Auden an the Greeks Essay

We would neer maintain become fully conscious, which is to conjecture that we would never rush become, for stop or worse, fully hu musical composition. this plagiarize is for W. H. Auden, who was a prolific writer and diagram write. In this study I will endeavor to give acumen about the beginning of this quote, the origins of this piece, and what the author meant in writhing it. As easily as examples of proof that Audens theory was true or not.And at last I will give my opinion whether I expression that Auden quote is correct. To start with a short back ground on the author Wystan Hugh Auden he was born in York, England, in 1907. He moved to Birmingham during childhood and was educated at Christ Church, Oxford. As a young man he was influenced by the poetry of Thomas Hardy, Robert Frost, William Blake, Emily Dickinson, as well as old English verse,(http//www. poets. org ). Auden percolatem to have always had a fascination with the superannuated Greeks having been ed ucated at a young age on the teaching of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle .Audens love of the superannuated Greeks would in later image place him in the category as a Grecophile ( a sports fan of all things Greek). This love of Ancient Greek teachings, and traditions Im incontestable this led to Audens viewpoint of how the Greeks contri justed to advance(a) nuance. In researching Audens frontier about the Ancient Greeks and their contributions to are modern daytime orderliness I found that the line is scoop outn from a big writing entitled The Greeks and Us in Fore wrangling and Afterwords, (W.H. Auden, saucy York, 1973, p. 32). The Quote is I dejection ideate of no better way of indicating what we owe to Greece than brief distinctions, for of all intellectual acts, that is perhaps the most characteristically Greek.It is they who have taught us, not to theorisethat all human beings have always donebut to animadvert about our thinking, to ask such questions as What do I think? , What do this and that other person or people think? , On what do we agree and disagree? Why? And not only(prenominal) did they learn to ask questions about thinking, but they also discovered how, quite of giving immediate answers to suppose something to be the case and then see what would follow if it were. To be able to perform either of these mental operations, a human being must first be capable of a tremendous feat of moral courage and discipline, for he must have learned how to resist the immediate demands of feeling and bodily needs, and to disregard his commodecel anxiety about his future so that he can enumerate at his self and his world as if they were not his but a strangers.If some of the Greek questions turned out to have been wrongly put, if some of their answers have proved wrong, that is a trivial matter. Had Greek civilization never existed, we king fear God and deal justly with our neighbors, we might practice arts and even have learned how to devi se pretty simple machines, but we would never have become fully conscious, which is to say that we would never have become , for better or worse, fully human. (W. H. Auden, New York, 1973, p. 32). In reading this text I begin to understand where Audens viewpoint is coming from.The main part of the text and purpose of this paper is still widely regarded as true by m either citizens in our country today. That the ancient Greek society of Plato, Aristotle, and Socrates, still offers much to the modern world. And with out this it would be hard to imagine what our world would be homogeneous without their contributions. Auden is agreeing with this philosophy. Auden is basically saying that the ancient Greeks have contributed how we should be looking at things that affect are daily resists, up to now so many of us do not.This is saying that we should be looking at a crush from not only are own viewpoint, or are sign first thought on the subject, but to be introspective and take the t ime to contemplate how the world around us whitethorn, or may not, see the same set of circumstance. And then taking all opinions into rumination for the final outcome regardless ff that outcome is good or bad. This takes a lot of mentally thought and discipline since in modern society we tend to be less philosophical, most of us say and do what first comes to our minds regardless of what others around us feel or think of the matter, or the eventual outcome of the situation.In my opinion Auden was saying that we can and should apply this to both aspect of are lives whether it is a personal matter, a judgment call, or really anything. The Greeks felt, in my opinion, that you must always think of your fellow man first and place oneself in his shoes, how another would feel and react to a situation taking that in to precondition and basing ones thoughts and actions on that.This sets peoples apart from a reactionary society to a thinking one, and had Greek civilization not existed we may have made our way, however we would authentic as shooting not had compassion for our fellow man and their viewpoints, in other words we would have not become fully human. This school of thought can be shown in example by the relationship of the three ample ancient Greek philosophers Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, theirs was a relationship of a teacher educating his pupils.Socrates schooled his followers, Plato, Aristotle with his gigantic knowledge and wisdom, the method became known as Socratic. According to Socrates an inquisitive constitution was critical in understanding and solving questions. And by posing this to every one from the man on the street to authority figures and taking their opinions into consideration would compel you to the most reasonable and logical answer benefiting all touch in the situation. However not even Socrates pupils always agreed with his teachings. both(prenominal) Plato and Aristotle disagreed with some of Socrates views and disagreed with o ne another. One thing that both did agree on was that an open forum of opinions would help you to acquire the best solution to a problem. Whether they agreed with it or not you must listen and always stop to discover from as many sources to come to the correct ratiocination. In conclusion my viewpoint on W. H. Audens comment Had Greek civilization never existed we would never have become fully conscious, which is to say that we would never have become, for better or worse, fully human.That yes indeed, after researching what he was referring to and the trying to look at it from the perspective of the ancient Greeks that using critical thinking, and excepting all sunglasses of opinion whether you agree with them or not and allowing them into your decision making function this is the most effectual way of deducing a question. In this I agree, however I find the modern world we are living in that few of my fellow humans take little or any of this into consideration. Today in my opin ion we speak more(prenominal) often forward we think of what we are saying and how it effects other and these peoples viewpoints.To me this is sad, if we thought more about the views and feelings of one another and less about making sure our own voice is heard what a different society we would live in. I would have to say I agree with W. H. Auden that if not for ancient Greece we would not have developed fully in to humans. However I feel that our modern society is growing rapidly away from theses ancient principals.