Blog post due date: The blog post is due by Monday at noon.
The reading for this week is from LLTM, pp. 166 - 175.
In a paragraph or two, discuss whether you consider one of these characters virtuous. They are all fascinating, but concentrate on one of them. You may want to refer to one or both of the other characters for comparison or contrast. Also, you might want to consider what Aristotle might say about your character. What would Aristotle say? What do you say?
I was immediately attracted to the self sacrifice of Iris Chang. Her service to others led to her early death. However, I wonder whether she ultimately would have done more good for the world if had stayed alive or if her error-filled efforts actually did more harm than good.
Joe Landrum sacrificed himself to the success of his wife. Many people would not consider him a hero. Is he a hero?
However, I'll probably write about Ray Kroc. I found the following passage about him quite disturbing: "MacDonald's still represents Americana. . . . It has a somewhat snobbish appeal for the young, who are enamored of the American life style." It is quite possible to see Kroc as virtuous. I'll try to examine that claim from both sides.
Remember, these are blog entries, not formal essays. Generate some ideas that you can share during our class discussion.
I think the story about Joe Landrum is very interesting. I don’t fully understand why people don’t call him a hero. I get that maybe some see him as just man helping his wife follow her dreams. I think though that he did live a virtuous life. I remember we talked in class about how “is someone really virtuous if they do something good for their own personal gain?” Joe dedicated all his time, effort and money in order for his wife to be happy chasing her dream of helping others. Sure he might get the reward of the happiness you get from helping others, especially the ones that you love, but he also gives all of his effort to his wife who, because of his efforts, is travelling and is often away from home. He doesn’t even always necessarily reap the benefits of being around her happiness when she is gone from him so often. He is helping his wife because he believes in her and wants her to be happy. I think what he did was completely virtuous. He gave everything he had to help people help others.
ReplyDeleteI think people are responding to the fact that Landrum's life was "ordinary." As a culture, we tend to expect more out of our heroes. I hope you'll be willing to defend your position in class.
DeleteThe story about Iris Chang is inspiring. She was so invested in the causes she was writing about that she risked her health to finish the story and give it to the world. It made her depressed and caused her to apparently kill herself but she knew that people needed to hear these stories. She gave up everything to warn people of the past. The Nanking "incident" is part of the country's identity and it is not as widely known as it should be. So she made them aware. She is virtuous because she did not do this for personal gain, she did it for the gain of others.
ReplyDeleteI share your feelings, Brooke, but I have some doubts. She was sloppy in her gathering of data, and she may have encouraged the "Nanking deniers." She let her horror at the events destroy her. What a terrible waste. Think of the good she could have done over a long lifetime. Isn't strength of character in facing emotional hardship necessary if we are going to live a meaningful life? In any case, I hope you will be willing to defend your position in class!
DeleteIris Chang did leave a virtuous life. Even though she has no time to deal with semantics, even no time for her to adjust herself, her contribution to the whole world, at least the victims at Nanking Massacre, is apparent. She speaks out for the victims and asks for official Japanese apology. Her book reminds people of tragedy of wars as well as the evil side of human nature. But I disagree with the reason of her suicide. Since she chose to devote herself to collecting information of Nanking Massacre, the work pressure did not kill her. It was the evil side of human nature killed her.
ReplyDeleteExcellent, Liz! I am intrigued by your last statement. I hope you will be willing to expand on it in class. Here's a question: If we are really going to be successful in fighting evil, don't we have to be strong enough to face it and survive to fight again?
DeleteI think that Ray Kroc was just another bourgeois concerned with profit-making.He always had a vision and confidence to do something big.If that something was done for a noble cause such as maybe providing employment to people or doing a service to customers then it would have been a virtuous life.However Kroc only agreed to open up Mcdonalds when he was promised a share of profits.He was a great salesman and he established that.He had his own way of running the restaurant so that it could make the maximum profit.He treated his employees with strictness so he was not good towards them.He did not have any of the qualities of a noble person.At best,Ray Kroc was an opportunist who grasped potential and transformed it into something lucrative.
ReplyDeleteExcellent, Zaphir. I agree with you, but you'll need to defend your position in class. I hope you'll be willing to do so. Some points: He did give people jobs who might not have had them otherwise. He provided inexpensive food by USA standards. He (or his wife) did much charitable work. And what exactly is wrong with seeking profit? I'm sure McDonalds investors remember him as noble, especially those investors of moderate means who can now live comfortable lives from their investments.
DeleteI believe that Ray Kroc was not more virtuous than the McDonald's brothers, but he had better ideas and bigger dreams for the company that led to success and worldwide recognition for his company. I disagree with Zafir, I think that the fact that Kroc made his company successfull, affordable, and addictive was a noble cause that helped many struggling households and people since 1961.
ReplyDeleteVery good, MaLia! I hope you will defend this position in class today.
DeleteI like Joe Landrum because I find his character to be very different. I think that by helping his wife he is truly a hero. At least a hero to her. I think the definition of heros is different for everyone. With that, the definition of virtuous is different for everyone. I believe that Joe did lead a virtuous life. A lot how people define things is through personal experience and lenses. So yes, I believe that since he spent so much time, and money, and love on his wife that he was virtuous. Even if it was for his or her personal gain.
ReplyDeleteVery good, Meryl. Is devotion to family alone sufficient to define a life as meaningful? I hope you'll be willing to talk about that point of view in class.
DeleteDid Ray Kroc live a meaningful life? On one level, his life represents much of what our culture defines as virtue. He survived difficult circumstances to achieve great financial success. He provided an inexpensive meal for those without the means or the time to provide better for themselves. His wife has been able to donate enormous sums to charitable institutions. He gave people without other skills a paying job. More than anything, he gave people what they wanted as far as eating is concerned.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I'm not so sure. Financial success is not important unless it does some other good. I note that most of the charitable work was done by Kroc's wife after his death. Was humanitarianism really his intention. What about the Ronald McDonald House program? He gave the people what they wanted, but it is often the employees of McDonalds who eat frequently there because they are paid very little and can eat nowhere else. And they receive no health benefits, which are sorely needed.
I note that "heath" is not on Kroc's list of aspiration for his eateries. A steady diet of McDonalds' fare will destroy your health eventually. Sometimes, giving people what they think they want is really not in their best interests, and can hardly be described as altruistic.
Besides, Kroc himself was quite cynical about that claim, As he said himself, " . . . salesmanship is the gentle art of letting the customer have it your way." We "want it" because we have been bombarded by ads telling us that we want it.
Most of all, I'd like to think that as a culture, our ideals mean something more than the life of Ray Kroc represents. As Jacques Pepin writes, "MacDonald's still represents Americana. . . . It has a somewhat snobbish appeal for the young, who are enamored of the American life style." Lord help us if that claim is true.
I wasn't really sure if I found Ray Krocs life to be virtuous because his work did just as much good as it did bad. I felt that it his life can not be looked at under just one view because he has done good too. Kroc was a war veteran and served his country in world war 2. I think that McDonalds has been good and bad in a few different ways because it has given people with a lower income a place to get food that has some nutritional value and it has given lost of people jobs but at the same time I feel that it hurts the people who eat it. I just feel like different parts of Ray Krocs life can be looked at as virtuous and others can't .
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the passages, I believe that Ray Kroc had the most virtuous life. First off, by wanting to serve in the armed forces. Even though he did not end up serving because the war ended, that itself is a very good deed. He even lied about his age, that shows true dedication. After this stint, 43 years later he ended up buying McDonald's. He would become a world-renowned business man. He was not a creator, but he was a true American by getting a hold of something and making it in the best possible way. That is why McDonald's is the biggest fast-food chain in the world.
ReplyDeletePeople may think that he just wanted money, but who doesn't. I personally think he just wanted to be successful. He had a quality idea and people loved it. McDonald's may have a bad image now. but it is still around and will be in the near future. He did form a foundation and was able to be a major donor.
I beleive that Joseph Landrum was not in himself virtuous but selfish in his act of working with handicapped children. Instead of being at home and supporting his wife while working a more challenging job he is working with children that gave him joy. This is not necessarily a bad thing but I do not find it virtuous.
ReplyDeleteFrom all the personalities I read about, the one I liked the most was Joe Landrum. Growing up in Greece, I find being a family member is probably considered the most important thing in one’s life. Joe Landrum was different than all the rest while he showed love and devotion to his wife. In my opinion, such an act is admirable. Simply for that fact, I consider him a character that lived a meaningful life.
ReplyDelete