Part 1: Assessment of the Reading
The reading is sort of an introduction to World Philosophy. The author describes not just a single view of culture, but makes an incredible effort in bringing into discussion worldviews of a plethora of cultures. Various views of different cultures are used in the analysis of particular philosophical topics. For instance, the Buddhists believe in the findings of Siddhartha that change is inevitable and that true wisdom lies in accepting change. The author explains that after renouncing his wife, father, children and what is called the “life of pleasure,” Siddhartha embarked on a journey of begging so as to get answers to his questions about the meaning of life. He fasted to an unimaginable point where he could allegedly feel his backbone upon sucking in his stomach. However, as the author writes, the answers that Siddhartha was looking for came when he sat under a wisdom tree during the full Moon. It is during this experience that the Buddhism founder realized that accepting change is the answer to the way to go in seeking answers to life’s misery.
On the other hand, in order to explain the miseries of life, the Taoists understand that wisdom is to let things happen by themselves: accepting change as the nature of life. Lao-tzu and Chuang-tzu, the founders of Taoism as a system of belief, argue that nature should be seen as the very heart of what it is. Taoists believe that “Tao” is nature’s way, which moves by effortless, packet efficiency so as to fulfill its purposes. The nature system dictates that there should be Summer which gives way to Fall, which in turn exits the stage for the Winter and finally giving way to Spring. Similarly, the night gives way to day and after the day comes the night. Again, similarly, people are born, they grow up into old age and finally they die. Therefore, Taoism is founded on the belief that wisdom dictates people should have an egoless, simple recognition of the manner in which things happen. Wisdom, therefore, is in the allowing of nature to take its course. The author also uses other cultural views to explain philosophical topics covered in the book.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Clearly, therefore, the book makes a huge effort in exhausting different philosophical topics from a wide perspective. Different views from different cultures are used in providing explanations for the same topic of philosophy. The broader topic of wisdom is explained using a number of cultural understandings from a global spectrum. Therefore, it comes out clearly that this is by any standard a great book for any person that intends to understand the true origin of wisdom.
Part 2: My Stance
My stance is that there is God and He is the origin of all wisdom. The stance is based on my personal faith and quest to get answers to the happenings of this world. I agree with the author’s views that there are people- many- who believe that failure to believe in God comes with its consequences. The possibility of facing such consequences is a terrible thing that is worthless to find oneself in. I always take time to listen to preachers and Christians that confess to having experienced the grace of God in their lives and some who have decided at some point in their lives to outright oppose God faced dire consequences. Such stories are there worldwide—from the East to the West. No matter how big a controversy it could be, it is not possible for people from all over the world to come up with such similarly inexplicable experiences of what God has done for them in their lives.
Just like the 17 th Century scholar Blaise Pascal argued, I believe that the decision to either believe or not believe in God is a personal choice that we get to make- just like people do in any form of wager. Mathematician Pascal talks about the decision as a simple one—either God does not exist or He exists. The human’s choice is also a simple one: either you believe or choose not to believe. The scholar presents four possible outcomes and I totally agree with him. In the case that one believes in the existence of God and duly believes in Him, the person stands to receive eternal life as their reward. For those that realize that there is a God and choose not to believe in Him, they stand to face eternal consequences. Thirdly, in the case that there was no God and someone chose to believe in the existence of one, they stand to lose some selfish consequences. Finally, for the case that there is no God and someone correctly believed so, they would stand to enjoy the feeling of being right, although in death.
I acknowledge the fact that betting that God indeed exists could raise some other issues for me, as a person. God would definitely expect me to live my life in a specific way, for which He will hold me accountable. I believe that indeed God exists, and that life has an endless dimension which lasts much longer than any individual’s life or that of the cosmos. We humans, are in charge of our own lives and subsequently determining how to live them- either we choose God or reject God.
Part 3: Explanation for My Stance
Science or any other belief does not provide answers for everything that happens in this world. I, therefore, choose to believe in God to get answers to all the mysteries of life. When in doubt, I look up to God for an explanation of where humans originated from. No other system of belief or science provides a clear explanation of where the first ever human life form came from. My stance is drawn from cosmological reasoning. The great philosopher, Aquinas, observes motion and subsequently reasoned that whatever gets moved must have been moved by some other. The chain of motion which exists in moving objects cannot be said to be infinite, because were it to be so then there would have been no beginning to that motion and thus no motion in the first place. Therefore, just like Aquinas argued and I concur, “it is necessary to arrive at a first mover which is moved by no other.” There is nothing which can credit itself to be an efficient cause of its own self because that would be an impossibility. Therefore, there ought to be a necessary being who existed in the beginning of things to cause everything to happen. Just like the first mover argument in setting things in motion, the necessary being and efficient cause is God.
