Thank you for your kind feedback, Thea. Much appreciated!
Issuu is a digital publishing platform that makes it simple to publish magazines, catalogs, newspapers, books, and more online. Easily share your ...
In Bungie Studios ' 2004 video game Halo 2 , Tartarus is one of the main antagonists in the latter half of the campaign story. The character (voiced by Kevin Michael Richardson) is the chieftain of the Brutes , one of the alien species frequently combated in the game. He is easily recognized by his white fur, mohawk, and massive war hammer. His harsh, cruel, oppressive nature lends itself to his mythological underworld namesake. In the game's campaign, Tartarus shows consistent hostility and derision towards the race of Elites of which the protagonist, the Arbiter is a part. In the game's third act, he attempts to kill the Arbiter and leads the Brutes in a mutiny to usurp the leadership position of the Elites within the Covenant army. Following this betrayal, the player, fighting as the Arbiter, must track down Tartarus and in the final mission, defeat him to stop the firing of the Halo ring. 
Wolfgang Mieder has collected cartoons that build on the image of Sisyphus, many of them editorial cartoons . 
Perhaps the most famous work of Kierkegaard was Fear and Trembling , a short book which exhibits many of the issues raised by him throughout his career. Fear and Trembling retells the story of the attempted sacrifice of Isaac by his father Abraham. God tells Abraham that in order to prove his faith he has to sacrifice his only son. Abraham obeys, but at the last moment God intervenes and saves Isaac. What is the moral of the story? According to our moral beliefs, shouldn’t Abraham refuse to execute God’s vicious plan? Isn’t one of the fundamental beliefs of Christianity the respect to the life of other? The answer is naturally affirmative. Abraham should refuse God, and he should respect the ethical law. Then Abraham would be in a good relation with the Law itself as in the expression ‘a law abiding citizen’. On the contrary what Abraham tries to achieve is a personal relation with the author of the moral law. This author is neither a symbolic figure nor an abstract idea; he is someone with a name. The name of ’God’ is the unpronounceable Tetragrammaton (YHVE), the unpronounceability indicates the simultaneous closeness and distance of the great Other. The Christian God then, the author of the moral law at his will suspends the law and demands his unlawful wish be obeyed. Jacques Derrida notes that the temptation is now for Abraham the ethical law itself (Derrida 1998:162): he must resist ethics, this is the mad logic of God. The story naturally raises many problems. Is not such a subjectivist model of truth and religion plainly dangerous? What if someone was to support his acts of violence as a command of God? Kierkegaard’s response would be to suggest that it is only because Abraham loved Isaac with all his heart that the sacrifice could take place. “He must love Isaac with his whole soul....only then can he sacrifice him” (Kierkegaard 1983:74). Abraham’s faith is proved by the strength of his love for his son. However, this doesn’t fully answer the question of legitimacy, even if we agree that Abraham believed that God loved him so that he would somehow spare him. Kierkegaard also differentiates between the act of Abraham and the act of a tragic hero (like Agamemnon sacrificing his daughter Iphigenia). The tragic hero’s act is a product of calculation. What is better to do? What would be more beneficial? Abraham stands away from all sorts of calculations, he stands alone, that is, free in front of the horror religiosus , the price and the reward of faith.
Register to become part of our active community, get updates, receive a monthly newsletter, and enjoy the benefits and rewards of our member point system OR just post your comment below as a Guest .