Western Religious views of the meaning of life

Judaism

Judaism‘s most important feature is the worshiping of a single, omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, transcendent God, who created the universe and governs it. Per traditional Judaism, God established a covenant with the Jewish people, at Mount Sinai, revealing his laws and commandments in the Torah. In Rabbinic Judaism, the Torah comprises the written Pentateuch (Torah) and the oral law tradition (later transcribed as sacred writing).

In the Judaic world view, the purpose of life is to serve the one true God and to prepare for the world to come.^[23][24] The “Olam Haba“^[25] thought is about elevating oneself spiritually, connecting to God in preparing for “Olam Haba”; Jewish thought is to use “Olam Hazeh” (this world) to elevate oneself. ^[26]

Christianity

Hans Memling‘s The Last Judgment, which depicts St Michael the Archangel weighing souls and driving the Damned towards Hell.

Though Christianity has its roots in Judaism, and shares much of the latter faith’s ontology, its central beliefs derive from the teachings of Jesus Christ, as presented in the New Testament. Life’s purpose in Christianity is to seek divine salvation through the grace of God and intercession of Christ. The New Testament speaks of God wanting to have a relationship with humans both in this life and the life to come, which can happen only if one’s sins are forgiven (John 3:16-21), (2 Peter 3:9). In the Christian view, humankind was made in the image of God and perfect, but the Fall of Adam caused the progeny of the first Parents to inherit Original Sin. The sacrifice of Christ’s passion, death and resurrection provide the means for transcending that impure state (Romans 6:23). The means for doing so varies between different groups of Christians, but all rely on one form or another of subjugation to God’s will.

Under the Christian view, the main purpose in life is to live like Christ did (perfect altruism) to love God with all one’s heart, soul, and mind, and to love fellow human beings as you should be loved.

In the Westminster Shorter Catechism, the first question is: What is the chief end of Man?, that is, What is Man’s main purpose?. The answer is: Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and enjoy him forever. God requires one to obey the revealed moral law saying: love the Lord our God with all our heart, with all our soul, with all our strength, and with all our mind; and our neighbour as ourselves.^[27] The Baltimore Catechism answers the question “Why did God make you?” by saying “God made me to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him forever in heaven.”^[28]

Islam

In Islam, Man’s ultimate life objective is to seek the pleasure of Allah (the Arabic equivalent for “God”) by abiding by the Divine guidelines revealed in the Qur’an and the Tradition of the Prophet. Earthly life, is merely a test, determining one’s afterlife, either in Jannah (paradise) or in Jahannum (Hell).

For the pleasure of Allah, via the Qur’an, all Muslims must believe in God, his revelations, his angels, his messengers, and in the “Day of Judgment“.^[29] Qur’an describes the purpose of creation as fallows: “Blessed be he in whose hand is the kingdom, he is powerful over all things,who created death and life that he might examine which of you is best in deeds, and he is the almighty, the forgiving” (Qur’an67:1-2)and “I only created jinn and man to worship Me” (Qur’an 51:56). Worship testifies to the oneness of God in his lordship, his names, and his attributes. Terrenal life is a test; how one acts (behaves) determines whether one’s soul goes to Jannah (Heaven) or to Jahannam (Hell).

The Five Pillars of Islam are duties incumbent to every Muslim; they are: Shahadah (profession of faith); Salah (ritual prayer); Zakah (charity); Sawm (fasting during Ramadan), and Hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca).^[30] They derive from the Hadith works, notably of Sahih Al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.

Beliefs differ among the Kalam. The Sunni concept of pre-destination is divine decree;^[31] like-wise, the Shi’a concept of pre-destination is divine justice; in the esoteric view of the Sufis, the universe exists only for God’s pleasure; Creation is a grand game, wherein Allah is the greatest prize.^[32][32]

Eastern Religious Views on the Meaning of  Life

Hinduism

A golden Aum written in Devanagari. The Aum is sacred in Hindu, Jain and Buddhist religions.

Hinduism is a diverse religion: there are some tenets accepted by most Hindus, but no doctrines that are universally accepted by all.^[36] Most believe that the ātman (spirit, soul) — the person’s true self — is eternal.^[37] In part, this stems from Hindu beliefs that spiritual development occurs across many lifetimes, and goals should match the state of development of the individual. There are four possible aims to human life, known as the purusharthas (ordered from least to greatest): Kāma (love and sensual pleasure), Artha (wealth), Dharma (righteousness, morality), and Moksha (liberation from the reincarnation cycle).^[38][39][40]

In all schools of Hinduism, the meaning of life is tied up in the concepts of karma (causal action), samsara (the cycle of birth and rebirth), and moksha (liberation). Existence is conceived as the progression of the atman (similar to the western concept of a soul) across numerous lifetimes, and its ultimate progression towards liberation from karma. Particular goals for life are generally subsumed under broader yogas (practices) or dharma (correct living) which are intended to create more favorable reincarnations, though they are generally positive acts in this life as well. Traditional schools of Hinduism often worship Devas which are manifestations of Ishvara (a personal or chosen God); these Devas are taken as ideal forms to be identified with, as a form of spiritual improvement.

Advaita and Dvaita Hinduism

Later schools reinterpreted the vedas to focus on Brahman, “The One Without a Second”,^[41] as a central God-like figure.

In monist Advaita Vedanta, atman is ultimately indistinguishable from brahman, and the goal of life is to know or realize that one’s atman (soul) is identical to Brahman.^[42] To the Upanishads, whoever becomes fully aware of the ātman, as one’s core of self, realises identity with Brahman, and, thereby, achieves Moksha (liberation, freedom).^[37][43][44]

Dualist Dvaita Vedanta and other bhakti schools have a dualist interpretation. Brahman is seen as a supreme being with a personality and manifest qualities. The ātman depends upon brahman for its existence; the meaning of life is achieving Moksha through love of God and upon his grace.^[43]

Buddhism

Early Buddhism

Buddhism is a nondual worldview, in which subject, object, and action are all seen as illusory. Buddhists believe that life is suffering or frustration. The suffering is caused by attachment to objects material or non-material. The meaning of life is to end suffering through detaching oneself from cravings and conceptual attachments. Suffering can be overcome through human activity, simply by removing the cause of suffering. Attaining and perfecting dispassion is a process of many levels that ultimately results in the state of Nirvana. Nirvana means freedom from all worries, troubles, complexes, Fabrications, and ideas.^[47]

The eight-spoked Dharmacakra

Theravada Buddhism is generally considered to be close to the early Buddhist practice. It promotes the concept of Vibhajjavada (Pali), literally “Teaching of Analysis”, which says that insight must come from the aspirant’s experience, critical investigation, and reasoning instead of by blind faith. However, the Theravadin tradition also emphasizes heeding the advice of the wise, considering such advice and evaluation of one’s own experiences to be the two tests by which practices should be judged. The Theravadin goal is liberation (or freedom) from suffering, according to the Four Noble Truths. This is attained in the achievement of Nirvana, or Unbinding which also ends the repeated cycle of birth, old age, sickness and death.

Mahayana Buddhism

Mahayana Buddhist schools de-emphasize the traditional view (still practiced in Theravada) of the release from individual Suffering (Dukkha) and attainment of Awakening (Nirvana). In Mahayana, the Buddha is seen as an eternal, immutable, inconceivable, omnipresent being. The fundamental principles of Mahayana doctrine are based around the possibility of universal liberation from suffering for all beings, and the existence of the transcendent Buddha-nature, which is the eternal Buddha essence present, but hidden and unrecognised, in all living beings.

Philosophical schools of Mahayana Buddhism, such as Chan/Zen and the vajrayana Tibetan and Shingon schools, explicitly teach that boddhisattvas should refrain from full liberation, allowing themselves to be reincarnated into the world until all beings achieve enlightenment. Devotional schools such as Pure Land buddhism seek the aid of celestial buddhas – individuals who have spent lifetimes accumulating positive karma, and use that accumulation to aid all.

Taoism

Taijitu symbolizes the unity of opposites between yin and yang.

The Taoists‘ cosmogony emphasizes the need for all sentient beings and all man to return to the primordial or to rejoin with the Oneness of the Universe by way of self-correction and self realization. All adherents should understand and be in tune with the ultimate truth.

All things were originally from Taiji and Tao, the meaning in life for the adherents is to realise the temporal nature of the existence, and all adherents are expected to practise, hone and conduct their mortal lives by way of Xiuzhen and Xiushen, as a preparation for the spiritual transcendence thereafter. “Only introspection can then help us to find our innermost reasons for living…the simple answer is here within ourselves.”^[53]

Confucianism

Confucianism recognizes human nature in accordance with the need for discipline and education. Because mankind is driven by both positive and negative influences, Confucianists see a goal in achieving the good nature through strong relationships and reasoning as well as minimizing the negative energy. This emphasis on normal living is seen in the Confucianist scholar Tu Wei-Ming‘s quote, “we can realize the ultimate meaning of life in ordinary human existence.”^[54]

go to this site and explore so big ideas.  write a paragrah how any of these thinkers compare with the the writers that we read in class. choose something or some idea that you’ve never heard of before for the best result

Atheistic cosmologies can have a creation event, but such models of the universe do not involve supernatural entities. Naturalism is the belief that the physical universe is all that exists. Materialism and energeticism are two naturalistic cosmologies. Atheism is also strongly associated with nihilism which is an anthithesis to cosmology or properly with teleology in its rejection of meaning and value.

Theistic cosmologies

Theism is the belief that gods exist and created the universe. Types of theism include monotheism and polytheism. The Abrahamic religions are theisms.

Pantheism is the belief that God and the universe have a one-to-one correspondence or the universe is a manifestation of God. The philosopher Spinoza was a pantheist. Panentheism or emanationism is the belief that the entire universe is part of God, but God is greater than the universe. The Neo-Platonic philosopher Plotinus was an emanationist.

Deism is the belief that God or Gods created the universe, set everything in motion, and then had nothing more to do with it. God remains completely transcendent to the creation after He creates it.

Other cosmologies

Cosmological dualism (as opposed to body-mind dualism) is the belief that there are two gods or metaphysical forces and the universe is a product of these gods or forces. The Persian religion Zoroastrianism is cosmologically dualistic.

Idealism is the belief that only consciousness exists. The various features of the world may be thought of as “ideas in the mind of God.” Various forms of idealism can be compatible with either theism or atheism. The British philosopher George Berkeley was an idealist, as was the German philosopher Hegel. See: Hindu idealism, Buddhist idealism, Platonic idealism, German idealism, British Idealism, Panpsychism.

Acosmism is the belief that neither the self nor the universe has ever existed. This is held by some forms of strict Advaita Vedanta, a Hindu philosophy. The Buddhist philosopher Nagarjuna, whose beliefs are called voidism, or nihilism (in the Eastern, rather than the Western sense), believed that the world neither exists, nor does it not exist.

[edit] Metaphysics and the Single Intelligible Object

Cosmology was a subject of metaphysics before the Copernican Revolution. Especially since Einstein‘s theories, cosmology has been primarily concerned with physics (see Physical Cosmology) But the Great Ideas of the Western World ^[1] defines metaphysical cosmology as “holding the universe in your hand as if it was a single intelligible object,” to which it must be added, “for the purpose of defining Man’s place in the universe,” not to mention the place of the person “holding” the universe. Physics takes the world apart piece by ever smaller piece, trying to figure out the puzzle of existence. Metaphysical cosmology puts the universe into one comprehensible object so that it may be examined as the whole. From this method, the “first science” of metaphysics can generate theories, but not science. According to the PBS program Faith & Reason,[1] cosmology is a “branch of study concerned with the origins and nature of the universe.” But this describes physical cosmology, as well. The difference between them is that physical cosmology takes a dim view of “theoretical” metaphysics; what cannot be proved by science has little account in physics. However, the epistemological principle of discovering “cosmos” from “chaos” has traditionally been to accept the findings of either the metaphysics or the science of cosmology, then “develop the consequences.”^[2] Metaphysical cosmology did not give way easily to physics. Copernicus developed the “heliocentric” theory of the universe, and when Galileo backed him up, the cosmology of the Roman Church, cosmology built on the solid foundation of Aristotle‘s metaphysics as introduced into the Church by Thomas Aquinas, received a shock heard throughout the Western World: the Earth was not the center of the universe. Galileo was put on trial for contradicting the Church, but his case won, with the resultant phenomenon of the “Copernican Revolution,” so called ever since.

“Pre-Socratic” is the expression commonly used to describe those Greek thinkers who lived and wrote between 600 and 400 B.C. It was the Pre-Socratics who attempted to find universal principles which would explain the natural world from its origins to man’s place in it. Although Socrates died in 399 B.C., the term “Pre-Socratic” indicates not so much a chronological limit, but rather an outlook or range of interests, an outlook attacked by both Protagoras (a Sophist) and Socrates, because natural philosophy was worthless when compared with the search for the “good life.”

To give the Pre-Socratic thinkers their full due would require an article of encyclopedic scope. Given that, I have decided to list a number of  sites on individual Pre-Socratic thinkers.

Anaxagoras of Clazomenae (500-428 B.C.)
Anaxagoras entry (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Anaxagoras entry (MacTutor)
Anaxagoras Fragments and Commentary (Hanover)
“Philosophers of the Stage” (Jeffrey J. Kostiuk/Perseus)

Anaximander (c.611-c.547 B.C.)
Anaximander entry (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Anaximander Fragments and Commentary (Hanover)
“Boundless Paradox” (Tom Rohrer, Oregon)

Anaximenes (fl. 550 B.C.)
Anaximenes entry (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Anaximenes Fragments and  Commentary (Hanover)

Democritus of Abdera (c.460-370 B.C.)
“The Atomism of Democritus” (Jan Garrett)
Democritus entry (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Democritus entry (MacTutor)

Empedocles of Acragas (c.490-430 B.C.)
Empedocles entry (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Heraclitus of Epheseus (fl. 500 B.C.)
“Boundless Paradox” (Tim Rohrer, Oregon)
Heraclitus entry (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
“Heraclitus on the Logos” (Gordon L. Ziniewicz)
Heraclitus’ Philosophy (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Parmenides (c.515-450 B.C.)
Parmenides biography (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Parmenides Links (epistemelinks.com)

Pythagoras of Samos (c.580-507 B.C.)
Pythagoras entry (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Pythagoras entry (MacTutor)
Pythagoras and the Pythagorians: Fragments and Commentary (Hanover)

Thales (c.624-548 B.C.)
Thales entry (MacTutor)
Thales entry (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Thales, Fragments and Commentary (Hanover)

Zeno of Elea (fl. 5th century B.C.)
Zeno entry (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Zeno entry (MacTutor)
Zeno Commentary (Hanover)

Classical Greece, 500-323BC

When we think of ancient Greece and the ancient Greeks, it is usually the 5th century which commands our undivided attention. This is the age of the great historians Herodotus and Thucydides, great dramatists like Sophocles, Euripides and Aeschylus, and the brilliant philosopher Socrates. The 5th century is also regarded as the age when the Greeks embraced their brilliant experiment in direct democracy. Amazing monuments to human achievement were constructed in Athens and other Hellenic city-states. It is an age of human discovery and achievement – an age which proudly bears the name classical. The Persian Invasion of Greece However, the 5th century was also an age of war and conflict. Between 490 and 479 B.C., Greece was invaded by the army and naval fleet of the Persian Empire. By about 500 B.C. the Greek city states had lost their kings (with the exception of Sparta) and had embraced a new form of government through councils of citizens. Almost immediately, however, these states were confronted by an invasion of the Persian Empire. King Darius (548-486 B.C.) managed to build up the Persian Empire and now controlled Asia Minor, including Greek poleis on the west coast. In 499 B.C., some of the these poleis rebelled from the Persians (an episode called the Ionian Revolt). The Athenians lent their support but the revolt ultimately collapsed in 493 B.C. Darius proposed now to invade mainland Greece – his prime target was Athens. Darius sent his fleet across the Aegean in 490 and awaited news of victory. The Persians landed at Marathon, a village just north of Athens. Commanded by Militiades, the Greek forces totaled only 10,000 men – the Persian force was perhaps 20-25,000 strong. The Greek forces charged and trapped the Persians and won the battle. The remainder of the Persians attempted to attack Athens but the Greek army rushed back and the Persians were forced to return to Asia Minor. The victory at MARATHON was won by superior timing and discipline. Darius prepared a second invasion but died (486 B.C.) before his plans could be carried out. The task was taken up by Xerxes (c.519-465 B.C.) who prepared a huge force that would attack by land and sea. In 483 B.C., the Athenian statesman Themistocles (c.523-c.458 B.C.) persuaded his fellow Athenians to build a navy of one hundred triremes. He also oversaw the fortification of the harbor at Piraeus. Fearing destruction at the hands of the Persians, in 480 B.C. thirty poleis formed an alliance. Athens, Sparta and Corinth were the most powerful members. In 480 B.C., Xerxes sent a force of 60,000 men and 600 ships to Greece. The Greeks made their stand at Thermopylae. Five thousand men took up their positions to defend the pass at Thermopylae. The Greeks held the pass but eventually a traitorous Greek led a Persian force through the hills to the rear of the Greek forces, who were subsequently massacred. Meanwhile, the Greek navy tried to hold off the Persian ships at Artemisium. The Athenians eventually abandoned Athens ahead of the Persian army. The Persians marched across the Attic peninsula and burned Athens. Themistocles then sent a false message to Xerxes, telling him to strike at once. The Persians were taken in and sent their navy into the narrow strait between Athens and the island of Salamis. More than three hundred Greek ships rammed the Persians and heavily armed Greek soldiers boarded the ships. The Greek victory at Salamis was a decisive one. However, Persian forces remained in Greece. Their final expulsion came in 479 B.C. at the village of Plataea. By 479 B.C., the Greek forces had all conquered the Persian army and navy. After the Persian Wars, Athens emerged as the most dominant political and economic force in the Greek world. The Athenian polis, buttressed by the strength of its Council of Five Hundred and Assembly of citizens, managed to gain control of a confederation of city-states which gradually became the Athenian Empire. The Athenians not only had a political leadership based on the principles of direct democracy as set in motion by Cleisthenes (see Lecture 6), they also had wide trading and commercial interests in the Mediterranean world. These trading interests spread throughout the area of the Aegean Sea including Asia Minor, an area known as the Aegean Basin. Greek victories against the Persians secured mainland Greece from further invasion. There was a great sense of relief on the part of all Greeks that they had now conquered the conquerors. But, there were some citizens who argued in the Assembly that a true Greek victory would only follow from total defeat of the Persians, and this meant taking the war to Persia itself. And this is precisely what would happen in the 5th century. Meanwhile, dozens of Greek city-states joined together to form a permanent union for the war. Delegates met on the island of Delos in 478 B.C. The allies swore oaths of alliance which were to last until lumps of iron, thrown into the sea, rose again. The Delian League policy was to be established by an assembly of representatives but was to be administered by an admiral and ten treasurers appointed by Athens. It fell upon the Athenian leader, Aristides the Just, to assign an assessment of 460 talents per year, which member states paid in cash or in the form of manned ships. Right from the start, the Delian League was dominated by Athenian authority and leadership. The Delian League had its precedents: the Spartan League, the Ionian League of 499-494 B.C. and the League of 481-478 B.C. Eventually, the Greeks liberated the cities of Asia Minor and by 450 B.C., the war with the Persians came to an end. It was at this time that the power of Athens was being felt throughout the Greek world. And as the power of Athens reached new limits, its political influence began to be extended as well. The Athenians forced city-states to join the Delian league against their will. They refused to allow city-states to withdraw from the League. And other city-states they simply refused entry into the League. Athens stationed garrisons in other city-states to keep the peace and to make sure that Athens would receive their support, both politically and in terms of paying tribute to the League. By 454 B.C., Athenian domination of the Delian League was clear – the proof is that the League’s treasury was moved from the temple of Apollo on the island of Delos to the temple of Athena at Athens. Payments to the Delian League now became payments to the treasury of Athens. The Age of Pericles It was around this time, 450-430 B.C., that Athens enjoyed its greatest period of success. The period itself was dominated by the figure of Pericles and so the era has often been called the Age of Pericles. The Athenian statesman, Pericles (c.490-429 B.C.), was born of a distinguished family, was carefully educated, and rapidly rose to the highest power as leader of the Athenian democracy. Although a member of the aristoi, Pericles offered many benefits to the common people of Athens and as a result, he earned their total support. Oddly enough, the benefits he conferred upon the common people had the result of weakening the aristocracy, the social class from which he came. As the historian Thucydides pointed out, “he controlled the masses, rather than letting them control him.” The “Funeral Oration” of PericlesPericles was a man of forceful character. He was an outstanding orator, something which, as we have already seen, was absolutely necessary in the political world of the Athenian Assembly. He was also honest in his control of Athenian financial affairs. Pericles first rose to political prominence in the 450s. At this time, the Athenian leadership was convinced of two things: (1) the continuation of the war with the Persians and (2) maintaining cordial relationships with Sparta. The strategy of Pericles was the exact opposite. In the Assembly he argued convincingly that the affair with Persia was in the past. He decided to concentrate instead on Sparta, which he saw as a direct threat to the vitality of the Athenian Empire. As would be evident by the end of the century, Sparta was a major threat. The reason for this is quite simple. On the one hand, Sparta chose to isolate itself from the affairs of other Greek city-states. On the other hand, Spartan isolationism appeared as a direct threat to Athens. Whether or not the threat was real, the bottom line is that Sparta and Athens were destined to become enemies. From the 450s onward, Pericles rebuilt the city of Athens, a city ravaged by years of wars with the Persians. He used the public money from the Delian League to build several masterpieces of 5th century Greek architecture, the Parthenon and the Propylaea.. This, of course, outraged many of his fellow citizens who attacked him in the Assembly on more than one occasion. The common people, however, were quick to support Pericles for the simple matter that he gave them jobs and an income. Under Pericles, Athens became the city of Aeschylus, Socrates and Phidias, the man in charge of all public buildings and statues. At this time Pericles also embarked on the path of aggressive imperialism. He put down rebellions and sent his Athenian armies to colonize other areas of Asia Minor. And while he was doing this, he was also trying to foster the intellectual improvement of the Athenian citizen by encouraged music and drama. Industry and commerce flourished. In 452/1 B.C., Pericles introduced pay for jurors and magistrates so that no one could be barred by poverty from service to the polis. Indeed, under Pericles, Athens was rebuilt and the population greeted him as their hero. But, there were problems on the not-too-distant horizon. The Peloponnesian War These problems came to a head during the Peloponnesian Wars of 431-404 B.C. As we’ve already seen, Sparta feared Athenian power – they believed that Athens had grown too quickly both in terms of population and military power. And Athens, of course, feared the Spartans because of their isolationist position. What we have then, is a cold war turned hot. The Peloponnesian War was a catastrophe for Athens. The chief result of the War was that the Athenian Empire was divided, the subject states of the Delian league were liberated, direct democracy failed and Pericles was ostracized. The Athenians also suffered a loss of nerve as their democracy gave way to the Reign of the Thirty Tyrants. The major result, however, was that the destruction of Athenian power made it possible for the Macedonian conquest of Greece (see Lecture 9). By mid-century there had been several clashes between Athens and Sparta and their respective allies. In 446 B.C. a treaty of non-aggression was signed that would be valid for thirty years (a form of détente, if you will). The peace did not last. In 435 B.C., a quarrel developed between Corinth, an ally of Sparta, and Corcyra. In 433, Corcyra appealed to Athens to form an alliance. The Corinthians knew that such an alliance would make war inevitable. The combined naval power of Athens and Corcyra was the largest in Greece, and Sparta viewed such an alliance as a direct threat. The same year, the Athenians demanded that the town of Potidaea should dismantle its defensive walls and banish its magistrates, a demand which further infuriated the Corinthians. Athens besieged the town. An assembly of the Peloponnesian league met and the Corinthians managed to convince the Spartans that war with Athens was the only solution. Fighting began in 431 B.C. Sparta wanted to break Athenian morale by attacking Attica annually, but the Athenians merely retreated behind their fortifications until the Spartan forces retired. Pericles refused to send the Athenian infantry to the field. Instead he relied on raids on the Peloponnesus by sea. More damaging than any offensive by the Spartans was a PLAGUE that raged in Athens in 430. And the following year, Pericles died. Over the next few years Athens and Sparta suffered so many losses that both sides were prepared to end the conflict. The Peace of Nicias was signed in 421 B.C. Hostilities were renewed in 415 when the people of Segesta (a city in Sicily) appealed to Athens for help. It was Alcibiades (c.450-404 B.C.) who persuaded the Athenian Assembly to raise a large fleet and sail to Sicily. But it was the Athenian campaign against Syracuse that eventually brought disaster. In 413 the Athenian navy lost a crucial battle. As they retreated they were cut off and destroyed. Thucydides reported that “few out of many returned home.” The war dragged on for another eight years. Sparta sought decisive help by gaining the assistance of Persia. In 405 a Spartan admiral captured the Athenian fleet at Aegospotami, on the shores of the Hellespont. The following year, beaten into submission, Athens gave up control of its empire and had to demolish its defensive walls. By 404 B.C., Sparta had “liberated” Greece and imposed on oligarchic regime (the Thirty Tyrants), that lasted until the following year. After the death of Pericles and the disorder of a century of warfare, the Greek city-states and direct democracy went into decline. The reason is that first one polis, then another, rose up, withdrew from the Delian League and began to assume control of their own affairs, without falling under the sphere of Athenian influence. Sparta assumed leadership of the city-states. Then it was the turn of Thebes, then Corcyra, then Corinth, the Sparta again. This fragmentation and political disorder left the door open for political power to come from an entirely different area of Greece – Macedonia. Under Philip II, Macedonia flourished through diplomacy and military aggression. Philip took advantage of the general disorder on the Attic peninsula, and extended his control into central Greece. His armies defeated a weakened Athens. In fact, Philip gained control of all the important Greek city-states with the exception of Sparta. Philip was murdered in 336 B.C. and was succeeded by his son, Alexander III. Under Alexander, the Macedonian Empire grew to become the largest empire in the ancient world – larger even than the Roman Empire at its height. Alexander the Great invaded what remained of the Persian Empire and gained control of Asia Minor. Most of Egypt fell under his armies. His armies marched as far east as the Indus River on the western border of India before he died of fever in 323 B.C. at the age of thirty-three (see Lecture 9). Greek Culture in the Classical Age The period from 500-323 B.C. is the Classical or Hellenic age of Greek civilization. The brilliance of the Classical Greek world rested on a blend of the old and the new. From the past came a profound religious belief in the just action of the gods and the attainment of virtue in the polis. Such a history helped develop a specific Greek “mind” in which the importance of the individual and a rationalistic spirit were paramount. The Classical Greek world was, in essence, a skillful combination of these qualities. Athens never united all Greece. However, its culture was unchallenged. The trade routes from the Aegean brought men and their ideas from everywhere to the great cultural center of Athens. Thanks to its economic initiative, the Athenian polis was quite wealthy, and Pericles generously distributed that wealth to the Athenian citizen in a variety of forms. For instance, the Athenian polis sponsored the production of dramas and required that wealthy citizens pay the expenses of production. At the beginning of every year, dramatists submitted their plays to the archon, or chief magistrate. Each comedian presented one play for review; those who wrote tragedy had to submit a set of three plays, plus an afterpiece called a satyr play. It was the archon who chose those dramas he considered best. The archon allotted to each tragedian his actors, paid at state expense, and a producer (choregus). On the appointed day the Athenian public would gather at the theatre of Dionysus on the south slope of the Acropolis, paid their admission of two obols, and witnessed a series of plays. Judges drawn by lot awarded prizes to the poet (crown of ivy), the actor (an inscription on a state list in the agora) and to the choregus (a triumphal tablet). The Athenian dramatists were the first artists in Western society to examine such basic questions as the rights of the individual, the demands of society upon the individual and the nature of good and evil. Conflict, the basic stuff of life, is the constant element in Athenian drama. Aeschylus ResourcesAESCHYLUS (525-456 B.C.), the first of the great Athenian dramatists, was also the first to express the agony of the individual caught in conflict. In his trilogy of plays, The Oresteia, he deals with the themes of betrayal, murder and reconciliation. The first play, The Agamemnon, depicts Agamemnon’s return from the Trojan War and his murder by his wife, Clytemnestra, and her lover. In the second play, The Libation Bearers, Orestes, the son of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra, avenges his father’s death by killing his mother and her lover. The last play, The Eumenides, works out the atonement of Orestes. The Furies, goddesses who avenged murder, demand Orestes’ death. When the jury at Orestes’ trial casts six votes to condemn and six to acquit, Athena cast the deciding vote in favor of mercy. Aeschylus used The Eumenides to urge reason and justice to reconcile fundamental human conflicts. Like Solon, Aeschylus believed that the world was governed by divine justice which could not be violated with impunity. When men exhibited hubris (pride or arrogance), which led them to go beyond moderation, they must be punished. Another common theme was that through suffering came knowledge. To act in accordance with the divine order meant caution and moderation. Further comments on Sophocles and Internet resourcesSOPHOCLES (496-406 B.C.), the premier playwright of the second generation, also dealt with personal and political matters. In his Antigone he examined the relationship between the individual and the state by exploring conflict between the ties of kinship and the demands of the polis. Almost all of the plays of Sophocles stand for the precedence of divine law over human defects. In other words, human beings should do the will of the gods, even without fully understanding it, for the gods stand for justice and order. However, whereas Aeschylus concentrated on religious matters, Sophocles dealt with the perennial problem of well-meaning men struggling, unwisely and vainly, against their own fate. The characters in the tragedies of Sophocles resist all warnings and inescapably meet with disaster. In Oedipus Rex, Oedipus is warned not to pursue the mystery of his birth but he insists on searching for the truth about himself (that he unwittingly killed his father and married his mother). Events do not turn out as Oedipus had planned — the individual is incapable of affecting the universal laws of human existence. Further comments of Euripides and Internet resourcesEURIPIDES (c.480-406 B.C.), the last of the three great Greek tragic dramatists, also explored the theme of personal conflict within the polis and the depths of the individual. With Euripides drama enters a new, more personal phase – the gods were far less important than human beings. Euripides viewed the human soul as a place where opposing forces struggle, where strong passions such as hatred and jealousy conflict with reason. The essence of Euripides’ tragedy is the flawed character – men and women who bring disaster on themselves and their loved ones because their passions overwhelm their reason. It is the rationalist spirit of 5th century Greek philosophic thought that permeates the tragedies of Euripides. He subjected the problems of human life to critical analysis and challenged Athenian conventions. Aristophanes would criticize Euripides for introducing the art of reasoning into drama The Greeks of the classical age not only perfected the art of drama, but of comedy as well. ARISTOPHANES (c.448-c.380 B.C.) was an ardent lover of the city and a ruthless critic of cranks and quacks. He lampooned eminent generals, at times depicting them as little more than morons. He commented snidely on Pericles, and poked fun at Socrates and Euripides. Even at the height of the Peloponnesian War, Aristophanes proclaimed that peace was preferable to war. Like Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides, Aristophanes used his art to dramatize his ideas on the right conduct of the citizen and the value of the polis. The experience of the Persian and Peloponnesian wars also helped develop the beginnings of historical writing. It is in the classical age then, that we meet the father of history, HERODOTUS (c.485-425 B.C.). Born at Halicarnassus in Asia Minor, Herodotus traveled widely before settling in the Athens, the intellectual center of the Greek world. In his book, The History, Herodotus chronicled the rise of the Persian Empire, the origins of both Athens and Sparta, and then described the laws and customs of the Egyptians. The scope of The History is awesome. Lacking newspapers, any sort of communications, or ease of travel, Herodotus wrote a history that covered all the major events of the Ancient Near East, Egypt and Greece. More information about ThucydidesThe outbreak of the Peloponnesian War prompted THUCYDIDES (c.460-c.400 B.C.) to write a history of its course in the belief that it would be the greatest war in Greek history. An Athenian politician and general, Thucydides saw action in the war until he was exiled for a defeat. Exile gave him the time and opportunity to question eye-witnesses about the details of events and to visit the actual battlefields. Since he was an aristocrat – an aristoi – he had access to the inner circles, the men who made the decisions. Thucydides saw the Peloponnesian War as highly destructive to Greek character. He noted that the old, the noble, and the simple fell before ambition and lust for power. He firmly rejected any notion that the gods intervened in human affairs. In his view, the fate of men and women was entirely in their own hands. It has been said that the Greeks are the first ancient society with which modern western society (since the Renaissance, that is) feels some sort of affinity. The ancient Greeks were clearly a people who warred and enslaved people. They often did not live up to their own ideals. However, their achievements in the areas of art, architecture, poetry, tragedy, science, mathematics, history, philosophy and government were of the highest order and worthy of emulation by the Romans and others. Western thought begins with the Greeks, who first defined man as an individual with the capacity to use his reason. Rising above magic and superstition, by the end of the fifth century, the Greeks had discovered the means to give rational order to nature and to human society. The Greeks also created the concept (if not quite the reality) of political freedom. The state was conceived as a community of free citizens who made laws in their own interest. As a direct democracy, for example, the Athenian citizen discussed, debated and voted on issues that affected him directly. The Greek discovery that man (the citizen) is capable of governing himself was a profound one. Underlying the Greek achievement was humanism. The Greeks expressed a belief in the worth, significance, and dignity of the individual. Man should develop his personality fully in the city-state, a development which would, in turn, create a sound city-state as well. The pursuit of excellence — arete — was paramount. Such an aspiration required effort, discipline and intelligence. Man was master of himself.