The Examination Between The Human Being Writing Sample

The Hungry Soul: Eating and the Perfecting of Human Nature, by Leon Kass takes a unique view of examining the body and soul by focusing on the eating habits of human beings. He uses this in order to distinguish humans from animals and the divine element (God). In this book, Kass touches on the point of sanctified eating. In Kass’ final chapter, he looks at the “created order”, the dietary laws in the chapter of Leviticus in the Holy Bible and the problem of eating. Not only do these sub-chapters actually give a good sense of what humans are in the design of divinity, but it also shows how far human beings have to go in order to be close to the divine power of God.

In the first chapter of the Holy Bible, Genesis, God creates the world. In this creation he creates man on the same day, yet man stands divine like at the peak of the creatures. Rousseau, in the Second Discourse, recalls that when he was a beast he ate mainly fruits and nuts. Eventually, he rose to his human status and began to eat meat. One must face the idea that animal meat, not fruits and nuts, is “the human food.” Kass later on discusses how vegetarians seem to alter the balance of nature and fails to distinguish between man and animal by only eating vegetables, fruits and nuts. According to Genesis, the early ancestors were originally strict frugivores (fruit pickers), but when God restarts the human race again with Noah, he then shows the hierarchy of humans and animals. He then brings humans to the point that they are to eat animal flesh in order to balance the nature of the world. Human beings, although being praised for being superior, are animals both in their nature and in their origins. According to Aristotle, the soul, though thought by humans to be the only creatures to obtain it, is more that consciousness and is acquired in all animals even plants. Even in Genesis, God thought that animals and humans should be similar in this fact in order to be his companions. Though Genesis discusses creation of the “humanity” of the human being, Leviticus brings forth the dietary laws in which humans must obey when looking for divinity.

Leviticus, the third book of the Holy Bible, discusses the dietary laws of the children of Israel. It is said that the children are not to “incorporate animals that kill and incorporate other animals. This sheds light on people not eating “predators” as well as its “prey” at the same time in order to distinguish the pure meat from the tainted. If this is true, then do we all actually follow this rule that God shares with the children of Israel in Leviticus? From personal experience, I have seen myself as well as others eat various meats such as cow, rabbit, squid, octopus, alligator, etc. without even questioning the divinity that we are so far from while eating such things at the same time. It is said that this is a sin, but why isn’t it taught to everyone just like manners are taught on a daily bases? Does this act make people less human than those who actually follow the word of God? This is an act of an animal. An animal does not separate the two types of meat only because they are animals. Therefore, this eating, done by many including myself, does in fact show times where my eating habits have been more of an animal rather than the superior human that I am. Leviticus is able to show the dietary law that should be followed; yet we as humans do have a problem of eating in the midst of all things.

The problem that humans have with eating is the idea that dinner parties and formal functions have taken the place of the human need to nourish the body. On a personal level, I have gone to church gatherings that have been formal dinner parties. The dinner was not to feed the body but it was for the purpose of socializing with friends and church members. Therefore, what seems to be the distinguishing factor between the animals and the humans? Kass states that a dinner party is only an well-orchestrated dinner that does not deal with the quantity of but the food but the quality. “Ordered and flavorful variety, not mere satisfaction of hunger is the point of the menu.” The taste of the food, unfortunately, is the major concern of the party. If the food were not tasteful, then the party would not be a success. So, the main question is, are human beings far away from animals as much as humans think? Not only do we gorge ourselves, but we do so just because we have parties, not because we are trying to survive. Therefore, is it true that we as human beings can actually “judge,” because if it was actually true, then would we as human beings eat when we are not hungry? These are the problems that we as human beings face while being superior over animals, yet far from the divinity of God.

Between Leon Kass and the Holy Bible and Torah, humans have been defined as superior beings yet not too far from animals as much as humans think they are. The human being is able to “recognize the distinctions that are manifest in the world” and seem to prove their greatness over animals. By reading The Hungry Soul, I have seen myself on a different note. Reading this book not only allows me to see how much of an “animal” I have been while eating and participating in dinner parties, but I have also seen how far from the divine we are. Plato and Descartes shows how human beings lack knowledge of self and what they need what methods are available in order to find certainty, justice and piety. Kass, look at the human being from another view. He decides to distinguish the animal and the human by their eating habits and rituals done in order to show the hierarchy developed by God during the creation of the world.

Bibliography:

Brutus In The Play Julius Caesar

Consider Brutuss actions. Is he right to join the conspiracy against Caesar? What are his reasons? Does he join the conspiracy, or is he tricked by Cassius? How do Cassiuss motivations compare to Brutuss? Are they nobler or less noble? In the play Julius Caesar Brutus, tricked by Cassius, joins the conspiracy against Caesar and kills him. In some ways he was right to join and in others he wasnt. Brutus and Cassius had different motivation for joining the conspiracy; Brutuss were more political. Brutus was a loyal friend and joining the conspiracy sort of gave the audience a sense of a disloyal friend. He was wrong to join the conspiracy and shouldnt have killed Caesar. Evan though Brutus had right reason for joining the conspiracy, and killing Caesar, it was not right to turn against a friend. Envious of Caesars growing popularity, Cassius probed to discover where Brutus deepest sympathies lay. He voiced a concern he had: Caesar was becoming overly ambitious. Unless something was done to check his fame, he would soon seize all power for himself. This could, effectively, turn the Roman Republic into a dictatorship. Cassius then apprised Brutus of a plot he had hatched: he had a band of other prominent Romans were planning to assassinate Caesar.

Brutus admitted that he shared the same inner concern: I do fear the people choose Caesar for their king. But still Brutus hesitated to involve himself in such a plot. After all, he dearly loved and admired Caesar. Even so, he couldnt deny that Caesars rapid rise to power constructed a potential threat to the Republic. Brutus promised Cassius that he would consider the matter, but would withhold his decision until the following day.

The dilemma weighed upon Brutus throughout the night; should he aid in the killing of his beloved friend Caesar. Or should he sit by and watch as Caesar destroyed the state? The plotting band, hoping to gain the support of the highly respected Brutus, paid him an early morning visit. Referring to Caesar as an immortal god, presenting false evidence of his intentions, and playing on Brutus immense love for Rome, Cassius finally prevailed on him to help see the mans death; Brutus agreed to take part in his friends assassination, to think of him as a serpents egg, which, hatched would as his kind, grow mischievous, and kill him in the shell. Assassination- a certain righteous treason- Brutus reluctantly decided, was justified under the circumstances.

Brutus should not have joined the conspiracy. He joined it for some wrong reasons. Even thou he was very concerned about the Roman Republic, he was still jealous that Caesar had a lot more power then he did. That was a lot of the reason, which was wrong, and not what a noble Roman, and a friend would do.

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict is a dangerous and volatile situation that has attracted American and worldwide attention for some decades. The conflict is a sensitive subject that produces strong emotions in people. It is very hard to speak, write or discuss the subject without taking sides; but at the end of the day most people looking from the outside in would agree that that both parties are somewhat responsible.

In 1948, there were approximately 860,000 Palestinians inside today’s Israel. About 700,000 were driven out or fled during the fighting that followed the declaration of Israeli statehood. All refugees lost their property (about 800,000 acres were taken for Israeli use.). The 160,000 Palestinians still in Israel in 1949 when the fighting stopped lost another 250,000 acres. The Palestinians in Israel were left without resources or strong leaders.

Today, land taken from the Palestinians and earmarked for military purposes or Jewish settlements amounts to more than 52% of the most fertile areas of the West Bank and 40% of the Gaza Strip. Only a very small percentage of this land was sold willingly by Palestinians. Most of it was confiscated, and is held to be for Jews only-not just Jews from Israel, but Jews from anywhere in the world. By 1990, according to Israeli estimates, 83% of the water from the West Bank will be diverted to Jewish settlements and Israel. The indigenous Palestinians will get only 17% of their own water. This taking of natural resources from the Palestinians, are the reasons for the rise in conflict.