Art began in the service of ritual. Over time, art gradually emancipated itself from its obedience to ritual, and this transformation had profound implications on the perception of art. One crucial concept that played a significant role in this evolution is the idea of an artistic aura, as proposed by Walter Benjamin. As art moved away from its ritualistic and religious foundations, the advent of technological reproducibility further reshaped its spiritual nature, and brought questions around its authenticity and social significance. In this essay, I will explore the transition of artistic creation from its ritualistic origins, the role of the artistic aura and the impact of technological reproducibility on the authenticity and social significance of art. My discussion will center on the idea that although the reproducibility of art has provided the opportunity for broader participation and the democratisation of artistic experience and expression – the loss of aura has deprived society of a sense of sacredness in art.

During the 18th century, a new moral perspective called moral sentiment theory emerged, primarily in Scotland and later spreading more widely. The controversial 18th-century Scottish philosopher, David Hume, argued that moral judgments and a sense of moral duty are not based on reason but are grounded in emotions. Hume proposed that our imaginative and empathetic capacities give rise to moral sentiments; emotional responses such as compassion, sympathy, or pity towards those who suffer or are mistreated by others. According to Hume, these feelings are the foundation of all moral judgments and actions. Thus, morality is based on affective responses, with reason serving primarily to rationalise and justify the directions indicated by our emotional reactions. However, critics argue that Hume's theory of moral sentiment is unreliable, unrealistic, and not an adequate basis for moral duty. In this essay, I will examine Hume's theory, explore some of the criticism it has faced and explain why I believe that while moral sentiments may indeed influence our moral judgements and behaviours, they may not provide an adequate basis for moral duty.

Death is a universal and unavoidable part of the human condition that presents some essential philosophical questions. While we can be confident that death will happen to us all, it remains ambiguous because we do not comprehensively know what death is nor what happens to our consciousness after we die. In Western culture, we tend to reject death and ignore it until it is at our doorstep. Yet death is a fundamental part of life and a crucial component of who we are. In this essay, I will explore how our attitude towards our own mortality shapes how we live. Whether we believe in an afterlife, karmic rebirth, or nothing at all, facing our own mortality gives our lives structure and meaning. Coming to terms with death is a necessary step towards living a life of authentic purpose in the present.

The predicament of human suffering is an issue that surfaces in most of the world's religions. Suffering impacts us all in one way or another, and the experience of it can be hard to reconcile with a benevolent and loving God or universe. In this essay, I will explore the role and nature of suffering from two diverse spiritual traditions: Christianity and Hinduism. Essentially, Christians view suffering as a consequence of free will, and Hindus view suffering as a result of karma; thus, the notion of causality features in both traditions. Furthermore, although these religions are significantly different in their beliefs, structure and traditions, their approaches to dealing with suffering and its role in shaping the soul's destiny contain some strikingly common themes.

According to Buddhism, there is no permanent self or soul – a contradiction to the Hindu idea of an eternal true self or atman. Yet, both religions believe in rebirth. Hence, one may contest the paradoxical nature of the Buddhist doctrine of reincarnation and question who is reborn and responsible for the karma incurred in previous lifetimes if there is no soul. In this essay, I will endeavour to untangle this dichotomy and argue that although Buddhism thoroughly illustrates life's transient nature, the Hindu concept of atman is more plausible within the context of multiple lives. Nevertheless, both philosophies explain different facets of a larger truth. Furthermore, multiple spiritual vantage points are oftentimes necessary to get closer to the truth. Opposing teachings can only attempt to explain the complex nature of existence, which is ultimately impenetrable by the human intellect.

Narcissism is a word thrown around casually to describe any behaviour that is self-centred and egotistical; however, the true meaning of the word, its origins and its pathological features are not commonly understood. Whether secondary narcissism results from a dysfunctional upbringing, genetics, a capitalistic society, or multiple other factors is still debatable. However, it is universally accepted by psychoanalytic theorists that secondary narcissism is pathological due to its negative impact on the people involved with the narcissistic individual as well as to society. In this essay, I will examine two psychoanalytic theories on the features and origins of secondary narcissism and why it is tendentially pathological.

This essay will explain Freud's theory of dream-work and its operative mechanisms. The analysis of dreams forms a significant part of Freud's understanding of the unconscious mind. Freud argued that the superstitious beliefs surrounding dreams possessing hidden meaning were, in fact, closer to the truth than the popular scientific opinion of the time – which was that dreams were mere physiological processes. Freud believed the psyche could express itself best in sleep, allowing thoughts from the unconscious to emerge freely.

Simone Weil was a French philosopher and political activist who lived a relatively short but spirited life between 1909-1943. Uncommon for a left-wing intellectual, she became increasingly mystical throughout her life. Weil's intellectual focus on attention is one of her most significant philosophical ideas. For Weil, attention was both an ethical exploration and a metaphysical theme. Weil's concept of attention is not only based on abstract philosophical theory; it contains the experience of profound and embodied empathy. This essay will explore Weil's notion of attention and how it varies from the general understanding of the term. Furthermore, I will probe the relevance of her notion and highlight the significance of paying proper attention in today's world.