Author: ERIKA ZHANG

In his work, Montaigne widely discusses a variety of fears by exposing fear-related emotions among individuals. In his work, he described fear as individual doubt and avoidance of terror and situations which cause panic. According to his work fear has negative impacts on the life of men since it seizes, contracts and frozen hearts of gentlemen. By discussing different instances of fear such as fear encountered by Monsieur de Bourbon’s people, The German people and fear from heaven encountered by Greeks we understand the effects of fear in society. Because of fear, two close people can find themselves in the opposite direction fearing the fear. Fear drives us of a sense of honor and even duty. He openly discusses his fears and the methodologies he used to overcome the fear. He argues that in the whole world he is most afraid of fear because its impact is more than that of the other accidents.

Pizan stood strong to defend women and overturn the existing conception that men are superior in comparison with women. For instance, she turned to the bible over Eve-Adam’s story and strongly defended eve. She argued that the act of Eve giving fruit to her husband, mostly considered as deception of men by women was not a trickery situation but was a sign of sincere and true love. She argues that after Eve was deceived by the devil, she never recognized whether it was a deception aiding to a trap.  Full of love and care she gave her husband to taste how sweet the fruit was as opposed to how the most audience interprets it. In her writing she has criticized the authors whose work undermines the role of women; instead, she has considered women noble beings.

The discussion between Socrates and Phaedrus starts Phaedrus pointing the essentials of an article written by Lysias. Both characters are in agreement with Lysias that there are two kinds of lovers: lovers and non-lovers. They state that the relationship between non-lovers is better than a relationship with lovers because lovers expose the discussion while non-lovers don’t.  The main interests for relationship by lovers are the benefit obtained in it. They measure and calculate both expenditure and income from a relationship and if the expenditure exceeds the benefit, they quit the relationship.  On the other hand, non-lovers value the relationship more than the benefits involved in it. Despite the amount spend in a relationship, non-lovers will not regret being in a relationship.

Some readers might think Agamemnon was very cruel and selfish to sacrifice his daughter to appease Artemis. From the standpoint of his family, he was really cruel. But from the standpoint of the king of Mycenae and the leader of the Greek army in the Trojan War of Homer’s Illiad, that was the only thing he could do. Agamemnon faced a dilemma before making his decision and went through a painful inner conflict. Although he loved his daughter and family, the Macro-benefit was always the king’s priority to consider. His special identity would be doomed to his choice.

A similar moral conflict applied to Clytemnestra’s revenge. From the standpoint of the family interest, some readers might think the way she revenged for her daughter seems acceptable. But she was not only killing her husband, but also the leader of the city, which would affect the safety and stability of the city. Based on that consequent, Clytemnestra was cruel, too.

The conflict of the benefit between family and power leads to the whole tragedies. Aeschylus lets us consider the situations in multiple perspectives: Whether the special identities of the characters in the play or the special situations they face. It’s hard to judge the absolute right or wrong of a fact.