The Beauty of Language

by Yza Siy

One of the most striking things that was said for me in the lecture last Thursday was how “ What’s important is the talking to and not just the about”. It is not all about knowledge and information but the acknowledgement talking to/ talking with another person brings forth.

I think this can be related to our past lecture on the concept of the Broken World that was presented by Gabriel Marcel. One of his central observations about life and experience in general is that we are living in this “Broken World”. Day in day out, we find ourselves too preoccupied with the daily grind that life brings. We tend to focus on our goals, our home works, tests or anything that distracts us reflecting and being-with-others.  We become too focused on what’s being said rather than to whom and how we say things.


The language that we began to master is a language that forgets what it means to have respect for the other. We forget that the beauty of language is that it allows us to understand not just the present but also something of the past and possibly future of the person we are talking to. Language is something intimate. As what was said in class, it is something capable of bringing out reality and I think this is something we all experience. We all meet different types of people and this particular someone tells us something. Whatever this person shared speaks of his past, possibly how this person will act in the future and therefore something of the present. With the simple act of talking with another person we are able to know the other in three ways and this experience plays as important role as to who we become. After all, who we are is a sum of all the people we’ve met and became acquainted with.

Can We Reach the Absolute Truth and Find the Absolute Meaning?

by Jun Hyeok Park

To answer the question if we, as human, can reach the absolute truth, we have the consider what exactly the question is talking about by looking at the word "the Absolute Truth" and "the Absolute Meaning". The word Truth and Meaning may make sense and are self-explanatory by the words itself but the additional word "Absolute" in front of them makes itquite vague.

If the word "Absolute" here refers to the unimaginative and the undefinite viewpoint of God, then we can consider that the question itself is falsely stated. In this sense, the question can never be answered by any human being because it is asking the viewpoint of God which the human beings will never know. Since we cannot imagine what it is to see in the view of God, the question is not anymore valid for us.

Then what if it refers to something 'final' and 'finite'? Then we can pose the answer, "maybe". First of all, truth that we are talking about is not universal. People have different sets of minds and ways of thinking; thus, it is not simple enough to generalize if the truth and meaning can be found to every single person in this world. Unfortunately, there is not a mathematical formula to solve the x in this case which means that any scientific attempts to answer the question may be difficult. Second, we have to recall that the process of finding the truth and meaning is endless. It is an endless journey to find the meaning and truth; therefore, there is no such thing as 'final' or 'finite' answer to it. Lastly, we as human beings may be limited but we are not just a finite being stuck in our own body. The endless journey to find the truth may 'free' us from the limits and make us to see the world different which only can be derived from own will and experience, not by others.

Now, considering the points I posted above, the answer to the question can be either yes or no. Rather than fighting each other with yes or no, it is better to settle down with the answer "negatively maybe".

Inconsistency of the Self

by Andrew Gallardo

The past week has not been an easy one for me. A lot of things happened. And once again, I let the time flew past me without cherishing some of the moments in it. Though right now I am not supposed to write how I long for a carefree life, or how I wish to live a day without worrying about any duties or obligations, for in reality, I have long accepted the truth that I have chosen this busy life, and consequently, the stressful lifestyle that comes along with it. Rather, I wish to share the actualization of the learning that I had from my philosophy class. The concept called the “Duality of Self” by Rene Descartes.

The “Duality of Self” concept ascertains that men are formed of two entities- that of the body called Res Extensa and the soul called Res Cogitans. It is the soul that is the indubitable “I”, and the body is the extension of this certain “I”. Now I would not reiterate and discuss all the points of Rene Descartes here, for with all certainty, I know a lot of people knows more than I do in terms of his Philosophy. But I am just perplexed at the mystery of this “dual” self- of how he tries to separate the concept of body and soul. Does that mean that a body and soul is distinct and separate? Can they live apart from each other? Is it possible to “live” even of just one of them is possessed?

And unexpectedly, amidst a normal day for a person with a lifestyle made out of routines, there was a sudden realization that made me understood this concept of “Dual self”. While doing my marketing paper past midnight last Thursday, when everyone at home were already sleeping (or at least I though they were for they were already in their rooms), there occurred in me an urge to sleep. My eyes were starting to close even though I do not will it to be. My body was already starting to relax on my soft bed even though my laptop was still on my lap. And I was starting to give in to the seduction of my body. Until I remembered my marketing paper. And I remembered how much effort our group exerted just to have even a little data for our paper. I could not let them down, I thought. They counted on me and for sure, they were doing their part too. But most of all, I could not let my parents down by giving them a failing or a barely passing grade despite all the efforts they exerted just to send me to a good school.

At that particular moment, I was lost within myself. I was caught in between of two wills of myself. A part of me wanted to sleep and relax even just for a night because I have been sleeping only for 5 to 6 hours for the past couple of days, but a part of me whispered that it is not the right thing to do at the moment. And perhaps this is the concretization of Descartes “Dual Self”. My body longs for a sleep, yet my soul reminds me of my obligation in this world.

Being limited as we are, perhaps we just have to live with this two wills inside of us. In this world, it is so easy to fall to bodily desires- sex, wealth, power and a lot of excessive vices. It is part of our imperfect being. Yet, we must, at least, seek and learn to balance these with the calling of our soul. I dare not to be adventurous and try to remove myself from this body so that I would no longer have bodily passions, wills or desires, for God knows how I love to live a life inside my comfort zone. And I honestly believe that these malicious desires do not all come from the body- there is an unexplainable calling too to fall out of these desires as much as there is a calling to do good. Perhaps the best that I can do is to just make these two being within me reconcile and unite in doing well. It is all about practice, maybe. And it would take time.

The Butterfly Effect

by Corrine Cheng



I was watching this film about a man who talked about different people who came by a coffee shop. There was an old man, a homeless man, a perverted man and the pink man (you can research about him in google) If you would notice, these people are totally different in the way they have lived their lives and it made me think of something about class last Thursday.

The main discussion was about existence and how one can prove he/she existed with his/ her lived experiences. How does this related to the video above? These people mentioned have lived differently which resulted to how they are at that particular moment. In a way, it shows how much experience can affect one’s existence. According to the narrator, “…I can sort of understood them in a weird kind of way.”  He mentioned possible scenarios about how he could be that kind of person had he lived differently. In here, the mentioned experiences kind of reminded me about the different people around me. We each are currently living different experiences. There are people who are happy now but there are also people who are sad. There are people who are angry but there are also people who are guilty. In a way, I can relate to these people. I have experienced happiness, loneliness, anger and guilt. But this relation made me realize something. I’m sure even great people like Mahatma Gandhi have experience these feelings. Does it mean that my mere existence can actually mean something?


It now brings me to the questions that I usually ask myself, “Why am I here? Why do I have to exist in this world? What is my purpose in life? Do I even have a purpose in life?” Basically, it questions my own existence. But it also brings about new questions like “Do people still want me here? Am I actually affecting some other life or none at all?” These questions now connect to other people. In a way, it makes me think about the people around me and whether my existence is important enough. Other people say that we exist to affect another person’s life whether big or small. It actually reminds me of the Butterfly Theory. In this theory, it explains that even a small butterfly can affect the world by its choice of flying to the left or the right. If only the existence and choices of a mere butterfly affect the world, does it mean that even my existence and choices can affect the world? I hope so.

What You Do In Life Echoes In Eternity

by Reiley Udasco

From the two meetings last week, what struck me the most was the methodic doubt that sir mentioned. How we are supposed to doubt everything until we arrive to the truth, which we are not to doubt. To be able to arrive to this, we are first to doubt our senses by doubting if we are aware of our surroundings like a mirage. We begin to bracket everything when start to doubt everything, probably also God. After continuous doubting, we arrive at a point where we become aware that we really doubting everything, but there is a limit where even when we doubt, we can’t doubt that we are doubting and thinking beings. We are a thinking thing in which we can be assure of.

As we began the discussion on of the “Third Meditation,” sir emphasized how important the “I” is, how it is embodied and that it is supposed to be affirmed by us. By affirming this, we know that we are thinking. Thinking in a sense where we doubt, affirm, know, love, etc. Also to have a better sense of this, Descartes encourages us to pause for a moment. We are to take the time to listen and reflect to ourselves. Focus the world that is embodied in us… “Kalooban.”

Also In class sir contrasted Descartes and Marcel’s Philosophy. Where in Descartes, we are closed off from other people. Also Decart doubted so much that he is only sure of himself and uses God as a guarantee. Also he mentioned that reality is greater than something that we can measure, goes beyond the objectifiable or mathematical(?). But with Marcel in the other hand, he affirms that our existence co-exists with other people. Also, that we are participating in a world with other people. We are to be social to be ale to enter society.

I believe that at times we are all Descartes’ where we tend to forget about what’s happening outside or that there are external factors (like people) out there and concentrate too much on ourselves.

“TAO,TAO,TAO…” was the main lesson my third year high school history teacher taught me. We cannot live alone, we need others in our lives to be able to find ourselves more. Life is a give and take relationship.

Last thing, never forget God. initivm sapiente timor domini- The beginning of wisdom is fear of the Lord.

Scars

by Mary Ann Docuyanan

I am very fond of Jessica Hagy’s blog posts on Indexed and the articles she had written for Forbes. It’s really interesting (at least for me) and in a way, creative to use such a medium to relate life experiences through Venn diagrams and graphs which are commonly used for mathematics. As we discussed the concept of existence and pondered on the question, “When are the moments that you feel you exist?”, I remembered one of her posts entitled Marks of authenticity:

Life’s experiences are always described in opposites: good or bad, happy or sad, positive or negative. In Jessica Hagy’s interpretation, one “mark of authenticity” is that the more “scars” a person has had, there is a greater “proof” that he/she has been alive and I think it’s true and a good interpretation of one’s existence because we will inevitably go through this. I wouldn’t be able to say that I felt happiness unless I had experienced sadness or say I am thankful for finally achieving something I hoped for if I don’t know what failures and disappointments are. Some scars may appear skin-deep only because of shallow reasons such as failing a short quiz and literally-speaking, getting a paper cut – momentary negative events. It shouldn’t be forgotten that others have scars that go deeper and offer a profound and life-changing experiences such as death of a family member, separation of parents, being diagnosed with cancer or being let go from a job in a very difficult time.

But life is a gift and it is beautiful. All these undesirables will not be able to diminish life’s beauty and a person’s mystery. It makes it more real and precious. It tells us a person’s story because the good and the bad things shaped us to who we are now. It marks a person’s strength to survive in this broken world that we live in. As the saying goes, “These times are hard but it will pass.” What we have is a lifetime of existence dealing with all kinds of experiences and I think, to make the most out of life, we should explore what life has to offer and do things that will make us fully alive – to exist in the philosophical sense that we are being.

If you want to find out more about Jessica Hagy’s work, visit her pages: Jessica Hagy (http://jessicahagy.info/), Indexed (http://thisisindexed.com/) and her Forbes contributions on leadership and motivation (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jessicahagy/).

Bird's Eye View

by Jeni Toreja

The thing about perspective is that the slightest shift can lead to the most drastic change.

A pregnant wildebeest unable to run as fast as usual may fear for both her life and her child’s, but the hungry lion’s only concern would be his empty stomach. A woman with high hopes and fantasies of marriage may be completely ecstatic about romance, but the man working as a lawyer with divorce cases would shake his head and disagree with slight pity. An overjoyed student mayhappilyshare about his recently aced test, but the one next to him who did not get a wink of sleep the night before to cram for a paper would probably find him irritating. A singer who practiced many months before a performance and was extremely nervous may miss a note or two from stage fright, but the audience watching from television screens across the globe would comment on her lack of talent.  A weak, starving and homeless child may knock on the windows of cars to beg for money or food, but the driver’s thoughts would comprise only the fact that he was late for work, and ignore him.

And Icarus, fell right from the sky with his melted wings of wax may drown in both the water and his thirst for freedom, but the rest of the world would simply carry on as usual. Perspective steers thinking and I wonder about the heights one can reach the moment he attempts to consciously shift his perspective away from its center—himself.As humans, our thoughts are based on how we see things, how we hear, smell, taste, feel; and it is when we push out this centered thinking that we are able to achieve a higher level of consciousness.

Back when we knew little about the world we lived in, people shifted their perspective and struggled to see everything from a higher point of view. This later turned into an art, as maps continuously evolved and people continuously explored the lands in an attempt to draw it all out on paper. It makes me wonder how vast the world must have looked when there was no science to explain it, to be able to ignite a thirst for knowledge that pushed people to see more, to learn more, to create maps that could only vaguely portray their struggle to shape lands that seemed endless.

However, it is in this journey of a shifting perspective that we learn there is a limit to just how far and how high we can see things. Marcel’s take on truth struck me because no matter how hard we search and attempt to climb up for a bird’s eye view, there is one perspective that we cannot attain, and that is God’s. We can never truly know all there is to know, to see as God sees and perhaps this veiled mystery is what keeps people thirsty.


It is through the shifting perspective, just as an artist would look at his model in many different angles before painting or sculpting its replica, that we bring our center out, learn and struggle to learn more by climbing the ladder to a bird’s eye view—a ladder with a top we can never reach but with an ascending journey that inevitably makes us see the world differently.

The Rifleman's Creed

by Justin Descallar





Last night, I was watching one of Hollywood’s greatest movies, The Fullmetal Jacket. It was a satirical movie about the Vietnam War and US military culture at that time. At one point in the film the marines under Sergeant Major Hartmann was preparing to sleep, they climbed up their bunks and braised their rifles as if they were hugging them. After that, they began to recite the Rifleman’s Creed. 
“This is my rifle. There are many like it, and this one is mine”
This line made me remember about our lesson of the on the body and of the mind, a topic which is I am racking all my wits against to fully conceptualize. This might be an erroneous description of the topic but perhaps the experience of it is similar. Using the similarity of the experience of having rifle maybe I can approach the feeling of what it is to be fully aware of the subjectivity of my body. Similar to the rifle of the marines in the film, I have a body. There are many other human bodies like this, but this one is mine. Ever since I was born, I am with my body. At first, I did not know who he was. But as I traversed through life with it I began to realize his characteristics. I realized that he did not like to exercise and he was physically weak. Even if “I” know that I can do more, he just wouldn’t run. I, the ever enthusiastic consciousness had to wait for my body to pick himself up. The next lines struck me more.
“My rifle, without me, is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless.”
Without my body, I am useless. I cannot proclaim my existence and be self-aware of the things around me. I cannot run, function and do the things that I love without him. Hence, I have to work out a working agreement with him so we can function well in life. I promised him to sleep a good eight hours a day in exchange of all the abuse that he would have to endure when I am in class, at the playground, and everywhere else my lackadaisical self would want. We would eat a healthy meal three times a day so he could have the sustenance to carry on. However, these feeling of care is not one sided. I know that my body also looks out for me and realized my importance. Without me, he wouldn’t be able to humanly exist similar to that I cannot without him. He tells me when I am in pain and see the world both literally and figuratively.He takes care of me allowing himself to be directed and used so that together we might truly live.
“My rifle and I know that what counts in this war is not the rounds we fire, the noise of our burst, nor the smoke we make. We know that it is the hits that count. We will hit...”
Without my body, I cannot truly philosophise and truly love the sophon. I cannot find my place in the natural order in the universe. Without each other, he and I cannot reach our full potential. Hence, we have to stick together.
“My rifle is human, even as I, because it is my life.”
This line made me remember the relationship between my body and my mind. Without my body, I cannot truly be human because there is no divide between my body and mind. “I” is not only my consciousness but of the oneness of my body and of my mind. Now I am at a crossroads. In this train of thought, I have been trying to treat my body as a subject as the marines have treated their rifles. I have tried to create a bond with my body similar to that of my bond with other humans. However, there is a mistake in my reasoning. By construing my body as a person, I am separating it from myself but there should be no gap. My body is not my bestfriend. He is I. Now I am back to square one. 
In all honesty, I’m really having a hard time construing my mind and my body as having no gap or being “one”. When I revisited this poem from Full Metal Jacket, I had an insight on maybe what Marcel was trying to talk about. Perhaps this is not the most accurate description of the subjectivity of the human person as being both in mind and body but I am getting closer. Am I?

Salaminate

by Dominic Echiverri

No it's no secret that all of us are angry in one way or another. But they fall in different degrees.
To bring the best out of this note, I find it's best that I say it in Filipino. As Father Ferriols said about philosophizing in Filipino, "It's more effective."

Alam mo yung ikaw yung "masayahin" o "palatrip" na tao sa mga kaibigan mo? Siguro natural kang ganyan. At magandang isipin na sadyang napunta sa'yo ang pagpansin ng tao na para bang wala kang problema sa mundo. At siguro nga wala kang problema, pero sadyang galit ka lang na tao.

"Angsty" sa Ingles.

Siguro ito ay dahil nanggagaling ito sa taong galit lang talaga. Parang pampigil lang siya talaga ng galit. Halimbawa, alam mong may mga karanasan kang nalampasan o dinadaraanan at alam mong galit ka, pero dahil sa tuwa mo lang at kasama mo mga kaibigan mo o ibang tao eh nagpapadala ka na lang sa tuwa. Kaya siguro kung ayaw mong magpakamatay at gusto mong masaya ang dating sa buhay, bababad ka sa samahan ng mga kaibigan o kapamilya o sa isang masayahing lugar o kaganapan. Hindi naman ito agad-agaran na masasabing perpektong katotohanan kung ibabase lamang sa mga istatistiko, pero mas maraming nagpapakamatay sa Europa kesa sa Pilipinas. Bukod siguro sa klima, e kapag namatay ka, maglalaro lang ng baraha at mag-iinuman ang mga katropa mo sa lamay mo. Katuwaan pa rin; wala man lang pakinabang ang pagiging melodramatiko mo sa pagiging emo mo.

Kaya lumalabas ang isang problematiko, isang ideya, isang kabalintunaan: tayo ba ay masaya dahil ayaw nating magalit? Mas nagiging galit ba tayo sa loob habang sa panlabas o sa kamalayan natin eh masaya tayo? Ika nga nila: ang mga masiyahing tao ay may kinikimkim na sakit o pagdusa. Hindi ko naman sinasabing otomatiko at tiyak itong totoo, dahil wala naman akong kinikimkim na sakit o pagdusa. Pero may mga kinaiinisan ako. Tulad mo, Janet Napoles, mamatay ka nang baboy ka pagkatapos kang mahanap ng taumbayan. At ang mga kasing-dumi rin ni Janet na mga tamad dyan na hindi naman nakikibaka sa pagbabago o sa pagsalita sa mga isyu ng bansa pero kung magsalita, akala mo mga political analyst. Manood na lang kayo ng Chicser concert sa SM na malapit sa inyo.

Siguro dapat kausapin minsan ang sarili, o magbalik-tanaw, o pag-isipan ang sarili. O di kaya'y magsalamin. Oo, magsalamin. Yung ginagawa mo sa kuwarto o sa banyo para tignan ang itsura mo. Ngayon lalimin natin. Magsalamin, tignan ang itsura't magtanong: ano na ba ako, sino na ba ako, at ako ba ay ako?
Sabi ni Socrates "An unreflected life is not worth living". "Walang kwenta ang buhay na hindi napagsalaminan" ang aking pagsalin rito, gamit ang salitang "pananalamin". O sa Ingles na gagamitin ko, "Life must be salaminated".

Dahil may iPhone at may mga ibang kagamitang elektroniko, para bang lalong napabilis ang buhay nating lahat. Ngunit, sa ibang pagkakataon, tulad ngayon at may sakit ako at bukod sa pag-aaral at pagtulog nararamdaman ko ang BAGAL ng buhay. Napapaisip ako sa mga bagay-bagay tulad ng narating ko pagkatapos ng tatlong taon sa kolehiyo: pwede pa ba kaya akong magkaroon ng Karangalang Latino sa pagtatapos? Hindi ko pa nasasabi kay **** magmula nang sophomore year na crush ko siya, at kung alam lang niya, may isang taong tunay na nais na alagaan at mahalin siya. At sa pagtapos ng lahat sa kolehiyo, ano nga ba ang gagawin ko? Maglo-Law School nga ako, pero pagkatapos nun, makakapagturo ba ako sa Ateneo tulad ng ninanais ko? O tutuloy na ba ako sa Masters of Law? O sa wakas maaamin ko na ba kay **** na ever since college crush ko siya, at kung alam lang niya, may isang taong tunay na nais na alagaan at mahalin siya?

Siguro hindi ko maiisip na magsulat tungkol sa pananalamin kung hindi ako napanalamin, dahil sa sobrang bilis ng buhay ko sa araw-araw, hindi ako napapahinto ng halos kahit na ano puwera lang tulog, pagkain, o pagtulog muli.


Manalamin. In English, Salaminate.

Existing

by Trixia Tan

Last Thursday, the thing that really boggled my mind was the question of Existence. I mean, how to really know that we exist? How to know that we aren’t just in a dream or a figment of some imagination or hallucination? Or that we aren’t invisible?


This question seems to be answered easily with just saying “because I exist” but the things is, how do I know that I really exist? How do I know that this is the real world and not a dream reality that I just conjured up? Like in the 2010 movie Inception, wherein the protagonist (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his wife forgot about the real world because they lived in their conjured up “dream” reality, only knowing the real from the imaginary when Leonardo found his totem spinning endlessly. However their going back to the real world caused the wife’s hallucination of the dream world as the reality to surface, which raises the question for me, how do we know that we exist in the reality?  To help me answer these questions, I compiled a list.

The ways to know that you exist

1. When there are documents that give proof of your existence. You have birth certificates, diplomas, records, and other documents that can attest to the fact that you are existing in this world.
2. When you check the mirror, and you can see your reflection. A ghost or someone who doesn’t exist wouldn’t know to look in the mirror, and there wouldn’t be any matter to look at.
3. When a person looks at you and doesn’t look through you. This means that you are not a ghost. It tells you that you exist in the eyes of that person and that you are physically in existence. 
4. When something you move would move and fall like any normal object. An object wouldn’t move in the first place without any existing force from an existing person and as was in the movie,Inception, the protagonists’ totem doesn’t stop spinning when they are in the dream world, so when the object we move falls, this can also mean that we are in reality.
5. When you do something and you get recognized. Like when you won something and an award was given or even in more simplistic moments when you are thanked at. 
6. When you touch someone. Like physically touch someone, it means that you are physically present for that someone to feel your presence. 
7. When you think of this question. This means that you are aware enough to ask this question and that can certainly assure you that you exist.

Based on this list, one can say that to know that we exist, there should be an interaction with the world. We can know that we exist when we are part of the community. As was discussed, we can know that we exist when we participate in the world and when we know that we are aware of the things around us. When in a sense, we are in being. 

Spectrum

by Miguel Jimenez

For this blog post I wanted to attempt to illustrate Gabriel Marcel’s meaning of Truth through a medium in which I thought related to the topic. I feel like the best way to try to explain philosophy is to try to give examples that relate, albeit weirdly, to the topic. I’m no physicist but, whenever I thought about Marcel’s truth and being in the lighted milieu, I was always reminded about one of the most interesting physics topics that I learned in high school, the Visible Spectrum (ROY G. BIV) that the human eye could see. So, taking the “lighted milieu” and the “light” literally, I will attempt to explain Marcel’s idea of truth through some examples and insights I gathered throughout the course of the lectureas well as during times of my own personal reflection using some concepts of the visible spectrum.

In a physical sense, white light, when it hits a glass prism, breaks up into the visible spectrum. This spectrum is the range of colors that our eyes can see. When light hits an object, the color it gives off or reflects is the frequency of light that it cannot absorb. In other words, a particular object, other than the color that it gives off, is absorbing all the other colors. If light doesn’t reach the object, no color is given off. Imagine a leaf in the tree in your backyard; you go to the tree, and notice that the leaf is green in color. Because sunlight is being shown on the leaf, it is reflecting the frequency of the color green to your eyes, and therefore you can say that the leaf is colored green. When it is night time, no light is shown on the leaf and therefore, the leaf doesn’t give off any particular color.

We can relate this to Gabriel Marcel’s interpretation of truth wherein we have to be in the light to be able to witness the truth that is illuminated or has been reflected from a specific object. We have to put ourselves in a lighted place to be able to see the truth. Similarly, we have to make light shine on the leaf for it to reflect it’s color in our eyes. If you are blind to the truth, you will not be able to see it becauseyou are preventing light from shining on it. It’s like trying to determine the color of the leaf in the nighttime or in darkness. In darkness, although you know that the leaf is there, you cannot determine its color because there is no light for it to reflect a color. However, if you are open to the truth and let the light shine into your eyes, you will be able to see the truth in its essence. This is just like being able to see the color green reflected from the leaf. Gabriel Marcel teaches us that you will only see the truth if you are willing to step into the lighted place, or the lighted milieu, if you are in darkness you will not be able to see the truth. We must place ourselves in the light in order to see the truth of the reality that is in our midst.

Truth is an aspect of reality, of which is two-dimensional. There is an objective reality and a subjective reality in which the aspect of truth is embedded.For this metaphor, the physical object, leaf, that I can touch, feel and be in the presence of is the objective reality. Alternatively, the color of the leaf is the subjective reality because it depends on the frequency of light that hits it which determines its color. The color it gives of is the subjective reality where the aspect of truth lies.

One cannot claim to hold the absolute truth, because if someone says that, he is saying that he is like God.God is the one and only holder of the absolute truth. As humans, we can only derive from the absolute truth because of our own biases, perceptions and different points of view. Additionally, it depends upon ones sense of values, backgrounds and experiences which defines the truth for them. Because we can only pick out derivatives of the absolute truth, the closest we can get to the absolute truth is a consensus between people. Using our garden metaphor, God would be like the sun, who shines the purest form of white light, making the leaf reflect its perfect and absolute color of green. The subjective aspect of truth would be like flashlights, which have different lights that aren’t as pure as the sun’s white light. This is so because whenever the flashlights shine their lights on the leaf, although it may reflect the color green, the leaf isn’t emitting its purest, absolute color.

Truths are subjective because it depends on the person who interprets the truth or the light that determines what is true for them. To illustrate this further, imagine it is nighttime and two friends are in the backyard each holding their own flashlights that are different in brand, use(tactical, work, camping flashlights) and luminescence (strength of light). One friend goes up to the leaf and shines his flashlight that gives off a yellowish light;because of this, although the reflection of the leaf is still green it would have a different hue or contrast in color than that of the leaf under sunlight. Another friend goes up to the leaf and shines light on it with his blue colored flashlight, again, a different hue of green appears which differs from the first friend who was holding a different flashlight and the pure form of white light coming from the sun. Say these two friends were quarreling about what color the leaf actually was. The first friend says that the leaf was (as an example) “yellow-green” while the other friend said that the leaf was “dark green.” Both friends say these things because they knew that when they shined their flashlights on the leaf, their respective colors reflected from the leaf. However, if they both shine their lights at the same time, wherein they combine both of their flashlight’s strengths, colors and luminescence, they would get a similar color. This in essence is what is called consensus.

Truths are limited and personal within the person’s immediate environment. In my opinion, truths have a radius, where if we were there to see it, then it would be our personal truth no matter how limited and shallow it may be compared to reality. As humans, we can only mold and interpret facts that we obtain from the objective reality and create our own personal subjective truths about a particular topic. Adding to this, we can also only hope to get close to the actual truth by learning more and obtaining more facts so as to be able to interpret and analyze it to form a deeper truth in which we know isn’t absolute but more of a consensus that is agreed upon by a community of truth seekers. I guess this is what Marcel meant when he talked about being with the lighted community and being in the lighted milieu. In relation to the illustration, this is why the friends have different flashlights. Independently, they both see the leaf in a different color, but with the question of what the actual color of the leaf is lurking in their minds, they can only hope to get closer to the answer by putting their lights together and shining them both at the leaf at the same time. It is this difference of illumination that creates communities of people with different truths. What might be green for a certain community might not be so for another community. This might be one of the reasons to why we have issues such as differences in religion or the correct way to raise a child.

With this being said, it is hard for humans to want to be open to see the truth because of the responsibilities and consequences that come with it. Marcel mentions an armor in which we put ourselves in to shield ourselves from the light of truth. In other words, because the fear of the truth and the responsibilities it brings is real and innate in humans, our defense mechanism is to shield ourselves to the truth in order to keep ourselves in this constant state of unknowing, which is what I think human nature is comfortable with. Therefore, it takes courage for one to take off his armor and fight the naïve side of him and look and see the truth and find out what responsibilities and consequences he has to undertake by knowing the truth.


Veering away from the leaf example (although it would technically be like trying to determine the color of the leaf at night or while wearing shades during the day), I’d like to illustrate this point by using one of the scariest things that all college students will have to face in their time in school, marks on an exam. Say you pulled an all-nighter studying for a midterm that you were so sure was next month, but instead, someone tells you that it is on this day. You get to class, take the test and the following day, your teacher hands back the exam. Before you get the exam back, or even, after the test when you’re going home reflecting upon which questions you messed up or what word you misspelled, your brain is constantly fighting itself over whether you did well or not in the exam. Your mind is in the constant state of unknowing, and because of this, is mentally building and constructing false truths or “what if’s” that may either scare you more or keep you at a confident state. So you’re in class, patiently waiting for your name to be called out. This whole time, your mind is scared of the possibilities that may arise. Personally, when my teachers call out my name for me to get the test in front of the room, it becomes, literally, one of the scariest parts of my entire life. You’re name gets called out, you walk toward your teacher holding your paper, you get your exam paper, walk back to your seat and you fold your paper in half covering the score. Without light hitting the bright red ink markings of your teacher’s pen in the front page, you will not be able to see the score of your exam because it is being blocked by the back page where you folded the paper. This is like the armor that we put on ourselves to shield us from the truth. Because we fold our papers to hide us from the score we got, we shield ourselves from the responsibilities we will have to face by seeing our marks on the exam. It really takes courage for one to open up his exam paper, look at the mark and accept the responsibilities and consequences he has to face. By opening up the page, you allow light to reflect on the front page, which makes the scribbles of the ink in your teacher’s pen absorb all colors except red.

The Fallacy of Sleeping With A Goat

by Nick Fortuna

I want to contrast with a lot of the answers we got earlier to the question of when we would be most aware of our own existence - the answer was often to the effect of our emotional highs: Major achievements such as getting in to a preferred college, or being immersed in your own passion.

I want to talk about situations where we forget, or even deny the "I." Appropriately, these are moments of shame.

There's a certain thought experiment my friends throw around as a joke that I brought up to a few people recently, and it goes like this: Would you rather sleep with a goat, and no one would ever find out, or would you rather not sleep with a goat but have everyone think that you did, with absolutely no hope of convincing them otherwise?

Now, it is a perfectly legitimate and defensible answer to prefer not to deal with the social consequences of having society think you shagged a goat, and to therefore just shag the goat. That isn't the fallacy here.
The answers I got though were subtly different, and, I believe, relevant to our class: If no one knows, then it's as if it never happened. The difference isn't very apparent at first, but we must look at the language. It is as if the event had never happened, not that it just doesn't have any consequences. It is, then, as if the existence is premised on an other's experience with that reality. One person even went so far as to say that they were basing their answer in Heidegger, comparing the act to a fallen tree that no one ever sees.
The fallacy here is quite simple - If you shagged that goat, then you would know, regardless of if anyone else does, and therefore the situation will have actually happened - but it would seem that there were a subconscious attempt to avoid that reality. It feels a bit like a stretch, but I say this because unless you deny the "I"'s presence at the act, then the argument that it may as well not have happened simply wouldn't feel sensible.


This happens in real life all the time: When people are at fault for something - and experiencing the shame of that - they try to deny accountability, or fault, or agency in the situation. They deny the self's presence (and therefore derivative things, like agency) to justify fault. For example, lawmakers deny having been involved enough with the cybercrime bill to have known about the libel clause, despite having discussed and voted on it.

Animality

by Mao Tan

Reflection is what feeds human desire for transcendence which ought to flourish human existence, to find value and meaning in our lives. True it is that without reflection, man forgets his nature of exigency that will make him fail to realize meaning and wholeness in his life. However, in the modern setting of our world, what seems to be true is that people seemingly indulging in the idea that reflection kills life. Included in this setting is me.

Just yesterday, I was walking along outside the Katipunan LRT station on my way to have a fancy dinner with my friend.  As I passed by the station, which is like always filled with beggars, street children and people rushing from the station, I thought to myself, don’t these rushing people put any value in those beggars? From the distance, I thought that the people from the LRT were thinking nothing about those beggars but trashes and eye sore. As I was approaching the beggars, one kid went to me to which I did not bother to give alms. Why would I concern myself with them anyway? All I had to look forward to then was the dinner that I would surely enjoy and not those beggars, coming to me and asking for coins. Then I realized, I had reduced the concept of my life to a manifestation of animality, only myself mattered above everything.  I thought that only those passersby were selfish but in the moment, I too was being egocentric. Nothing mattered to me except for joys and pleasures that I experience in my life. Because the only thing I thought about was the fancy dinner which would feed my enjoyment, I forgot that life isn’t just about my own joys but reaching out to the others around me. Looking at my whole experience, I realized that reflection does kill life. As I was trying to reflect, I was awakened from the illusion of selfishness that I got myself into.


During that moment, I thought that the joy and pleasure I find in food would give meaning to how I would live my life which got me disconnected from the beggars, forgetting that they are also humans and we live in the same world. Looking at it, I wasn’t really living out what human life is supposed to be. All throughout the moment, I was just trying to ignore the importance of reflecting on it which I knew would get me off the tracks to my own enjoyment.Yes, reflection kills life only if you think that life will just revolve around your own joys and satisfaction.  Reflection is somewhat KJ but we should remember that life isn’t just about joys. It is not just about ourselves but being with others to whome we must reach out. As humans, we should look at our own lives, and remind ourselves of what the primary essence of our being is.

Mulan

by Chris Estrada

What is reflection? Allow me to tear a page out of sir’s book by defining the word through its etymology. The word reflection comes from two Latin wordsre- "back"  and flectere "to bend". To put it in another way, reflection means that we look back on a certain thing or ponder on a certain problem that we are facing.

Allow me to reflect for the moment. In order for one to reflect on something, he must first find a problem that is worthy of putting his thoughts into. At the moment, my main concern is the smothering of my friends. At times, I feel as though I’m usually with friends. Most of the time, I don’t have much time for myself. There are times when I even sacrifice my study time because a certain friend has abandonment issues or another friend is spazzing about this new girl in the org. I feel as though there’s not enough time to just unwind from my already busy schedule. I find myself obligated to cater to my friends’ needs all the time.

I then ask myself why I try so hard to cater to my friends’ needs? I ask myself, “Why do you sacrifice you time and effort for them at your own expense.” I’ve been asking myself this, and only one answer keeps popping up: I know what it feels like to be abandoned. I know how it feels like to be abandoned by someone you care about, and how a void is created that just can’t be filled. I know the feeling of betrayal when most of the people you respected and trusted just decide to find another person to replace you. The pain is unbearable, maddening even. It is not something that should be experienced by anyone. Ever. I take this as the most logical cause of my sacrifice. It may sound arrogant, but it’s the best answer at the moment.

This need to not let anyone feel abandoned or manipulated however does not excuse my over-extending to others. I am still a self that must not be seen as an expendable means to an end. I am a being of intelligence and worth, and I myself must recognize this. I must treat myself the way I treat others because at the moment, I can feel depression and fatigue kicking in. I must convert myself. Become someone different because by doing so, I can become a better person who can help more people.


Some people believe that reflection is the anti-thesis of living. By reflecting, you stay in one place, and not really enjoy the present. You remain stuck in the past until you finish your reflection. I say different. Living does not rely solely on the present. The past is also an important factor in living as there is experience accumulated from it, and this experience helps us make the right choice in the present.

The Subjective Time

by Andrew Gallardo

Time, for me, is one powerful entity that encompasses the actions of many creatures. Indeed, it is a part of the way of life and it dictates the way of life of all creatures in this world. It is an inevitable force that makes the world spin, and, conscious or not, makes the life go on.

Yet, there is something about time that always leaves me wondering. Why is it not fixed? Why is it that there is no such law that dictates a set time for everyone? Can we not make an agreement that a midnight should really be a midnight for everyone, and not 11:59 in the evening for someone, and 12:01 in the morning for another?

I know that there is a new law now in this country that sets such fixed time, though administratively, I guess that it is not being followed. I mean, even until now, my wrist watch and our clock watch does not reflect the exact same time. But in a broader scope, someone in another country surely has a different time with me. To be specific, there is even an adjustment rule on how to convert your time with that to another land.

But no, I would not talk about physics, astrophysics, astronomy or whatever field of science that would explain why such difference of time occurs. Nor would I talk about how space influences time and all those philosophical explanations. I would just like to relate what I have learned in my philosophy class- about the subjectivity of the concept of truth.

For me, the concept of time concretely shows how the truth is relative to the rational that interprets it. It is hard to find a standard time that is being followed by anyone. Even the “Big Ben” in London is not being followed by all the Brits. Therefore, we can imply from the situation that the meaning that we derive from the numeric time is the one that truly matters.

We all know that in these recent days, some people, especially those who work as call centre agents, have a rather different “take” on time than what we usually have. While most of us relate night time into sleeping, some people like the call centre agents and the guards have a contrary view to this. And while for Spanish and Italians, there would always be a siesta after lunch; some countries only treat this time as a normal mid-afternoon.

Again, maybe indeed, people do not bother in setting a fixed time for everyone for it is not really the numeric time that matters, but rather, it is what we do on those times that truly affect us. Each of us has our own “take” on a time. Personally now, in my case, night time until around 2:00 is the “working time” for me and 2:00 to 8:00 is the proper sleeping time. While a friend of mine sleeps from 10:00 in the evening until 6:00 in the morning. This subjectivity of the concept of time shows how a fact can mean so much different for anyone. And we should not force ourselves into brushing off this difference; rather, we should respect it, for the truth is indeed subjective- it relates to the very person itself of the meaning-giver.


And perhaps, that subjectivity of time is the one that gives birth to the adjectives that relates to the essence of time, such as the word “timeless”. For indeed, there is something more than the computed detail between things- something that mere words could never and should be enough to describe. And contrary to what I have stated earlier, it is not really the numeric time which should dictate the action. Rather, what we do on those times defines what the time is for us. And, certainly, it is really our actions that makes a time “timeless”.

Towards the Light

by Jem Tan

The road to reaching your full potential is not always an easy one. I, for one, am still struggling. But I will eventually get there, slowly yet surely.

I used to be that person who was self-centered and apathetic to everything else but my own needs and wants. I was stuck in a routine, but it was a routine that could be likened to quicksand. I was afraid of getting hurt by others, and by extension, I became afraid of trying out new things. Looking back, it was extremely selfish. It meant that I needed to get what I wanted and expected out of others, and if I couldn't, I would just walk away from them. In order to drown my anxiety, I occupied myself with fiction and games, and spending hours on my laptop. But eventually, I realized that I could not go on living such a life. I needed to change myself. To put it in Dr. Garcia's words, maybe this was the experiencing of both dissatisfactions. The first dissatisfaction was concerning my frustration with the world. And after some reflection, I experienced a second dissatisfaction. This time, I was dissatisfied with myself. I wanted an inner transformation. I wanted to transcend my current self. I wanted to go out into the real world, and become the best person I can be—not only for myself, but also for others.

As Dr. Garcia said in his lecture, finding the truth is an inner struggle. There are two aspects of every person: the "you" who wants to open the door of the truth; and there is also the "you" who is on the other side of the door, who wants to keep the door closed. The truth requires courage, but once the door is opened, it sets you free. Perhaps that is why we experience an inner struggle when we finally realize that there is something we need to change in ourselves. There is always that part of us who resists change and wants to keep our stagnant routines. Whenever we try to get out of our comfort zone, there is always that tiny devil on our shoulder whispering: "Don't bother with change and just stay where you are right now!" That is why finding out that you need to change something is just the first step. It requires courage to actually accept that you need to change, and to go through with that change.


If we want something to change, we need to plug both ears in order not to let that devil's words get to us. We must follow that light which beckons us. We must dive into the unknown, and it is by doing so that we get to know more about the world and also ourselves. We may never fully get to know the Truth—but if we sit on our laurels, we sure won't get any closer to it.

In A Trance

by Cole Tan

Reading Marcel, I honestly did not understand the word transcendence in the reading. Granted I was En 10 but even using context clues on the reading made me more confused. =)) Anyway, silently listening to Dr. Garcia, and yes I mean silent because again I had no idea what to recite, I started understanding the word transcendence.

Transcendence is doing more than what is expected, at least how I understood it. So like Dr. Garcia said “For example you’re in a corridor and you see people doing different kind of things, some people are laughing, some are studying, some are sweet you are aware of these people. Being aware that you are aware of others is like being transcendent. More than being conscious of others, you are conscious of yourself being conscious of others.” (I might have paraphrased a bit but that was the general idea ahahaha) And Sir Earl asked us what we have done recently that is in line with the whole idea of transcendence.

Last semester, I was faced with a grave dilemma (at least it seemed that heavy at that point in my life) whether to run for Second Year Batch Representative and retain my position in the Executive Board or drop my position and start from the bottom up for something I truly want. Like anyone would do, I weighed the pros and cons. If I stay in my position, I would have been EB for three straight years in the same position with only the first three characters in the title changing (1st, 2nd, and 3rd), the freshmen will remember me faster, I would still have a voice in decision making for the org, I will have free org shirts and lanyards, I get to go to Lex Camp for free and would probably have a greater chance of becoming a president having known the constitution at the back of my mind and the would have been three executive titles to back my campaign. Cons: It’s going to be another year of weekly 1.5 hour meetings and monthly 3 hour meetings, another year of texting all 135 LM majors for updates, another year of un-magis-like studying for long tests, and another year of questioning my worth to the org.

The pros truly outnumbered the cons. However, I knew I will not be satisfied nor will I be happy in that position. And so, I chose to give my position to a person I truly believe can do the work, trained her and I moved on to work under both the Executive Board and the Associate Vice Presidents as a Core Head, a Project Manager , and a Marketing Director. I have exemplified transcendence by choosing to do what I love and in extension doing more for my org rather than fulfilling my wants and my desire to be president. Well, as for that last part, there’s still a way. AHAHAHAHHA But we’ll still see.


xoxo

Savagery

by Robert Go

Okay, so I just had my first Long Test a while ago in my Hi165 class entitled Rizal and the Emergence of the Philippine Nation. Since a lot of the concepts and topics that I studied for are still fresh in my mind, I thought that it would be best to use these tidbits and actually attempt to relate it to Marcel’s piece. I realize it might be a bit boring talking about these pre-colonial native Filipinos, but please bear with me. Who knows maybe you could actually learn a thing or two?

Did you know that the indigenous society during pre-colonial Philippines possessed an extremely flexible social structure quite unlike the rigid Indian caste system. The flexibility and high degree of social mobility was caused by the fact that people were more important than land. In the past, indigenous society experienced low population density which meant that there weren’t enough people to cultivate the surrounding land; the lack of labor force made land irrelevant. As a result, the power of the tribal leaders (datus) lied in the number of followers they possessed. However, since there was a high demand for followers, the people had to ability to choose which datu they would follow. They would often times choose to align themselves with the ‘better’ datu who not only had more alliances or military conquests but also one who could provide his followers with more protection, feasts and even gifts. With this, they could shift allegiances at any moment based on their assessment of the datu.

The very fact that pre-colonial Filipinos would shift their commitment to someone else based on who could provide them with the most benefits shows the lack of loyalty and the high priority set on self-interest during that period thus giving us a glimpse of how broken our world really was and even is. Marcel talks about how this world is broken because of our narcissism. We are filled in a world full of I’s and me’s, in a world where people have become reduced to abstract individuals. Our brokenness stems from how we only see people as investments; we immediately look for what that a certain individual can provide us or how can they be useful to us. Their specific functions then overshadow the other aspects of their humanity that we fail to see. Consequently, this detachment and lost sense of community affects how we interact with people today just like how the pre-colonial social structure used to operate.

Another fun fact: when Magellan and the Spaniards arrived in the Philippines, they were able to persuade a local datu named Raja Humabon to pledge allegiance them. However, once Magellan was defeated in the Battle of Mactan, Raja Humabon invited all the remaining Spaniards to a feast where they slaughtered all the Spaniards. A very ruthless yet practical action since they could no longer benefit from the Spaniards. The natives saw no reason to align themselves anymore with the foreigners since their lost portrayed them as weak and useless to them. It may be an extremely brutal act on the part of the natives, but can we really say that we are less barbaric? In modern context, we may have actually done something similar where we just get rid of people who are no longer of use to us as a result of our broken priorities.


At the end of last Thursday’s class, a question was given to all of us: how do we respond to this brokenness? Unfortunately, I have no answer to this question since I believe that to finally fix and create an unbroken world is too ideal. It may sound a bit pessimistic, but I believe it is just truly impossible. The structure in which we are live in calls for the survival of the fittest. It is a dog-eat-dog world out there where one’s own self-interest prevails over all and this has continued on for the longest of the times. The world wasn’t broken just when Gabriel Marcel wrote this piece 50 or so years ago, but it was already broken even during pre-colonial times. This world forever was, is and will be broken, but it’s just how we choose to live in this broken world that could set us apart from the savages.

From Computer Screens To The Real World

by Anna Grafilo

Social networks changed the way we communicate with other people these days. It became easier for us to talk with our friends and relatives through instant messengers like Skype and Facebook messenger and e-mails. The purpose of these technologies is primarily to bring people who cannot be physically near you closer by allowing us to have a faster way to communicate with them. Some people say that social network is one of the things that caused this world to be fragmented. They say that the technology that was supposed to bring people closer also is one of the reasons why our society becomes more and more fragmented. An example of how social networks show how fragmented we are, are in the photos itself. Humans are social beings and it reflects on some older photographs where most of them feature a family or a group of friends but we can see a shift that from family and friends the photos that we take are slowly becoming centered with ourselves. In one Facebook account we could see that the owner has may be hundreds of thousand of photos with them but there is also sometimes one album besides the profile pictures album containing their 'selfies'. Selfies are basically pictures of only yourself and no one else.

But it is not with the pictures that we see how social networks are instruments or further fragmenting the world we live in. We could see it also by the way we interact with each other. Sometimes I would see people in the cafeteria sitting across each other but their attention is not with the person they are with it is with the person on the phone or sometimes they are with the person physically but the attention is not there it is with their phones or laptops playing games or another person they are talking to. For me it is rude because you are together supposedly to spend time and interact with each other but what happens was that they are there physically but not mentally.

People say that because of social networks our interactions with other people becomes more and more distant, in a way we prefer to talk to them facing the screen than talk to them face to face because it is more comfortable. We have thousands of friends in Facebook but we do not know all of them personally. But is it really the social networks are not really the ones to blame for the further fragmentation of the world, we are the ones to blame. Going back to the purpose of social networks it was created by the people who wanted it to be an instrument to connect people all over the world to bring our loved ones closer. It is us that give these technologies a purely selfish purpose and then blame them for the growing distance among us mentally and emotionally.


I think that the world that was broken years before us and our own broken world are the same. The world during 1950’s are the same as 2013’s people go on with their lives without a care for what other people do and what they are experiencing. But we can still try to repair this broken world. It may not fully heal but we can still try by doing simple things like greeting other people or like trying to relate to other people and not just the class you belong in by getting ourselves to be more exposed to the reality that not all of us have it easy. Maybe the world will never fully heal from its fragmentation but maybe just maybe we try to reach out and give an effort to heal it.

Reacting To The Broken World

by Arik Sison

25 July 2013
Discussed Text: Marcel, The Mystery of Being

The Broken World is the text that I am able to relate to the most, so far. I found myself agreeing with many of the points which were mentioned in the article. Specific events came to mind while these points were being mentioned.

Point 1 (technocracy):

Our world today is a technocracy. In a technocracy, technical experts, like scientists and engineers, are looked up to and they greatly affect making decisions. These people are seen as more important than people in the arts and in the humanities. A person’s level of scientific expertise would be the basis of his rank in society.

I think that this was a very valid point. Personally, I chose my course because of its technical nature and because I also believe that becoming technocrat would be my way of being somebody important in society. Our society always looks up scientists and engineers. Aside from this, they are very important due to the fact that our lives in this technological age wouldn’t be the same without them. The negative effect of this fact is that people start to look down on the arts. Nobody encourages their children to become writers, painters, or musicians. Everyone wants to have an engineer or a doctor in the family. In turn, this causes conflict between the people who dream about the arts and the demands of society. It is a known fact that the science people are perceived as more financially stable because they normally earn a lot more money than the arts people. Also, greed becomes a great factor in career choice. Who doesn’t want to be rich?
This fact isn’t so bad for me because I am a student of science, but how should the students of the arts feel about their worth being downplayed?

Point 2 (lost sense of community):

People are not used to people anymore. Gone are the days when people had to get their hands dirty. In the present, getting out of anything has been reduced to a text. Confrontation has been reduced to something like this as well. Real relationships turned superficial.

I noticed that people do not keep their promises as much as they used to. When people plan to meet at a certain time, someone would usually cancel through text a few minutes before the meeting is supposed to takes place. This annoys me because the person could have at least called, which I think is a lot more personal than texting, instead of just sending a message, leaving me powerless to react to whatever valid or pathetic excuse he has for the change of plans.

I also noticed that people are living more online than in real life. Discussions are now possible without the discussers being present in one place. The interaction of these people is lessened because they only communicate through chat boxes. There is now harder to get to know people personally. The problem with this that the things some people say and do online greatly contrast what they see do in real life. Who are these people, really?

In the end, technology’s advancement may greatly limit human interaction and may further hinder any sense of community.

Point 3 (the world refuses to imagine):

Familiarity breeds contempt. People have this mindset wherein they tend to take for granted the people who are closest to them. In their minds, these people have always been there and they always will be there. They become less of a priority due to their constant presence. They stop caring about their relationships with the people closest to them. In the end, a lot of relationships are destroyed. I know a lot of families which are broken because the members no longer nurture their relationships. Besides the family, a lot of the people who we meet every day are taken for granted. It is only when they are absent that we realize their worth. People only appreciate the packers in the groceries when they aren’t there to pack their items for them. What if we were those people? How would we feel and how would we see ourselves and our job?

The problem is that people are not used to putting themselves in the shoes of others. When we do, we may find some realities that we don’t like and life-changing realizations during these contemplations are never easy to handle. After all, it is easier to be ignorant than to care. It is easy not to care about others.

Finale

While thinking about possible solutions to the broken world, I remembered what Dr. Garcia mentioned in class to summarize this topic. He said that we should ask ourselves what we can take of this broken world and what are we called to do about it. We ought to know when to consume and when to create. There is always a way to fix the broken.