This essay will draw upon philosophical ideas to attempt to explain the origins of the Law of Attraction and identify its philosophical background despite its new age modernity. It is beyond the scope of this essay to verify the Law of Attractions ultimate existence; for the purposes of the research, it is only important to acknowledge the theory as a conceptual observation. Authenticity of the law is not under question here, but rather the social and philosophical foundations that it is built upon. The Law of Attraction is a universal law based on the principle that whatever is given out by thought or action is returned to the subject. As Bryne, a leader in popularising the doctrine contemporarily, suggests, “we create powerful emotions about what is in our minds..then the law of attraction returns the same to us” (Byrne, 2012, p.114). This law states that any personal desire can only be accomplished objectively and externally by concentration and positive thinking (Curtis, 2009, p.250).
Increasingly evident in its growth and positioning in the mainstream sphere, the implication of the law of attraction itself, is that as it is presented as a law, there are underlying sciences contributing to its establishment. By using applications of traditional schools of thought including Stoicism and Epistemology, I attempt to establish linkages instead between the logic behind the Law of Attraction and philosophical thought. The law of attraction is often validated by a combination of scientific and pseudoscientific theories, thus creating duality in its background
Category: 2023
This project aims to illuminate how monogamy creates a romantic ideal in which individuals involved rely on one partner to fulfil endless needs. In order to satisfy these demands, a partner has responsibilities such as; being the greatest lover, the best parent, the trusted confidant, the emotional companion and the intellectual equal. Such expectations from a partner facilitates a restriction on their freedom. Hence, this romantic ideal creates a paradox where we have never been more reliant on our partner’s loyalty but have also never been more prone to stray since we live in a time where we feel entitled to pursue our desire because this is the culture where we deserve to be happy and utilise our freedom to the fullest. An act of infidelity is rooted in a need for an emotional connection, freedom, autonomy and a wish to reclaim lost aspects of oneself. Whereas, in polyamorous relationships “lovers guard their own and their partner’s autonomy, which is understood as the freedom to feel differently tomorrow” (Grahle 2002, 24).
This project socially critiques the tabletop fantasy role-playing game Dungeons & Dragons. To this end, I engage with game studies to clarify notions of play and Joseph P. Laycock’s account of meaning production within D&D specifically. For these thinkers, play provides a space constitutively separated from and opposed to external life. This is an imaginative activity. Laycock highlights quasi-religious function of engaging in imagined worlds through a sacred order in D&D. I critique these accounts for their undeveloped social theory, which foreshortens their analysis, taking play or the religious sentiment as historically invariant rather than as social and historical products. As a background to this critique, I engage with the critical theory of Adorno and Horkheimer. For them, the self-defeat of the Enlightenment characterises the contemporary social world. The former failed to realise its promise of liberation and instead continued the domination it sought to overcome.
I go on to unfold the historical dialectic of D&D. From its inception, it has been a product of bourgeois society which serves its work process, despite its ostensible separation from external life. Play and narrative, in the form of the novel, both have utopian possibilities in turning against the world as it is; I contend that D&D regresses from these into an appendage of the work process which disappoints the existent possibilities of games and novels in truly opposing the ruling order. Rather than overcome magic, D&D mimics the magical practice of sacrifice in sacrificing the player’s own prohibited desires which would contradict the social process. Yet it does so in a form thoroughly characteristic of the Enlightenment; therefore, it can only be classed as regression.
The question of how to live is an area of great contestation for humanity. Nietzsche, in disavowing morality of the Christian world, saw the higher kind of human, the Übermensch, as the only way to affirm ourselves, following the disbelief in God. Applying the concept of the Übermensch to other literary figures like Achebe’s Okonkwo and Camus’ Meursault, as well as looking at Han’s diagnosis of the contemporary times, I assess how well a guide Nietzsche’s Übermensch serves, both now and then.
This essay tackles the question as to what the function asexuality embodies within or against Western culture. In recent years, the sexual orientation of asexuality, characterised by a lack of sexual attraction towards others, has been increasingly made aware, leading to a deeper understanding of human sexuality. Yet, it remains to be concluded whether this new understanding of sexuality can be incorporated into the Western perception of asexuality. Or whether it inadvertently functions as a challenge to Western culture and adjacent values. Utilising both academic and philosophical works- such as Bogaert, Plato, and Freud- providing a range of varying views directly or indirectly dealing with the object of asexuality. By analysing these sources, asexuality is demonstrated to have expanded one’s understanding of human sexuality, the progression of attraction and arousal. This immediately stands in opposition to the high value and pushing of sexual relations of the Western world as the path to happiness, validating the argument of asexuality’s function as an enlightening, inoffensive resistance to Western culture.
This essay delves into the fundamentally opposing philosophies of Robert Nozick and John Rawls, two profoundly influential political thinkers whos works have shaped contemporary political thought. By examing both Nozick’s libertarian perspective and Rawls’s liberal egalitarian position the essay aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of their opposing beliefs regarding justice and the role of the state in society. Furthermore, this essay contextualises the works of each philosopher through highlighting the ways in which Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair’s political ideologies reflect the works of Nozick and Rawls, respectively. Through comparing the ideologies of these politicians to the works of Nozick and Rawls the essay explore the practical implications of these contrasting viewpoints and their impacts on society, welfare, and public policies. Overall, this essay aims to provide a deeper appreciation of the complex relationship between philosophy and politcs.