Nietzsche would definitely say that this play is the perfect example of what he talks about in the exerpt from class. He says it takes a true educator, a friend, (Katharine) to enable us to see the true side of ourselves and to begin the process of revealing that to others. Having the outside match the inside.
Epicurus would also like Katharine and Dr. Rank, although not Rank's approach to Nora about his true feelings, especially since she was having such trouble with herself and he knew his time left was limited.
Beauvoir would appreciate the way that Nora stood up for herself against her husband, especially after he said that he could change and he forgave her. She would have been better off at least even taking a break, but she gave him an indeterminant standpoint which allowed for her to take the time and measures she needed.
Plato would congratulate Nora for having very little help in seeing that she is not living the best life that she could possibly have. Even possibly all along she knew but just needed someone to come unlock her chains or give her the helping hand to stand up and walk out.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Blog 8
Okay, well I thought I was going to write my second essay on the point of educators giving the proper tools to help young minds find their true selves. But, today in class I changed my mind. The second topic that you explained in your blog made me realize that my skills would be much better utilized in discovering Nietzsche's true meanings. And possibly comparing/contrasting him to other philosophers. I really liked him and Aristotle and Epicurus. I guess when I start reading Nietzsche again this afternoon I will start to put together the puzzle. For me it's harder to talk abstractly about the philosophers unless I have concrete topics (pre-formulated questions and movies!) to talk about.
I guess it all comes back to me, after all. That's what the class is about, right? I do better when I explain and discuss, dissect.. whatever what I feel most comfortable doing. I know it will suit me better to stretch from what I am comfortable doing, but philosophy is a new thing to me and I don't feel that I have enough time during the rest of this class to do that with this particular type of learning and stretching my capabilities in that regard. So.. with that being said, I can definitely talk in my own words about what I read - sort of like I was bred, taught to do so through my previous classes unrelated to philosophy. Like I said before, in my AP English class about three years ago, we were told to write about a foreign concept (to us at the time in our schooling, that is) regarding an entire novel - using every concept of literature to explain this type of thing. Very vague, I know, but I was great at doing this. But! It definitely helped if I had thoroughly read, understood, and internalized the material and all of the underlying points. Regardless, I think that this type of writing will better suit my skills for this class.
I guess it all comes back to me, after all. That's what the class is about, right? I do better when I explain and discuss, dissect.. whatever what I feel most comfortable doing. I know it will suit me better to stretch from what I am comfortable doing, but philosophy is a new thing to me and I don't feel that I have enough time during the rest of this class to do that with this particular type of learning and stretching my capabilities in that regard. So.. with that being said, I can definitely talk in my own words about what I read - sort of like I was bred, taught to do so through my previous classes unrelated to philosophy. Like I said before, in my AP English class about three years ago, we were told to write about a foreign concept (to us at the time in our schooling, that is) regarding an entire novel - using every concept of literature to explain this type of thing. Very vague, I know, but I was great at doing this. But! It definitely helped if I had thoroughly read, understood, and internalized the material and all of the underlying points. Regardless, I think that this type of writing will better suit my skills for this class.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Blog 5
Well it took me quite a deal longer (5 min or so) to pinpoint the specifics for this entry than I thought it would. But now that I have a topic, it will all be downhill from here. I think that most people in our society fail to communicate with each other, most especially when it is crucial to the relationship of the interacting people. I learned this lesson the hard way at my last job. Obviously I lost my job, but it was due to mis-communication (so my boss says). I truly believe that she wanted to fire me for a while and just needed the reason good enough to do so. Regardless, I had taken the money out of the register and put it in an envelope to take back to the safe. At the same time, all of the customers in the store decided they wanted to check out at the same time. So, as my boss is walking to the counter to ring someone up at the other computer, I slipped the envelope under the counter. (I know now that I should have just handed it to her, told her I had it, etc. and I might have been able to save my job, but that's the lesson I learned!) After we had finished ringing all of the customers up, she saw the envelope and looked inside, then told me, "Great! You left this money sitting here? That's just great!" So, of course I didn't get a word in edge-wise (she is quite the over-bearing female dog) and she fired me when the next girl came in. She just said that she had told me several times about leaving the money lying around (which she hadn't) and asked for my keys and told me I no longer had a job. So obviously you see there were many points in this storyline that proper communication could have saved the boss-employee relationship. It's actually quite ironic because while I was being trained to do everything in the store (I was immediately promoted to assistant manager when she hired me), someone would forget to tell me a key bit of information. So I would mess something up and she would blame it on lack of communication. Go figure lady!
I think that everyone has this problem to this day. We are afraid to talk to each other because we are afraid that the result won't be the one we want. Sometimes we are even afraid that we might hurt the others feelings or it will make us feel less intelligent just to ask questions or tell someone else what to do. I think that this violates the natural law in many ways and the individuality as genius. The natural law in that (in the case of my job) we should treat people as ends in themselves and basically, I infringed on that for both of us, resulting the way it ended.
It's kind of a stretch to connect these ideas together, but I meet this problem every day in my life and I need to think more about how other people handle the same situations with regard to me and how to better myself in making the best decision for myself without putting anyone else down.
I think that everyone has this problem to this day. We are afraid to talk to each other because we are afraid that the result won't be the one we want. Sometimes we are even afraid that we might hurt the others feelings or it will make us feel less intelligent just to ask questions or tell someone else what to do. I think that this violates the natural law in many ways and the individuality as genius. The natural law in that (in the case of my job) we should treat people as ends in themselves and basically, I infringed on that for both of us, resulting the way it ended.
It's kind of a stretch to connect these ideas together, but I meet this problem every day in my life and I need to think more about how other people handle the same situations with regard to me and how to better myself in making the best decision for myself without putting anyone else down.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Just a thought...
I know there isn't an assignment for tonight, which is a great thing since Evans has band practice after he gets off work at 6. So while I'm sitting here waiting for the time to change into when I need to leave to pick him up, I'm contemplating what we discussed in class and the possible topics for my paper. (Btw- I just finished watching 'The Fall'. It's very cool with perspectives and storytelling and the psyches of the two main characters) So I was thinking about in class today, most of the philosophers talk about how society should be. Or even how, if we could create a brand new society, what it would take to make a good one for everyone and how everyone should be. But what about our society? There is no way that we can change our society with the numerous people that just don't care as much as we do about bettering ourselves and the people around us. So what do we do then? I guess that is why I am so concerned about in what way do I approach people about the many different problems I have with their character and the way they treat others. After all, (Rawls?) aren't we supposed to do what we can to prevent others from hurting another? That's all our society is and I would love to read more of the Beauvoir-type philosophers, although even she is a bit outdated on the subject, so you have to assume and apply her terms to the most modern situations. But regardless, it's not the best if only a few of us know what we and others should do, but we can't change the world or even our small communities if others are content with their lifestyles. I know that we need to show them that change is better and necessary and it's our duty if we know so, but you and I both know for a fact that some people (unfortunately even well-educated and even intelligent people!) think this "stuff" is ludicrous and worthless. So where do we go from that?
Blog 4
Several years ago (as in about four), I would have felt like this assignment was a huge task. But, that was when I was beginning my AP English class my senior year of high school. Dr. Hick used to make us connect all significant facts of a book, story, or poem into a 5-8 page paper, with little or no guide for a prompt. But, that is how you pass the AP tests and get credit for college. One time I was way off-track on the wrong tangent and she made me re-write the paper. How awful! - I had to come up with a completely new set of ideas for the same exact material! Anyway, I'm just stating that I am perfectly capable of doing this, it is just a matter of picking the right topic to dissect. Now, four years ago if someone asked me to philosophize(?) about any thing I'd like, I might talk about problems of others (mentally addictive drugs, bad habits, some other thing that bothered me about people) but now that I have been much closer to the real world for a little under three years, I think that my perspectives have changed a bit. I try to view people as generally good (yes, even before this class) but that they have learned traits or habits that aren't quite so good, and sometimes quite bad. Well, I'm not really sure where I'm going with this now, so maybe the prompt questions will help guide me.
One thing that I am anxious about (I'm prone to anxiety about any little thing, so this isn't too abnormal I suppose) is that when I use the text support, that I might not understand exactly what the philosopher was trying to mean in that particular statement and therefore, making my statements somewhat useless without the proper support.
As for the topic, I like what Dr. A said in class about my previous blog and the personality block that schools enable. My brother was a year ahead of me in high school and when it came to his senior picture, I remember mom saying, "Well they say they want you to be your own person, but everyone looks alike with the tuxes and dress tops that they put on everyone." And she's right, I think that the school wants to iron out the individuality in their class of successful students. To them, it's just: 256 seventeen- and eighteen-year-olds are receiving their high school diplomas because of our greatness, and we don't want them to make us look bad. But, it is significant to me if I graduate 18th in my class which allows me to receive more scholarships and offers to better under-graduate schools, and a lot of times these smaller schools who are competitive are looking for someone with a personality. It's the difference between book smarts and intelligence.
I'm not really sure where I will get with this paper, but somethings always turns up for me. Plus I have great resources in "friends" that enable me to open my mind to other possibilities I would have never encountered before.
One thing that I am anxious about (I'm prone to anxiety about any little thing, so this isn't too abnormal I suppose) is that when I use the text support, that I might not understand exactly what the philosopher was trying to mean in that particular statement and therefore, making my statements somewhat useless without the proper support.
As for the topic, I like what Dr. A said in class about my previous blog and the personality block that schools enable. My brother was a year ahead of me in high school and when it came to his senior picture, I remember mom saying, "Well they say they want you to be your own person, but everyone looks alike with the tuxes and dress tops that they put on everyone." And she's right, I think that the school wants to iron out the individuality in their class of successful students. To them, it's just: 256 seventeen- and eighteen-year-olds are receiving their high school diplomas because of our greatness, and we don't want them to make us look bad. But, it is significant to me if I graduate 18th in my class which allows me to receive more scholarships and offers to better under-graduate schools, and a lot of times these smaller schools who are competitive are looking for someone with a personality. It's the difference between book smarts and intelligence.
I'm not really sure where I will get with this paper, but somethings always turns up for me. Plus I have great resources in "friends" that enable me to open my mind to other possibilities I would have never encountered before.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Blog 2
Parents should be responsible for teaching their children the skills necessary for developing their own individuality as necessary through the different stages of life. Formal education should be responsible for teaching the facts and processes of the society – the formal “government” and career expectations. As for the happiness of the individual, it is the individual’s responsibility – this is to say with the two given circumstances. The only circumstance that requires action of the individual is that if he is unhappy. In which case, he must communicate with his parents, teachers, and even more specifically his “friends” to discover the aspect of this source of unhappiness and the steps that must follow to solve their unhappiness.
Unfortunately, our society does not already play this role through any of the three areas. As parents are becoming younger, teachers are becoming more restricted, and as true “friends” are harder to find and keep, there is less of a concern for individual happiness. Instead, what is happening more often is that from the government’s educational system is more concerned with the happiness of the majority and/or advancement to the next success. Which, if someone is happy and good at fixing cars or working construction, then furthering their education in the field of, let’s say, mathematics, is just a waste of their time and assets. In this way, our society hinders individuals in that everyone is expected to at least graduate the basic bachelors system and possibly even a masters before they can be considered worth to their society, regardless of their originality.
Also, aside from the above examples, conformity to a “mould” of a character (I love the quote from John Mill, “Persons of genius are, ex ri termini, more individual than any other people – less capable, consequently, of fitting themselves, without hurtful compression, into any of the small number of moulds which society provides in order to save its members the trouble of forming their own character.”) is becoming the “cool” thing to do in schools – leaving the original individuals by themselves to develop alone for the most part. Which, as we all know (or should) from experience, being alone constantly is hardly a source of happiness. And just as important as it is for the emotional well-being of the individual to have friends is also the aspect of discussing important matters with “friends” to help with the development of the individual.
The moral obligation we have to develop ourselves in order to be happy is that (for an example, this can be applied to other situations) if we are indeed capable of being original, then we are breaking the natural laws applied to Mill’s views in that we are not preventing others from doing harm to themselves and others – which could be prevented if only by convincing them that they need development in order to more fully understand and help themselves and society.
So, since society has failed in these regards, we must rebel (although peacefully) and prove that we are original in that we can improve our own lives and even more so the lives of others in order to be able to live in a society that is non-conforming and beneficial and most of all, so unobtrusive that it can be controlled by individuals.
Unfortunately, our society does not already play this role through any of the three areas. As parents are becoming younger, teachers are becoming more restricted, and as true “friends” are harder to find and keep, there is less of a concern for individual happiness. Instead, what is happening more often is that from the government’s educational system is more concerned with the happiness of the majority and/or advancement to the next success. Which, if someone is happy and good at fixing cars or working construction, then furthering their education in the field of, let’s say, mathematics, is just a waste of their time and assets. In this way, our society hinders individuals in that everyone is expected to at least graduate the basic bachelors system and possibly even a masters before they can be considered worth to their society, regardless of their originality.
Also, aside from the above examples, conformity to a “mould” of a character (I love the quote from John Mill, “Persons of genius are, ex ri termini, more individual than any other people – less capable, consequently, of fitting themselves, without hurtful compression, into any of the small number of moulds which society provides in order to save its members the trouble of forming their own character.”) is becoming the “cool” thing to do in schools – leaving the original individuals by themselves to develop alone for the most part. Which, as we all know (or should) from experience, being alone constantly is hardly a source of happiness. And just as important as it is for the emotional well-being of the individual to have friends is also the aspect of discussing important matters with “friends” to help with the development of the individual.
The moral obligation we have to develop ourselves in order to be happy is that (for an example, this can be applied to other situations) if we are indeed capable of being original, then we are breaking the natural laws applied to Mill’s views in that we are not preventing others from doing harm to themselves and others – which could be prevented if only by convincing them that they need development in order to more fully understand and help themselves and society.
So, since society has failed in these regards, we must rebel (although peacefully) and prove that we are original in that we can improve our own lives and even more so the lives of others in order to be able to live in a society that is non-conforming and beneficial and most of all, so unobtrusive that it can be controlled by individuals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
