Epicurus perception of pleasure and justice

Epicurus perception of pleasure and justice Epicurus is one philosopher who believed in living a life full of pleasure. According to him, life without harm therefore a life without pain was the definition of living a just life. Without harm, there was no possibility of pain and therefore pleasure is achieved which constituted justice. Injustice is brought about by pain which in his perspective does not bring pleasure. Consequently, a life that focuses on pleasure is a just one since it constitutes doing what is right to avoid pain.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Epicurus’ perception of pleasure and justice specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Epicurus believes that pain is the beginning of injustice to oneself or society. A life filled with pain does not constitute a just life since there is no pleasure when pain is present. In his perception every human being should be in pursuit of pleasure because no one would love to live in pain. While in pursuit of p leasure, justice is achieved since the person would not bring or cause harm either to himself or society. Pain which is brought about by harm is the main source of injustice, pursuing pleasure involved refraining from doing what does not bring pleasure to oneself but ensuring that obtaining utmost personal pleasure would be the true definition of justice. This would involve forming a circle of friends who believed in the same beliefs as you since associating with individuals who had different definitions of true happiness and pleasure would not bring true pleasure as this would mean that you would have to live a life of pleasing others other than yourself therefore not finding pleasure which ultimately results to injustice to self[1]. All efforts exerted by human beings are intended for the pursuit of personal pleasure. Desire for many things was not necessary as this would not cause pleasure since one cannot attain all that he believes he wants to acquire in life. Instead one shoul d be content with what they have and this can be best portrayed by his perception about life and death. He did not think it pleasurable to pursuit the pain that is brought about by thoughts of death since when living death is not present and once you are dead then life is not there. Therefore, there is no meaningful gain in bringing harm to oneself by contemplating the pain that is brought about by death since none exists in the presence of the other and such thoughts only brings pain thus creating a source of personal injustice. According to his understanding, limiting the desires that an individual may have and expelling all forms of fear especially the fear of the gods and death would result to a life full of pleasure and justice. Epicurus also noticed that there are other forms of pleasure that have negative results and the acquisition of such pleasure brings more pain than pleasure once sought thus resulting to injustice of self. According to him, pleasure is achieved through h appiness which is brought about by relating with friends who possess similar virtues to yours and also possessing a peace of mind. Honest living which brings about a peaceful mind and pleasure to oneself as well as bringing justice to self and to others[2].Advertising Looking for essay on philosophy? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Epicurus truly advocated for pleasure which would bring about justice. Avoiding all forms of fear and pain would bring about pleasure thus resulting to justice to self and to society in general. Pursuit of pleasure which was free from any forms of negative consequences was his definition of justice. Bibliography Armstrong, John. Epicurean Justice. Phronesis 42. 3 (1997): 324-334 Footnotes Armstrong, John. Epicurean Justice. Phronesis 42. 3 (1997): 324-334 Armstrong, John. Epicurean Justice. Phronesis 42. 3 (1997): 324-334

Legal Citation †Citing Cases with The Bluebook

Legal Citation – Citing Cases with The Bluebook Legal Citation – Citing Cases with The Bluebook The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation is a well-known legal citation style guide in the US. Other systems have been introduced in recent years, challenging the dominance of The Bluebook, but if you’re a law student you’ll almost certainly encounter Bluebook-style citations at some point. In this post, we provide an â€Å"anatomy† of a Bluebook case citation to make sure you can reference legal sources clearly and correctly in your written work. Basic Citation Format The basic citation format for a legal case in Bluebook referencing includes four elements: the parties’ names, the case citation, the court, and the year of the ruling. This is presented with the following format: Parties’ Names Case Citation Court Year of Decision DeBoer v. Snyder, 973 F. Supp. 2d 757 (E.D. Mich 2014). You will then give citations in the main body of your text or in a footnote immediately following the relevant passage (accompanied by a signal). In the rest of this post, we’ll look more closely at each of the above elements. Parties’ Names The parties’ names are the title of the case, so you should italicize them and separate them from the rest of the citation with a comma. The case name should also be shortened using approved abbreviations. Case Citation The case citation usually includes a volume number for where the case was published, the abbreviated reporter identification, and the first page of the case. In DeBoer v. Snyder, the case citation can be broken down as follows: Volume Number Reporter Page Number 973 F. Supp. 2d 757 This indicates that the case is reported in volume 973 of the Federal Supplement, Second Series, starting on page 757. Alternatively, if available, you can give a medium-neutral citation instead. Court and Year The ruling court and year of decision should be included in parentheses after the case citation. The name of the court is abbreviated here (e.g., â€Å"Eastern District Michigan† becomes just â€Å"E.D. Mich†). If you’re using a medium-neutral citation or a case citation that already mentions the ruling court and/or year of decision, you dont have to to duplicate it here. Parentheticals Further to the above, Bluebook referencing allows for inclusion of a second set of parentheticals after the court/year for additional information. Usually, this is either substantive information or detail regarding the weight of the authority: 1. Substantive Information This is information provided to clarify the relevance of a citation, either via a direct quotation of the passage in question or a brief explanation. Explanatory phrases should begin with an â€Å"-ing† verb. 2. Weight of Authority This concerns the precedential value of the cited case, including factors such as the relevance of the authority (e.g., whether the ruling was en banc, per curiam, etc.) or other cases cited to support the decision.