“Which is the most universal human characteristic: fear, or laziness?” (Waking Life)
I think that the universal human characteristic is definatley fear because I think it is easier to be proactive than it is to be brave. And even when someone is brave it is not that they are not afraid. Rather that they are simply not immobilized by something extremely traumatic. Everyone in the world is afraid of something. It could be something as simple as the boogie man or something as big as death itself. Everyone experiences fear at least once in their life. Fear is instinctual. It is used to help us protect ourselves by causing us to fight or flee. I agree with quotation.
"Sanity is a madness put to good uses; waking life is a dream controlled." (Santayana)
I think that the quotation means that life is similar to a dream but simply more controlled. I however would counter that it is the opposite. That a dream is simply a more controlled version of life itself. In life your choices are limited, people have an influence on what you can and cannot do. If Life is the only sanity I would rather be insane, besides who doesn't want whatever they can imagine. And life isn't always put to good use. Occasionally you get serial killers. Unless you have some pretty nasty nightmares I think the dream world is a bit more hospitable. In addition I think that some dreams have been pretty influencial on my life. Simply unconscious thought is good for the soul.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Monday, November 2, 2009
In the literary works truth is difficult to put a definite label on. Dickinson's three poems seem to speak a lot of God and how he is truth. In "How to Tell a True War Story," O'Brien makes up a story to prove a true point about war and nature in general. In Wolves in the Walls truth turns out to be the unexpected and everyone is shocked when a little girl was actually correct. Finally in I know the Moon the animals disagree what the moon truly is and even when man shows them that the moon is simply dust the animals can agree it is not based on their own personal beliefs. All of the poems offer very different ideas of what truth really is however none of them disagree or contradict each other. All of the works of literature seem to focus on the individuals interpretation of events and circumstances as what dictates truth.
I enjoyed I know the Moon by Gaiman. i thought that there was a good concept behind it because the author had contradictory points thrown into an argument but when man said that they were simply making something out of nothing the animals were able to agree with one another that it wasn't simply a ball of dust but something more to them. Although they all thought that the moon was something different they were willing to accept eachother's beliefs and their own without conflict. I really enjoyed the story and wish that maybe some of the older generations could learn to put petty differences aside and be more willing to agree to disagree without the need for senseless violence.
I enjoyed I know the Moon by Gaiman. i thought that there was a good concept behind it because the author had contradictory points thrown into an argument but when man said that they were simply making something out of nothing the animals were able to agree with one another that it wasn't simply a ball of dust but something more to them. Although they all thought that the moon was something different they were willing to accept eachother's beliefs and their own without conflict. I really enjoyed the story and wish that maybe some of the older generations could learn to put petty differences aside and be more willing to agree to disagree without the need for senseless violence.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
In Issac Asimov’s “Lecture on Humanity”, given in 1973, he makes many predictions about the 21st century. He says, among other things, we’ll need population control, a shift in our view of education, a change in food production, and we’ll have to realize “we’re a world without war” (10).
As a young, intelligent member of the 21st century, what do you think of Asimov’s predictions? Have any of them come true? If they haven’t, should we work toward making any of them a reality? Why or why not?
What other elements of Asimov’s lecture appeal to you? What do you make of his humor? Of his anecdotes? Explain what we can learn from his pointed sarcasm and from some of the stories he shares with us.
And, finally, how does this lecture reflect qualities of synoptic philosophy and critical analysis? Give a specific example.
We’re all excitedly awaiting your response to these questions. Make sure you’ve posted your blog by midnight on Tuesday, September 22nd. Also, it would behoove you to reexamine your classmates’ responses to the previous post. Some of them are without commentary; others recently posted.
I disagree with Asimov. I believe that he is looking at the world in a very idealistic way. Although everything he says is very intelligent, convincing, and impressive, his ideas are just about about as plausible as a Utopian society. Solving the worlds problems by simply changing our lives is simply not possible without serious action from a person in power. The government represents us and politics is simply a grown-up-game of staying in power. No government leader is going to sacrifice his or her political career for something they deem unimportant. America, other countries, and even human beings ourselves will always deal with more pressing matters first. Even though he does warn us of the dangers of the future, nothing will be done until trouble is banging at our back door. Also his predictions don't sound realistic. We must face the fact that as long as there is desire, lust, and greed the world will never be without war and violence.
I did think Asimov was very funny and appealed to the people. He was easy to relate to and very charismatic. He is definitely a very good speaker.
Asimov used synoptic philosophy by gathering evidence for his ideas from a variety of sources in science and literature. He used critical analysis by using his ideas to draw conclusions and to connect information from different sources.
As a young, intelligent member of the 21st century, what do you think of Asimov’s predictions? Have any of them come true? If they haven’t, should we work toward making any of them a reality? Why or why not?
What other elements of Asimov’s lecture appeal to you? What do you make of his humor? Of his anecdotes? Explain what we can learn from his pointed sarcasm and from some of the stories he shares with us.
And, finally, how does this lecture reflect qualities of synoptic philosophy and critical analysis? Give a specific example.
We’re all excitedly awaiting your response to these questions. Make sure you’ve posted your blog by midnight on Tuesday, September 22nd. Also, it would behoove you to reexamine your classmates’ responses to the previous post. Some of them are without commentary; others recently posted.
I disagree with Asimov. I believe that he is looking at the world in a very idealistic way. Although everything he says is very intelligent, convincing, and impressive, his ideas are just about about as plausible as a Utopian society. Solving the worlds problems by simply changing our lives is simply not possible without serious action from a person in power. The government represents us and politics is simply a grown-up-game of staying in power. No government leader is going to sacrifice his or her political career for something they deem unimportant. America, other countries, and even human beings ourselves will always deal with more pressing matters first. Even though he does warn us of the dangers of the future, nothing will be done until trouble is banging at our back door. Also his predictions don't sound realistic. We must face the fact that as long as there is desire, lust, and greed the world will never be without war and violence.
I did think Asimov was very funny and appealed to the people. He was easy to relate to and very charismatic. He is definitely a very good speaker.
Asimov used synoptic philosophy by gathering evidence for his ideas from a variety of sources in science and literature. He used critical analysis by using his ideas to draw conclusions and to connect information from different sources.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Meaning-Making Machines
I agree with Kristol.that if the community believes itself to be meaningless and unimportant that the society will fail. Human beings live lives guided by emotion. Everyone wants a purpose in their life and something to work for. In a society where people believe that they have no purpose and that their life is meaningless will simply drag itself down into the ground. Adults would have no reason to get up in the morning to go to work and children wouldn’t have any desire to go to college or to make something of their lives if they think that it doesn’t count for anything. A society that believes that their lives are meaningless is a society doomed to failure. Everyone has their own role and responsibilities that make them a critical part to the functionality of a community.
More times than not it is what people believe about themselves, rather than what others believe of them, that makes the difference. When people are confident in their abilities and their ideas it can create a placebo effect that will govern every one of their actions. Even somebody deemed unintelligent by society can become the next president of the United States (haha) if he or she believes in himself. The mind is very possible and can make or break people. Despair will surely lead to destruction whereas confidence will lead to prosperity.
More times than not it is what people believe about themselves, rather than what others believe of them, that makes the difference. When people are confident in their abilities and their ideas it can create a placebo effect that will govern every one of their actions. Even somebody deemed unintelligent by society can become the next president of the United States (haha) if he or she believes in himself. The mind is very possible and can make or break people. Despair will surely lead to destruction whereas confidence will lead to prosperity.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)