Spartanmouse

Well I'm not going to be published anywhere else, am I?   Thrasymachus declares that justice is nothing but “the advantage of the stronger.” What does he mean by this? Identify and evaluate how successfully Plato rejects this claim in the Republic.   In Book 1 of Plato’s the Republic, Socrates engages his interlocutors in a dialogue about the nature of justice. The sophist Thrasymachus proposes the contentious but compelling definition of justice as being ‘simply what is in the interest of the stronger party.’  In this rejection of conventional morality, Thrasymachus disclaims the relation between justice and moral virtue, asserting the relativistic position that what is right is defined entirely by the interests of those with the greatest political power, the rulers, and not by any absolute objective standard of right or wrong action. Socrates cannot give a definition of justice of his own, but he refutes Thrasymachus’ claim using his customary technique of questioning the assumpt

Lying face down on my bed, I breathe effortlessly. It requires no application for it is no act of will. My ear turned to the mattress, I hear the dull rhythm of my heart slogging away. It pumps and pumps and pumps again, each pump marking the passing of a moment wasted, lost forever not to history but to nothing, for who shall remember these hollow beats that thud like a suitcase dragged cruelly down step after endless step? When comes the rest from this vain and wearisome toil? Who made this wretched and unwilling machine and said that it should sigh in, sigh out and pump and pump and pump, all the while giving off a fierce heat that none besides itself would know? Sweat breaks out upon my hands and feet and brow. I grow too hot against the mattress, this absurd assemblage of pump and pipe and bellows. Too hot, too hot! But there is no other blood or friendship in this bed with which to mingle, and for all my perspiration this heat might as well be the deathly chill of ice. In such a

  If you believe same-sex relationships are wrong, based all or in part on the teachings of the Bible, and if you assume it necessarily follows that you should be against the legalisation of same-sex marriage, I’d like to suggest there may be important things you haven’t yet considered.   If you believe this is an important topic, I submit that this note is worthy of your attention, even if you are convinced that your conviction about this may not be swayed, and I ask you to read on.   Let us start by making some assumptions, which I hope everyone reading this is either happy with, or is happy to entertain for the purpose of illustrating the argument: God created man in his image and created woman from man’s flesh to be his companion, united forever as one body and this is the basis for Christian marriage. Sex between a man and a woman is part of God’s design in creation. Homosexuals indulge in sexual sin and as a consequence will not inherit the kingdom of God. Everybody on this plane

Few can have missed the recent and on-going furore over the government’s proposals to legalise same-sex marriage in England and Wales. Public expressions of both support and opposition to the proposals from ordinary members of the public have been in plentiful supply, and shyness hasn’t prevented lots of people, many of whom are not often found campaigning, appealing to friends and strangers alike, to join the melee and take action to influence proceedings one way or another. What has been lacking is real dialogue.   How many of these eager voices have engaged in rigorous debate? How many have taken the time to consider their position and to hear and reflect on that of their opponents? How many have done so in pursuit of a full understanding of the issue about which they are so exercised, and have been prepared to pursue that aim relentlessly and to its very end? Of those arguing against same-sex marriage, I have found but one such person, but I am not surprised. Why? Because the vast

Imagine for a moment that you are gay. As a youngster, this is not something you were insanely masochistic enough that you would have chosen it had it been a choice, but in any case it was not. As an adult, you’re now well-adjusted enough, but still rather regret your sexuality, not least because you grew up surrounded by messages that said it meant you weren’t ‘normal’ or ‘healthy’. Imagine the isolation and fear you felt when strangers, peers and friends alike made derisive jokes about gay people or casually used the word ‘gay’ to mean stupid or awful, not to mention some people's expressions of disgust nor the recurring wide tacit and express acceptance of the self-righteously aggressive tone in which this sometimes came. Imagine that growing up, your sexuality was a secret that you kept from even your very closest friends and family members until you were 18, and from many others for much longer, because you were afraid of what they might think and how they might react. Imagine

And so here we stand, looking into the unknown: Another long week stretched out before us, A vast plane of uncertain possibility.   Just out of view, the minutes are neatly stacked, Each patiently waiting for its allotted time. With every tick of the clock, They creep steadily closer to revealing their lot.   Who knows what they will hold? Dull monotony for seven long days, Or shock and surprise at every hour? The sense of anticipation is palpable.   Whatever happens to you and whatever happens to me, I hope we'll have the strength to take the bad with the good. I hope we'll have the grace to be thankful for the good amongst the bad. I hope we'll take comfort in knowing that even in our loneliest moments, we never truly need be alone. I hope we'll have hope that the next minute may bring something better, And I hope we'll dare to believe that life might one day be wonderful again.   I can but hope.