in society.

Word Count: 447

What reasons does Mill give in support of the Greatest Happiness Principle?  Is utilitarianism a “pig philosophy?”  How does Mill explain the fact that some people choose lower pleasures over higher pleasures? Do you agree with his assessment?

Losing interest to a high desire is easy when you never been given a chance to do it your self and instead do whats important to you in the present time. If a person is doing heavy labor and working everyday there most likely going to be taking the lowest pleasure. Sometimes they don’t even have a choice as it might be the only source of income for them. An example can be a parent working like I stated above. They wouldn’t be able to reach out and do something they always wanted to do but never have done as a job. It would just take up way to much time to learn.

Mill sates the Greatest Happiness Principle is “on which this theory of morality is grounded-namely that pleasure, and freedom from pain, are the only things desirable as ends; and that all desirable things (which are numerous in the utilitarian as in any other scheme) are desirable either for the pleasure inherent in themselves, or as means to the promotion of pleasure and the privation of pain.” Mill is saying one should always choose the option that gives the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people. If the quality is good enough, it should always be picked most the time. But if the quantity is bigger somewhere else should that be picked instead? Mill says that some people chose lower pleasures over high pleasures, these would be something like alcohol, partying, sex…etc. Some high pleasures would be like studying, reading a book…etc. But of course I believe most people would pick lower pleasures as would I. I agree with Mill to an extent, depending on what the situation is. Im not going to choose something that doesn’t interest me just because it might be more important. I feel like that will be taking away many things that I’m doing in life today. If you have more happiness in the choice you pick than the other then thats the better answer for you. Following this method is the best choice one can have.

Word Count: 383