Swenson Vs. Quinn

David F. Swenson and Philip L. Quinn are two brilliant authors that share some of the same views on the meaning of life as one another. They both believe religion is the way for one to best live a moral life. Even though the share the same main ideas, they little differences that make them stand out. Swenson makes statement that man typically lives on ward but tends to reminisce back in time. By this he means that if there was no past, there could be a future looking at it through retrospect. As humans we have an ability other living creatures have which is self-awareness. At a young age we are trained in a way to remember the past and think about the future, but the ultimate way to control both of those things is to control the present time.
The view of life is more of what a person feels rather than what he sees. The spirit of the human holds the ability to have the attitude for someone to accomplish anything in life which could also include someone achieving a goal. Because of that, the view can’t be obtained through communication. Swenson states that the human expression is the key, because through expression man can show value to his existence. If a person asks someone what the view of life is, they can’t relate because they’re talking instead of experiencing so they might not agree with anything the person says. But by experiencing and showing self-worth it provides proof and how life really is. The life of a human with no happiness can be closely be described as “death in life”. All humans naturally want to live a happy life. That is why Swenson believes Christian religion is key, because happiness is so embodied in their believe. Swenson states, “So deeply grounded in human nature is the need for happiness, but ineradicable and imperative. Man is made for happiness; an essentially unhappy man has missed his goal, and has failed to realize his humanity.”(18) By this he is saying that humans crave it so much that Happiness is something that could never be fully
Quinn shares the same religious belief has Swenson, but with slightly different way of thinking in terms of living a happy life. Quinn shares the idea that there are two kinds of categories when thinking about the happiness of human life, Axiological and Teleological meaning. When someone lives an Axiological life they tend to do things that make themselves feel good even if may does harm to another person or thing. Next being living a Teleological life which is doing things that does good to others even it may not feel good to yourself. Even with that believe Quinn believes that those are independent ways of living so the human life must have more than one sort of meaning. The history of the human race could be a great way to look at the meaning of life and does so by looking at the Christian view of life. Even though not all humans lived a good life, at least a few have. When Quinn looks back on history through the Christian faith he finds this public figure Jesus Christ. Through the Christian faith, Jesus is portrayed as the figure that believers should build their morals off of. When people think of what Jesus does they only think of the Teleological things he had done and try to mimic it. What people fail to realize is that everything he did paid a price on him physically. The average human can’t take the Axiological things Jesus as done. The counter to that statement is that people may not feel good while doing the suffering but good will end up coming from