Objectivity Of The Social Researcher

Objectivity Of The Social Researcher Before addressing the debate, the historical significance of social theory must be addressed as there is a long history regarding issues of objectivity, and value free research. Prior to World War Two, social research was dominated by the paradigm of positivism. Philosophers such as Comte (1798-1857) strongly affirmed that methods applied to the natural sciences such as physics should be applied to the study of social behaviour (Benton Craib, 2001). The positivist perspective placed great emphasis on the objectivity of social research, accepting Science as the only general form of knowledge that produces reliable social scientific knowledge that can be generated into theory applicable to social behaviour within society (Benton Craib, 2001: 23). Moreover, like the natural sciences it requires both logical and empirical support. Causal relationships can be identified and truths can be falsified thus, positivist sociology assumes that law-like generalisations can be derived from socia l research Pedraza (2002: 75). Postivism was widely accepted throughout the nineteenth centuary as science was assumed to be the highest form of knowledge, thus by applying the methodologies of the natural science to the newborn social sciences allowed for some level of acceptance. As far as objectivity is concerned, positivist methodological approaches claim that objectivity is an ideal that is attainable, as the social realtiy of society can be observed it without any antecedents. As a result, the aim of the social scientist is to be exogenously detached from the research subject. Turning to Weber (WEBERREF) changed the direction of social research claiming that although social research should be value free, obtaining completely objective research was impossible. This is simply because researchers are subjective humans. Weber coined the term value free sociology and urged that sociologists need to be unconfined by personal values if it was to make a positive contribution towards society. Weber recognised that personal values would to some extent influence research topics but encouraged objectivity in exploring a topic once chosen. For Weber, value freedom is then a non-judgemental analysis of society in its own terms. Although Weber advocated this approach to social research, it must be acknowledged that values can enter research in a variety of ways ranging from the choice of research area, formulation of the research question; methodology including data collection, analysis of data; interpretation of data and overall conclusions (Bryman, 2008). Following from Weber the epistemological position of positivism has been overtly critiqued by various theorists, particularly those who take an ontological, interpretivist stance. For example, Becker (1964: 245) argues that, there is no position from which sociological research can be done that is not biased in one way or another. Therefore, social research cannot be completely objective as researchers can unknowingly contaminate their exploration of an issue with values developed throughout their own biography. Furthermore, Becker (1964) claims that, sociologists must either write from the position of a superordinate or from that of a subordinate (Lawson, 1991: 591). In addressing this claim, Becker (1964) discusses the credibility of hierarchy which explores the notion that social groups whom are perceived to be superior within a given society are in a position of power that can define the rules of society. The exclusivity of the natural sciences within society is an example of thi s. Becker (1964: 242) goes on to surmise that sociologists challenge this rule by refusing to acknowledge the established status order in which it is surmised that the truth of knowledge is unequally distributed. Therein, Becker suggests that social research should focus on the underdog in order to reform knowledge distribution. This is similar to the view that has been taken up by feminists such has Hartstock (2004: 7) who place emphasis on relativist standpoint theories whereby knowledge is shaped by power relations, that it is socially situated. Therefore those oppressed can give the best account fo the internal workings of their group. Hartstock (2004) attains that prior to feminist sociology, research disciplines and public policy did not account for women as group with their own knowledge. For Hartsock (2004), any social research that does not address the unequal distribution of knowledge, is therefore, potentially skewed. Thus drawing upon the Marxist notion of historic materialism standpoint theorists such as Hartstock (2004) and Harding (DATE) chose to address this with the aim of exercising social research from the position or standpoint of women. It can be surmised from this perspective that it is therefore it is impossible for a social researcher to extract themselves from power relations in thei r own situation. Therefore the feminist approach strongly advocates that objectivity should not be the primary aim of a social investigation. Rather, it is important for researchers to adopt a stance and consider how their values will influence their research. In addition, it should be recognised that feminist researchers shape the results of their analyses no less than do those of sexist and androcentric researchers. The objectivist stance should be avoided as it attempts to make the researchers cultural beliefs and practices invisible, while simultaneously skewering the research objects, beliefs and practices to the display board (Harding, 1987:9). What are the arguments against this? GOULDNER Gouldner is in consensus with Becker that social research cannot be value free yet he openly criticises Beckers claiming that Becker does not address the reasons why sociologists are more inclined to take the side of the underdog. Furthermore Gouldner asserts that is not always the case, the manner which some sociologists conceive the value-free doctrine disposes them to ignore current human problems and to huddle together like old men seeking mutual warmth. This is not our job, they say, and if it were we would now know enough to do it. (Gouldner, 1973: 13) It is clear that subjectivity poses a severe limitation for the positivist objective approach to social research. For Gouldner, however, the positivist approach posed another extensive problem, it was useful to those young, or not so young, men who live off sociology rather than for it, and who think of sociology as a way of getting ahead in the world by providing them with neutral techniques that may be sold on the open market to any buyer (Gouldner, 1973: 12). In others word Gouldner saw self interest as a powerful motivator the outcome of research being affected by the context in what it is undertaken. Thus the social researcher is not necessarily on the side of the underdog. In laymen terms Lawson (1991) suggests that the crux of this debate is the question of whether sociologists are allied with the state, accepting the state as the overall authority or should they adapt a more ethical, moral role in addressing social problems of society. Ultimately social researchers are divided by this dilemma that as Gouldner suggests, depends on the social context of the researcher. What Gouldner recognises is that the attempt of sociologists to draw upon the natural sciences to obtain an objective approach does not entirely fit with social studies and that the institutions in which professional sociologists consult such as government, academia and business can have a profound effect on a researchers values. Parsonian sociologists such as Haak (1994) and Hammersely (2000) are critical on views promoted by Becker and Gouldner arguing that that the politicisation of social research is not only misguided, but inherently dangerous, and that an intelligent and sceptical commitment to the principles of objectivity and value neutrality must remain an essential feature of social research (back cover). Hamersley (2000) promotes the idea of value-free, objective social research placing emphasis on academia as the key institution to producing knowledge. Yet the University as a place for producing knowledge itself is under threat. This can be demonstrated by addressing the tragedy of the anticommons. ANTICOMMONS 300 In response to Hardings Tragedy of the Commons whereby a resource is exploited by overuse, (HellerRosenburg1998)) address the notion of the anticommons where upstream and downstream technologies are compatible for the development of a new product yet the technology is patentable and ownership is fragmented thus the price of the new product becomes high and its consumption ends up being small or there is a gridlock in the development of the products EXAMPLE OF ANTICOMMONS This is not objective research if the notion is to make profit 250 This situation can be directly perceived by examining changes within university systems. For example, in Japan, national universities that conduct public research have transitioned to University Corporations by which there is an emphasis in profiteering from any innovations it may develop (Nishijima, 2004). According to Nishijima (2004) the Japanese ministry of education has advocated universities to acquire patents of innovations and to partake in research activities with private organisations such as corporations. through establishing Technology License Office for the past few years. The transition of National University to University Corporation implies that results of basic research will suddenly change from public goods to private goods and that the anticommons problem will emerge in the product innovation where basic research and development of new products are complementary. In the case of National University, there seems no consensus (no argument so far) on how economists should formulate the objective function of national university.10 Even if we assume that national university behaves as if it maximized a particular objective function such as probability of research success subject to budget and other constraints, equilibrium variables of national university will not be far from those arbitrarily given, as long as the particular objective function is not convincing. Therefore we have no choice but to exogenously give particular values to variables Thus as Oliver (1992) ascribes, social research are sometimes forced to take sides as funding bodies are not willing to take risks and support user-controlled research. The point that Gouldner (1973) puts across is that sociology should focus on social change therefore it must take sides. Essentially, Marx emphasised the need for social research to contribute to social change, The Standpoint of the old materialism is civil society; the stand point of the new is human society, or social humanity. The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it. (Eastman, 1935) like Marx, Gouldner (1973) believed that sociology should count towards human emancipation thus Gouldner became a strong believer in public sociology. REFLEXIVITY 300 The notion of reflexivity. Researchers must give an indication of the purpose of their research and how they have come to partake in such research This illustrates some of the factors that can affect social research. Namely, the need for profit. PARSONIAN SOCIOLOGY ARGUES FOR EPISTIMOLICAL RESEARCH DISCUSS!! BURAWOY PUBLIC SOCIOLOGY DISTINCTION BETWEEN THOSE THAT ACT AND THOSE WHO DONT As Burawoy (2005: 324) asserts the possibility for public sociology comes from sociologys spontaneous connection to its reflexive relation with civil society. Burawoy clearly recognises that sociology in itself is a reflexive paradigm and suggests that it clearly needs to move from ideological theory to commitment to action. In a sense Burawoy (2005: 325) advocates that social research must take sides claiming like Marx and Gouldner that society should place human society or social humanity at its organising centre. 200 words Whilst this debate continues, a few conclusions can be drawn from this essay. Firstly, it is near impossible for social researchers to complete value free research. There are several factors that account for this. Namely as Gouldner asserts, the social context in which research is conducted. Secondly, It would seem that social research is clearly divided by professional and public sociology. Thus it is not a case of whether or not to take sides but more a case of which side our values empower us to choose. Those inclined towards professional sociology may attain that objectivity is not compromised whereas those inclined towards public sociology may recognise that it can be and even more so, that it is necessary to evoke humanitarian changes.

Foodborne Illnesses :: essays research papers

Foodborne Illness   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  What is Foodborne Illness? According to a medical dictionary, foodborne illness is an acute gastrointestinal infection caused by consuming food contaminated with pathogenic, bacteria, toxins, viruses, prions or parasites. Such contamination was caused by improper food handling, preparation or storage of food. Contacts between food and pests, especially flies, cockroaches and rodents are a further cause of contamination of food. Foodborne illness can also be caused by adding pesticides or medicine to food or consuming or by accidentally consuming naturally poisonous substances. That is why foodborne illness can also be called food poisoning.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Health Canada estimates that about two million Canadian suffers foodborne illness per year and CDC (Center for Disease Control) estimates approximately 76 million foodborne illness cases occur in the United States per year. However, many foodborne illness cases are unreported. Some of the most common bacteria and viruses that cause foodborne illness are Salmonella, Campylobacter, Escherichia coli O157:H7, and Hepatitis. In the following report, you will read some of the major foodborne illness outbreaks in Canada and United States.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  According to Health Canada, the number of Canadians who has foodborne illness is estimated to be approximately two million per year. As mentioned in the introduction, many foodborne illness cases are not reported. In Canada, it is estimated that for every one case of foodborne illness that is reported, there are 350 cases that are not reported. The ones that are reported are usually major problems. Canada had some major outbreak of foodborne illness through these many years.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  One major outbreak was on March and April 1998. The major outbreak was Salmonella Enteritidis associated with the contamination of cheese in a commercial product. This happened in Newfoundland. Nearly 700 cases were reported, most of which were children that got the illness. It was found that the source of the outbreak of Salmonella Enteritidis was the cheese in a prepackaged processed lunch packs. The cheese was contaminated when it was being packaged into the lunch packs. It was never found how the cheese got contaminated, but they discover that the cheese was contaminated before it arrived to the place where the products were processed and packaged. They suspect that something must have happen in Parmalat ¡Ã‚ ¦s plant, the company that provides the cheeses for the lunch pack, because it was only the cheese that got contaminated. However, they will not release any information, so the real explanation of how the cheese got contaminated will never be known.

Ethics and Placebo Trials Essay

Placebo trials are experimental trials that involve the administration of a substance that does not really have any effect on the individual’s system. This means that it is a neutral trial that will have neither positive nor negative effects on the physiology of the person it is administered on. Whatever positive benefits may be derived out of placebo trials are merely therapeutic and may arise from the potency of the power of suggestion. These trials are most often used in randomized control trials in investigating the effectiveness of a specific treatment. (Miller and Brody, 3) However, with the rise of the use of such trials, there have been many more questions raised. Are these placebo control trials indeed necessary? What ethical issues are raised with the implementation of placebo trials? The debates regarding the ethicality of placebo trials in investigative research continue to rage across the scientific community. The discussion has become so complex that the sides taken regarding the matter have evolved to more than just â€Å"yes† or â€Å"no† to the question of placebo ethicality. There have been numerous aspects of placebo trials that have undergone the scrutiny of those directly involved with fields utilizing these trials. The main aim of this paper is to understand the obligations of medical practitioners who are employing placebo trials in their own scientific investigations of the effectiveness of various treatments. What ethical standards should these individuals, physicians and the like, take into consideration when conducting investigative researches with placebo trials? Glass and Waring The main problem with a physician’s utilization of placebo trials for investigative purposes is the fact that they are part of the profession that involves the assurance of optimal health for their patients. Some of the researchers and critics exploring the ethical holds on medical practitioners with regards to placebo trials have looked at it from a legal standpoint. Glass and Waring (582) indicate that they have foundâ€Å"no legal precedent allowing physicians to ‘opt out’ of their professional obligations because they are researchers in addition to being physicians†. It is emphasized that the physician must do all in his power in order to insure that the client receives all possible modes of treatment that would maintain or enhance his or her health. As a researcher, the physician is viewed as a fiduciary, a person delegated with power that will be used for the benefit of another person and who is held legally against the highest standards of conduct. The physician-researcher as a fiduciary, then, has a moral ascendancy over his or her patient-subject. (Glass and Waring, 578) This means that a placebo trial that would involve having the physician-researcher observe the null effect on the health of a patient-subject and at the same time have knowledge of the betterment of the health status of patient-subjects in the other experimental trials. (Glass and Waring 579) Thus physician’s are now ethically compromised and even legally liable for their utilization and continuation of the placebo trial. Knowing that there is a treatment that could improve the health of those in the placebo arm of the experiment but not applying that treatment on the participants in that arm indicates their sacrifice of the health of those participants for the scientific progress afforded by research data. The ethical responsibility of the physician-reseracher, therefore, is in the fact that clinical studies of treatment effectivity make use of participants who have been diagnosed with the specific medical condition hoped to be treated by the experiment’s procedure. Hawkins Hawkins (484) states that the true problem faced by physician-researchers is a moral one. The moral norms and societal dictates placed upon those in the medical profession involve the fact that they need to be able to give a sick person all the possible chances of being treated. However, Hawkins (484) points out that this moral responsibility is limited. She states clearly â€Å"researchers do not owe effective treatment to everyone around them. † (473) The obligations of a physician to his or her patient are enclosed within a given framework, that of the physician-patient relationship. In order for such a relationship to be established, the physician must come into agreement with the client that he or she will indeed act as one half of that relationship. The same agreement must be made on the part of the client. Although this agreement may not be explicit, it is nevertheless positively acknowledged by both parties. (Hawkins, 476) There is, according to Hawkins, no ethical dilemma in a physician-researcher’s use of placebo trials. Just because these researchers have had medical training and have taken a medical oath does not mean that they are always in the role of a physician. These are individuals that have many other different roles as fathers, mothers, non-practicing physicians, friends and the like. The role they take as a researcher, therefore, does not mean a continuation of their role as a physician. (Hawkins, 479) The obligations of an individual in the role of a researcher is separate from his or her role as a physician thus their obligation in placebo trials involves simple assurance that the participant will not be harmed by the procedure that will take place. Miller and Brody Some critics of placebo control trials state a weakness in therapeutic obligation of physician researchers as the main grounds of contestation of the ethical foundations of the said trials. Miller and Brody (8) state that even when based on the principles of clinical equipoise, an ethical basis of assigning participants in different experimental arms which involves disagreement among experts as to the effectiveness of either arm, therapeutic obligation is still a weak attack against the ethics of placebo trials. The individuals who knowingly participate in experiments with placebo arms are not exploited as long as no harm befalls them. Also, they are aware that they enter the experimental set-up as participants in a research and not as patients of the researchers who happen to also be physicians. (Miller and Brody, 5) Miller and Brody thus state that â€Å"placebo trials are not unethical just because they withhold proven effective treatment†. (6) It is thus seen that the responsibility and obligation of the researcher with regards to the ethicality of placebos is not in their therapeutic obligations as physicians. However, this does not mean that placebo trials are completely ethical. This also does not mean that researchers are devoid of ethical obligations to their participants assigned to placebo arms of the investigative experiments. The ethical obligation of the researcher in placebo trials is the same as that of researcher in any clinical trials. This involves the proper acquisition of informed consent from the participants. Also, researchers must be able to assure the fact that participants will not be exploited or put in harmful situations. Miller and Brody also insist that researchers must first establish that the investigation has scientific merit and that scientific merit is increased with the implementation of the placebo trial. (8) Analysis and Argument All three articles assessed above have merit and, at the same time, also have faults. Glass and Waring (582) stating that no legal precedents were found that indicated physicians were no longer tied to their professional obligations is faulty. In much the same way that a lawyer does not have to give counsel to every jaywalker he or she sees, the physician likewise does not have professional obligation over individual’s whose relationship to him is simply that which exists between researchers and participants. I also disagree with Hawkins’ statement that morality is what binds the physician thus the use of placebo trials is not unethical. What is ethics but a concept in the realm of morality? Yes, there are standards and regulations with regards to ethical conduct. However, as a whole, ethics is based on morality thus a moral problem is, in fact, an ethical problem. The middle ground taken by Miller and Brody also seems to be misled. A placebo trial is not equivalent to other clinical trials. It involves factors that are not present in other trials, such as the exposure of the participants to neutral treatment. In other clinical trials, there is still exposure to some form of treatment thus there is an effort to aid the participant. I believe, however, that physician-researcher’s obligations to the patient-participant, is limited solely to the relationship of researcher and participant. The role taken by the individual is not that of a physician but that of a researcher. The participants are also aware that they enter into the experiment not as patients but as participants. Although they are not given the chance to undergo possibly effective treatment, it is not the moral obligation of the researcher to insure that they do. Even if, for example, a person persists to smoke, I am not morally or ethically obligated to make sure that he or she stop. Placebo trials are valid research designs and should not be stopped simply because of a feeling that it is unfair to those who, in the first place, willingly submitted themselves to the experiment’s conditions. Works Cited Glass, Kathleen G. , and Waring, Duff. â€Å"The Physician/Investigator’s Obligation to Patients Participating in Research: The Case of Placebo Controlled Trials. † The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 33 (2005): 575-585 Hawkins, Jennifer S. â€Å"Justice and Placebo Controls. † Social Theory and Practice 32 (2006): 467- 496. Miller, Franklin G. , and Brody, Howard. â€Å"What Makes Placebo-controlled Trials Unethical? † The American Journal of Bioethics 2(2002): 3-9

Characteristics Of Oedipus - 1406 Words

Sophocles is very influential and one of the first great play-writes. One of his greatest characters is no-doubt Oedipus the king. Oedipus is one of the most complex and interesting characters ever put to paper. Oedipus’ actions are very unique and human, in the context of books. Oedipus has many different character traits, such as his hubris, determination, and knowledge, however all of them blend seamlessly together in a very believable and human way. When Oedipus first introduces himself to us he already displays one of his greatest traits. He is summoned to his balcony because a messenger of the Gods has returned to him with news. â€Å"My sons!† (Sophocles 1) He cries out. Oedipus views himself in a very Godly and fatherly way. He saved†¦show more content†¦You are blind in mind and ears as well as in your eyes.† (22) Oedipus summons Tiresias to his castle in hopes that he would tell him good news. After Tiresias does not tell him what he wants to hear, and accuses him like Creon, Oedipus turns on him and calls him a traitor. Prideful people view themselves and their needs as more important than others, Oedipus also views his position of authority very highly. When people challenge his authority he, due to his pride and hubris, reacts very aggressively. Oedipus, throughout the book, displays great determination. This may be an effect of his hubris, his overconfidence in the way he views himself has led him to believe that he can do anything, so he tries to. Soon after Oedipus discovers that he must find a murderer in Thebes, he vows to Creon that he will find this murder, and questions him vividly. â€Å"Oedipus: Where are they? Where would a trace of this old crime be found? Creon: The clue is in this land, so said the God.† (10) Oedipus truly wants to find the killer, whether this is to prove himself or save Thebes is up to interpretation, however he asks Creon many questions about the killer. If Oedipus was just hubristic and not determined he wouldn’t care about Laius’ murder, because he would view himself above the Gods and their punishments. However, he questions Creon and vows to find the murderer with him. Along with his questioning of Creon, Oedipus invokes a curse onto theShow MoreRelatedCharacteristic s Of Oedipus1043 Words   |  5 Pages Oedipus Rex Oedipus Rex is a book about a man named Oedipus, who before he was born had a prophecy to fulfill. The prophecy stated that Oedipus would kill his Father and marry his mother. Oedipus had many flaws, with one being inner blindness. Oedipus’s flaws and inner blindness played part in him being a static character because he was oblivious to the clues all around them, if he had caught the clues in time he could have saved his family of embarrassmentRead MoreCharacteristics Of Oedipus The King928 Words   |  4 PagesConstitution on, like in the US. In Sophocles’ play Oedipus Rex the king, Oedipus, was very well liked because of his heroic act of solving the Sphinxs riddle, ridding the city of the monster, which led him to become the king of Thebes. During his rule, a plague spreads throughout the city, killing many people, forcing the people go to their king to plead for the help of their heroic king to once again save the city. A prophecy from Apollo was given to Oedi pus which said, in order to save the city, theRead MoreCharacteristics of a Tragic Hero in Oedipus the King by Sophocles1238 Words   |  5 Pagesof a tragic hero, it can be concluded that Oedipus is a tragic hero. Oedipus The King was written by a well-known tragic dramatist named Sophocles. This story is considered to be one of the greatest tragedies of all time. In fact, the Marjorie Barstow of the Classical Weekly says that it â€Å"fulfills the function of a tragedy, and arouses fear and pity in the highest degree† (Barstow). It is also very controversial because of the relationship that Oedipus has with his mother, although it was unknownRead MoreEssay about Tragedy in Sophocles Oedipus The King and Antigone 1403 Words   |  6 PagesTragedy in Sophocles Oedipus The King and Antigone The Greeks considered tragedy the greatest form for literature.   However, the tragic ends for the characters were not ordained or set by fate, but rather caused by certain characteristics belonging to that person.   Such is the case with the characters of Sophocles plays Oedipus the King and Antigone.   Oedipus from King Oedipus, and Antigone and Creon from Antigone posses characteristics, especially pride, that caused their tragic ends.   AsRead MoreOedipus Rex970 Words   |  4 PagesOedipus: An Exceptional Man In all the passages that have been written through history on how an excellent man should behave, one writing stands out from all of them. Aristotle’s, The High-Minded Man. This manuscript explains that for any play to be truly considered a tragedy, its hero must meet Aristotle’s standards for a high-minded man. In the tragedy of Oedipus Rex, by Sophacles, Oedipus clearly meets the requirements to be called a high-minded man. Oedipus is expressive about his thoughtsRead MoreThe Characters Of Hubris In Oedipus The King1032 Words   |  5 PagesHubris is one characteristic of humans that leads to people committing evil deeds. In the play Oedipus the King, Oedipus struggles with facing the truth about his fate. His hubris leads him to be an arrogant and ignorant person throughout the play. Hubris also leads Oedipus to lose control over his emotions on multiple occasions in the story. In Sophocles’ play, Oedipus the King, Oedipus’ character flaws clearly ou tweigh his positive qualities. Oedipus’ rage, pride, and ignorance are the main characterRead MoreOedipus The King : A Tragic Hero987 Words   |  4 PagesLike most greek tragedies, Oedipus the King had a tragic hero whose downfall was the result of a tragic flaw. Oedipus, like other greek characters, did not see his errors until his reign was coming to an end. Oedipus, the man who saved Thebes did not understand that every good thing must come to an end. A tragic hero defined by Aristotle has five characteristics that lead to their downfall and their understanding of why the situation happened. Oedipus is the ideal tragic hero because his downfallRead MoreOedipus The King : A Classical Tragedy1272 Words   |  6 PagesSophocles’ Oedipus the King is a classical tragedy that derives its meaning through the experiences of its tragic hero, Oedipus. Throughout the play, the eminent characteristic of Oedipus is his ignorance of the truth that inevitably leads to his down fall. This ignorance of truth is a characteristic found within the Aristotelian definition of a tragedy. Tragedy, as defined by Aristotle in his Poetics, are imitations of actions and are not narrative. This means that tragedies are often demonstratedRead MoreDiscuss The Importance Of Oracles To Oedipus Rex1620 Words   |  7 Pages1. Discuss the importance of oracles to the ancient Greeks and specifically, to Oedipus Rex. Include a consideration about whether human actions are the result of predestination (Fate/Destiny) or free will. What does Sophocles seem to believe on this issue? After reading the passage throughly, I feel that for the ancient Greeks fate was an important aspect to their daily lives it shaped and formed human life. Fate has evolved during the years mainly because for the Greeks it was seen somethingRead MoreOedipus Rex And The Downfall Of Oedipus951 Words   |  4 PagesA man has many defining characteristics. Some characteristics are positive, and others negative. There are times a potentially positive characteristic may cause his eventual downfall. This concept could be directly related to the story Oedipus Rex. Aristotle once said something to the effect that the tragic hero falls into bad fortune because of some flaw in his character. Essentially, he is telling us those characters, like Oedipus, have flaws that, under normal circumstances, would be a beneficial