The actions are adequately matched.
- A life of suffering will lead to a life with religious ascetics. However, it is seen as one of the extremes that should be avoided because self mortification is unprofitable and unworthy.
- A life as an Hindu Prince leads to a life given to pleasures. This is seen as the other extreme because it also leads to being unworthy and unprofitable.
- Meditating under the Bodhi Tree leads to the path of enlightment. It is what leads to "The Middle Way" between "Eternalism" (which is denied by Buddhism) and "Annihilationism" (Budhism accepts the fact of existence. Therefore things can be destroyed.)
By regulating laws and using checks and balances in society by hiring police
<span>In a way, I admire Filmer. He was a maverick. Very well educated and about as smart as any of the Enlightenment thinkers, he happened to think they were all wrong. And he spent a lot of time and energy writing and telling them that they were wrong.
His big idea, that he defended, is the Divine Right of Kings. Think Louis the 14th. He is one of the best examples of DRoK. He was king because god made hime king. Everybody agreed and that's how things were. If you challenged the king about anything, watch your head. It may be rolling on the ground.
(Watch Man In the Iron Mask if you can. It's fiction, but Leonardo diCaprio does an excellent king of France.)
I'm thinking this question is part of an Enlightenment unit. So you probably don't need that explained. John Locke and others of the time had the idea that people give consent to the government, have basic rights, power should not be concentrated all in one person and other ideas that made it into the Declaration of Independence and Constitution.</span>