Physical And Non Physical Sufferings example essay topic

In the chapter titled Rebellion (or his book title), Feodor Dostoevski's character, Ivan Karamazov, demonstrates that his angry and resentful attitude is the by-product of his very choosing. The fundamental principal of our own humanity is God's acknowledgment of our expression of free will. Found between the boundaries of man's ownership of worldly acts and thoughts, which can lead him to an eternity of joy or damnation, is that critical choice of what attitude we will wrap ourselves in for our finite time here. The extreme, and perhaps somewhat all too common, result of this human choice between simple joy and compounding suffering is presented in Ivan. As highlighted in Genesis account of Gods' pure joy and pleasure of man, and His authoritative command for man's dominion over all of His creations, it is impossible to imagine our Creator desiring our willing choice for suffering. God's divine plan for man starts and ends upon love.

God provides overflowing and unconditional love so we can grasp the extent of His love for the purpose of developing our own love of self. The evolvement of our personal faith instills in us the divine sense of worth and desire, we some how come to "know" originates from our Creator. Ivan has neither grasped nor developed this love, let alone experienced this instalment. Genesis states God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (KJV Gen 5: 26). In the shared likeness of God Himself, we must assume we all have the full capacity to experience and share God's innate love and joy. God's sending of His son in order to redeem us, His children, is the ultimate act of both heavenly and earthly love.

Through His written word and through His son, God explicitly teaches us that love and joy are the nature of His being. Man, in God's likeness, must actively counter this nature in order to derive an attitude of suffering, through the denial of natural joy and love. Ivan is a clear example of this suffering activism, as he clearly stands against most issues rather than necessarily in agreement or support of any higher principal. In Feodor Dostoevski's book The Brothers Karamazov, this excerpted chapter is appropriately titled "Rebellion".

Rebellion is defined as the willful resistance or defiance of an established principal or authority. In our definition of activism, Ivan's rebellion would be considered the most aggressive and destructive form of activism. (CITE) Suffering is a verb that immediately draws a reflection to a state of discomfort or pain. The origin and causes of human suffering are central themes of most faith-based people.

People of faith seek the resolution of and endurance through our suffering by understanding cause and then adopting faith principals of living. Tragically, this faith seeking has been complicated by the fact that we have developed a pervasive and adopted world culture, centered on suffering. Our Christian faith teaches us the basis for human suffering is found in the Garden of Eden. Biblical accounts detail that within the history of humanity, there was in fact a state of perfection in which God and man not only lived together, we freely communicated and shared. The cascading effect of Satan's deception of Adam and Eve is the single point of original sin that we as Christian acknowledge today. While our faith actively teaches and practices the steps and sacraments to remove original sin and repent for ongoing sin, it is outside the scope of this paper to explore the cause and effect of sin and human suffering.

While the goal of reaching back to our original point of perfection is assumed humanly impossible, any point in our individual human existence, which is removed from that point, is here within considered "suffering". The realms and even the divine or evil guidance of suffering and resolution, is to be considered beyond this paper. Ms. Elizabeth A. Johnson's statement within Consider Jesus that "The world today is filled with suffering on a magnitude that boggles the imagination... In the light of Jesus' history, of his ministry of great compassion towards people who are suffering, and especially of his degrading death on the cross, the questions are urgently asked: "How does god relate to all this suffering?" Does God want it?" Does god not want it, but permit it?" Does it affect God too? "Does god suffer when creatures whom god loves are suffering?" would provide the overall context entering or exiting this discussion within. The unwavering faith in the fact that God is our Lord and conqueror of all evil, that His son Jesus Christ is our Savior and that our creation and existence is purposed through God, is the fabric of this writing.

The fact that faith is an ingredient of a humanity that is in-motion within full expression of free-will, underlies John F. Haught's statement within Science And Religion that "Some of us would even argue that faith has no intensity or depth unless it is a leap into the unknown in the face of such absurdity. Faith is always faith in spite of all the difficulties that defy reason and science". Using Ivan Karamazov as the model of humanity, we can discuss our human response to all forms of suffering in the continues of earthly life. The world culture of suffering is one that has made suffering itself a normal and expected attribute of our being. We seem to have adopted a culture or philosophy that we are some how not living a "real" and enjoyable life unless we are battling the suffering. It seems as though suffering now is perceived as a very part of the composite which was to be included with all that our Creator purposed.

Through an overflow of hard-hitting world news, Jerry Springer-type talk venues and especially reality TV, we have found a medium to become spectators, or voyeurs, of human suffering, and somehow along the path, we now derive entertainment from it. Never mind the fact that our world media now is a force, which actively offsets the fundamental message of faith, perseverance and hope, it has made the entertainment value of human drama boring to subscribers. Most tragically, this culture has now dulled our sense of compassion to the plight of those who are truly suffering. Due to the volume of and main focus on suffering, participants in this culture now also assume that suffering is predominating over love. In the process, our culture of suffering has not only clouded the factual reality of our Creator's point of perfection for man, it has dissuaded and discouraged many from pursuing the faith seeking. For purposes of this discussion, suffering associated with humanity will be delineated between physical suffering and non-physical suffering.

Physical suffering is the state within the confluences of science and physiology, where the body endures trauma brought on by injury, disease and / or the aging process. This form of suffering is measured by the degree of trauma and the perceived level of bodily pain. Physical suffering is one in which we all can associate with, without necessarily having to specifically endure. Physical suffering is viewed as inevitable for each of us, and people today will go to great lengths to delay or avoid this form of suffering. While post traumatic recovery requires any and all necessary steps, human's objective is to rapidly shorten the suffering time frame and assume recovery is the end result of the lesser physical pain. On the other hand, the remedies and choices for avoidance of physical suffering, span from preventative holistic measures, to radical, aggressive medical procedures.

Our consumer market is never short of magic pills and powders that will magically have us lose 15 pounds or reverse the dreaded aging process. In a world where the ravishes and causes of some of the most dreaded diseases are well understood by most western countries, we continue to see an unparalleled increase in dangerous personal behavior; from sexual behavior to nutritional irregularities that has led to an obesity rate of nearly 35% in our population. (CITE) There are an unlimited number of risky behaviors in which we choice daily as part of our expression of free will. The frequency and regularity in which millions of people chose elective cosmetic surgery is staggering 5.8 million. Even children are under going these optional surgeries. These people eagerly and willing endure sometimes extreme physical suffering to address a perceived bodily imperfection.

Although recent medical studies have provided substantiating evidence, only in very selective areas is prayer and petition to our Creator introduced as part of the physical healing or preventive process associated with suffering. Non-physical suffering is a general category of suffering used here to depict those human thoughts, feelings or intents which themselves cause a chemical trauma to the body. In this basic of definition, we would view this form of suffering, from an outside looking-in perspective, as not being inevitable, but rather elective. Non-physical suffering is a physiological condition such as a chemical imbalance, or a clinical condition such as manic depression.

Non-physical suffering is rooted in those cognitive "things" we elect to hang onto; either consciously or unconsciously. Examples would be attitudes, biases and prejudices, addictions and dependencies or even hateful, vengeful emotions. This form of suffering is one in which our Creator, in the most human of description and emotional terms, must press for endurance along with us. There can be no easing of this suffering without the complete and full commitment and willingness of the sufferer. Tapping of those unique human gifts from our Creator, which Pope John Paul II depicts in his writing, The Ecological Crisis: A Common Responsibility.

You have the article so I cant quote what exactly it says... Ivan Karamazov's life is ingrained in this form of suffering, and he shows no outward willingness or commitment to easing his pain; a rebellious choice. There exists a human dependency between these physical and non-physical sufferings which can not be arbitrarily divided or delineated in practice. When discussing suffering and humanity, there are numerous situations and conditions which do not neatly fall into logical understanding, let alone categories. As an example, extreme and prolonged physical suffering may / will manifest into non-physical suffering such as a dark or angry attitude. Conversely, the chemical trauma brought on by non-physical suffering can lead to physiological conditions such as ulcers and other stress related illness.

This is a critical point, and highlights the human necessity to mitigate the non-physical suffering we elective ly endure through our choices. By the simplest objective view, the same viewing lens by which we view overall humanity, the elective nature of non-physical suffering aligns with Ivan. A situational example where suffering defies logic and category is those instances where the innocent, either by circumstance or void of making any choice, are subjected to any form of suffering. The human response to this is "why". ... In Feodor Dostoevski's book The Brothers Karamazov, the excerpted chapter titled "Rebellion" revolves around a core commandment Jesus Christ noted as one of the greatest within the Law of Moses.

In addressing an entrapping question by the Pharisees, Jesus answered". ... the greatest commandment in the Law?' " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. ' This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself. ' ' MATHEW 22: 36. Dostoevski's lead character, Ivan, initially confesses his passive misunderstanding of this commandment and proclamation of Jesus. Ivan is not unlike a lot of Christians today who passively move beyond the message contained within both the commandment and proclamation.

Scholars of Christianity and Biblical writings have noted that this single verse frames the core fundamental principals of the Christian faith, and provides the practical path for our lives. Non-physical suffering, as defined within this discussion, is addressed at the elementary basis of this commandment and proclamation. Public forum has titled this biblical verse "The Golden Rule" in that is represents how we should strive to live our lives. (CITE) Dostoevski will later evolve the character of Ivan and present a man who is not in fact just passively dismissing a single commandment, but instead actively rebelling against the principals of Christianity, the teachings of Jesus and committing blasphemy against God. Conversely, the brother of Ivan, Alyosha, represents the upstanding and constant figure of Christian principals, and serves as the practicing Christian of The Golden Rule. (CITE) At the start of Dostoevski's excerpt, Ivan engages the other character of Alyosha with an acknowledgment of his lack of understanding of the paraphrased bible verse of "how can one love one's neighbor".

(CITE) Ivan provides insight into his own character by not stating the critical qualifying point of the actual bible verse". ... as yourself" (CITE). The fundamental principal of Christianity, the ministry of Jesus Christ and the biblical understanding of our God is all predicated on the individual; the YOU. Faithful actions such as opening our hearts and minds to the new covenant delivered through Jesus Christ, acceptance of the mercy and forgiveness of sin, reaching beyond our own needs to serve in a role of discipleship and seeking our innate love and joy can not be conducted without our own accord. In the absence of an individual presence and personal connection to God through faith, how could anyone expect to be capable or willing to love another? God... self love. Referring to 'self love' we read from an article called "Finding God in All Things": A Sacramental World View and Its Effects by Michael J. Himes that "The gift of self is what is meant by a page, love.

Creation exists because it is the object of love. Love, a page, is the only ground for its existence". In our argument going against Ivan... this is another quote from Himes:" A great problem of religious language and imagery is that we use it too confidently. We speak as if what we are talking about-God-is perfectly clear and fully intelligible. Any language about God that is perfectly clear is certainly wrong.

We are, after all, daring to speak about ultimate Mystery, and whatever we say, we must not, under pain of blasphemy, lose a profound sense of awe before the mystery which undergirds all that exists". This man even goes into saying that the 2nd commandment of "you shall not take the name of the Lord you God in vain to relating it to that if we speak of mystery we must acknowledge that ultimately we do not know what we are talking about.