Thesis (Th. M.)--Dallas Theological Seminary, 1992. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 89-95).

No description available.

Title from first page of PDF document. Includes bibliographical references (p. 47-49).

The aim of this thesis is to compare the consecutive years of degree of happiness between the Nordic region and Japan. The second aim is to seek for the detrimental factor contributing to happiness before and during the pandemic, based on the measurement by the World Happiness Report. Yearly based datasets of 'life ladder score', 'log GDP per capita', 'social support', 'healthy life expectancy', 'freedom to make life choices', 'generosity', and 'perception of corruption' from 2008 to 2021 were used for the aim and goal. The results of this study showed there were no significant changes in the trend of happiness from 2008 to 2021 between the Nordic region and Japan. Also, there were not any significant differences in terms of subjective well-being before and during the pandemic. Besides, as a result of multiple regression analysis, the study revealed that 'freedom to make life choices' was the detrimental factor that contributed to the subjective well-being before the pandemic. On the other hand, during the pandemic, 'social support' was the detrimental factor between the Nordic region and Japan. This study implied the connectedness between the subjective well-being and self-determination theory in terms of relatedness, and autonomy. For further investigation, it was concluded that creating a more inclusive measurement of happiness which adjusts diverse psychological definitions of happiness, investigating the relationship between the subcategories of population and happiness, and reviewing more comprehensive detrimental factors that explain well-being between the Nordic region and Japan should be needed.

Die Dissertation greift zwei neuere Ansätze der Platonforschung (P. Stemmer, N. Blößner) auf. Demnach ist Platons ''Politeia'' keine Lehrschrift, sondern eine kohärente Argumentation, die zudem den im ''Phaidros'' entfalteten Kommunikationsregeln folgt, also auf konkrete Situationen, Beweisziele und Personen bezogen ist. Der Autor konzentriert sich besonders auf den letzten Aspekt und hier vor allem auf die jugendlichen Gesprächspartner des Sokrates, die Brüder Glaukon und Adeimantos. Er zeigt, dass deren Analyse, die öffentliche Meinung der Zeit impliziere eine starke Tendenz zum Egoismus, und das bei ihnen daraus erwachsene, im Dialog drängend artikulierte Bedürfnis nach Gewinnung einer fundierten Gegenposition, die sie von Sokrates erwarten, Anlage und Durchführung von dessen Argumentation in der Tat wesentlich beeinflussen. Weil eine allen Einwänden standhaltende Begründung stets den Nachweis erfordert, dass gerecht zu sein ein intrinsisch notwendiger Bestandteil der Eudaimonie, d.h. eines gelingenden Lebens ist, erweist sich die reflektierte Lebenswahl somit als das zentrale Thema der ''Politeia'', das den Dialog zusammenhält und seinen Aufbau sowie den Zusammenhang seiner vielen unterschiedlichen Sachthemen letztlich erklärt. Behandelt wird dieses Thema aber nicht abstrakt, sondern mit Bezug auf die konkrete Situation der Brüder, von denen Glaukon (so der Autor) die initiative Rolle zuzuschreiben sei. Trotzdem gelinge es Platon, das Gespräch nicht um die Entscheidung einzelner Personen für ihre individuelle Lebensführung kreisen zu lassen, sondern um die grundsätzliche – und sich somit auch auf den Leser des Textes beziehende – Frage, auf welcher Erkenntnisbasis, auf welcher methodischen Grundlage und mit welchem Grad an Gewissheit man solche Entscheidungen überhaupt treffen kann. Diese Sicht macht auch die methodischen und erkenntnistheoretischen Explikationen, die Platons Dialog in beträchtlichem Maße enthält, zu essentiellen Bestandteilen der Argumentation. / This dissertation picks up on two recent approaches in Platonic scholarship (P. Stemmer, N. Bloessner), which view Plato’s ''Politeia'' not as a doctrinal work, but rather a coherent argumentation, which, moreover, applies the rules of communication as laid out in the ''Phaedrus'' and is thus related to the argumentative goals of concrete persons in a specific situation. The author primarily focuses on the second aspect, particularly on Socrates’ young interlocutors, the brothers Glaucon and Adeimantus. He shows how their analysis, according to which the public opinion of their time implies a strong tendency towards egoism, and their consequent desire for a well-founded counterargument, for which they turn to Socrates, in fact determines the structure and development of the latter’s argumentation. Since a justification which can withstand all objections requires the demonstration that being just is an intrinsically necessary component of eudaimonia, i.e. of true happiness, a rational life choice thus emerges as the central theme of the ''Politeia'', which gives the dialogue its inner coherence and ultimately explains its structure as well as the connection between the various topics it deals with. This theme is not, however, developed abstractly, but in connection with the concrete situation of the brothers, with Glaucon (according to the author of the dissertation) taking the initiative. However, Plato nonetheless succeeds at not letting the discussion revolve around the particular decisions of an individual regarding a particular way of life, but rather around the fundamental question – which thus also relates to the reader of the text – as to the epistemological and methodological basis for such decisions and the degree of certainty with which they can be reached. According to this interpretation, the methodological and epistemological explications, which figure prominently throughout the dialogue, should be viewed as essential elements of the argumentation.