Showing posts with label fr. roque ferriols. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fr. roque ferriols. Show all posts
Sunday, September 1, 2013
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.
Saturday, June 29, 2013
The Essence of Questioning
by Vikha Vargas
26 June 2013
Discussed Text: Ferriols, "Insight"
Sometimes, I ask myself, what is the point of being human? Or what does it mean to be human? What am I here for? I have been living in this world for almost 20 years now and I still have not figured out one ultimate answer to my existential questions. During the past lectures, I have been encountering mind-boggling facts or perceptions about life and ways of living. I am also led to the realization that at some point in our lives, we tend to take things for granted. Because we think we are too aware of them, when in fact we are most probably not. We think that the simplest things in life are way too simple but sometimes they turn out to be the opposite. Why? Because we only see things on a surface level, which is probably why sometimes we fail to have a deeper understanding and perspective regarding certain matters. Sometimes, we fail to look sideways. We are too concerned about moving forward and finding the ultimate answers to our questions; we do not seem to notice the tiny details that may actually help us find answers. Also, little do we notice, we are already lacking the necessary experiences in life.
But, can we really find answers, at least in this lifetime? I cannot deny the fact that I am also confused. Thus, when the question about philosophy being aimless and useless was raised in class, I was torn between a yes and a no. It is a no because there are probably people who might have given up on their pursuit of finding answers, because in the end there are actually no answers –that everything is simply open-ended (at some point I believed this). Thus, it is pointless to ask questions because it will lead you to nowhere. It is just a waste of work for our brain cells to process things that can never be deciphered. But I changed my mind right away. Philosophy, for whatever it is worth, is definitely not useless nor aimless; and I am quite certain about it. I realized that my aforementioned reasons for saying that philosophy is aimless and useless are shallow. There is more to philosophy. There is more to questions that do not seem to have answers. They are not exactly pointless. When we ask questions and we do not find answers, we must ask again. As humans, I believe we should. We were given the capacity to think; thus we must use it. Our minds were not made to resemble stationary figures or jars that were never used for productivity but for display. The human mind was not made for that, it was meant to be used for the exploration of our imaginations and the processing of previous and recurring ideas. We must have a second-order, third-order, fourth-order (to nth-order, if necessary) questionings that serve as some sort of follow ups, because certainly they will give us closer to the answers; or if not closer to the answers, at least we become meshed into different and wider perspectives. That way, we learn. Philosophizing or asking questions lead us to something, thus indeed philosophy is not useless and aimless. Through the questions we raise, we are also led to new discoveries that would help us define our existence, even just contributing a tiny detail of it. However, we must remember that t is also important that we think and ask questions in the context of everyone else, not just within ourselves. More often than not, it is through others that we find ourselves. Therefore, we must think outside our realms and allow ourselves to be immersed in diversity.
Another thing which can also help us to become more aware of our surroundings (and to eventually find answers) is to experience life. As I have learned, philosophy is also experienced. It is something we also do. Philosophy is not just confined in books and theories, but also in experience –in submergence wherein we figuratively let ourselves swim, drown and die in experience through time. In fact, philosophy begins with life; thus we need to be immersed. In turn, it can change and transform us; and bring us to another place where we can experience new things. Seemingly, philosophy and the search for meaning and answers is not a short-lived task, but a lifelong process of searching and finding, and searching again. We were meant to be filled with questions –to keep us ever searching and learning. But not knowing the answers to these questions does not make us any less of a person. Through the art of questioning and philosophizing, we learn. With that element of learning, I now believe that it is not just the answers that we should be completely concerned of, but the questions raised, experiences gained, lessons learned --the getting-there and philosophizing aspect in life.After all, as Ralph Waldo Emerson said,“life is a journey, not a destination.”
26 June 2013
Discussed Text: Ferriols, "Insight"
Sometimes, I ask myself, what is the point of being human? Or what does it mean to be human? What am I here for? I have been living in this world for almost 20 years now and I still have not figured out one ultimate answer to my existential questions. During the past lectures, I have been encountering mind-boggling facts or perceptions about life and ways of living. I am also led to the realization that at some point in our lives, we tend to take things for granted. Because we think we are too aware of them, when in fact we are most probably not. We think that the simplest things in life are way too simple but sometimes they turn out to be the opposite. Why? Because we only see things on a surface level, which is probably why sometimes we fail to have a deeper understanding and perspective regarding certain matters. Sometimes, we fail to look sideways. We are too concerned about moving forward and finding the ultimate answers to our questions; we do not seem to notice the tiny details that may actually help us find answers. Also, little do we notice, we are already lacking the necessary experiences in life.
But, can we really find answers, at least in this lifetime? I cannot deny the fact that I am also confused. Thus, when the question about philosophy being aimless and useless was raised in class, I was torn between a yes and a no. It is a no because there are probably people who might have given up on their pursuit of finding answers, because in the end there are actually no answers –that everything is simply open-ended (at some point I believed this). Thus, it is pointless to ask questions because it will lead you to nowhere. It is just a waste of work for our brain cells to process things that can never be deciphered. But I changed my mind right away. Philosophy, for whatever it is worth, is definitely not useless nor aimless; and I am quite certain about it. I realized that my aforementioned reasons for saying that philosophy is aimless and useless are shallow. There is more to philosophy. There is more to questions that do not seem to have answers. They are not exactly pointless. When we ask questions and we do not find answers, we must ask again. As humans, I believe we should. We were given the capacity to think; thus we must use it. Our minds were not made to resemble stationary figures or jars that were never used for productivity but for display. The human mind was not made for that, it was meant to be used for the exploration of our imaginations and the processing of previous and recurring ideas. We must have a second-order, third-order, fourth-order (to nth-order, if necessary) questionings that serve as some sort of follow ups, because certainly they will give us closer to the answers; or if not closer to the answers, at least we become meshed into different and wider perspectives. That way, we learn. Philosophizing or asking questions lead us to something, thus indeed philosophy is not useless and aimless. Through the questions we raise, we are also led to new discoveries that would help us define our existence, even just contributing a tiny detail of it. However, we must remember that t is also important that we think and ask questions in the context of everyone else, not just within ourselves. More often than not, it is through others that we find ourselves. Therefore, we must think outside our realms and allow ourselves to be immersed in diversity.
Another thing which can also help us to become more aware of our surroundings (and to eventually find answers) is to experience life. As I have learned, philosophy is also experienced. It is something we also do. Philosophy is not just confined in books and theories, but also in experience –in submergence wherein we figuratively let ourselves swim, drown and die in experience through time. In fact, philosophy begins with life; thus we need to be immersed. In turn, it can change and transform us; and bring us to another place where we can experience new things. Seemingly, philosophy and the search for meaning and answers is not a short-lived task, but a lifelong process of searching and finding, and searching again. We were meant to be filled with questions –to keep us ever searching and learning. But not knowing the answers to these questions does not make us any less of a person. Through the art of questioning and philosophizing, we learn. With that element of learning, I now believe that it is not just the answers that we should be completely concerned of, but the questions raised, experiences gained, lessons learned --the getting-there and philosophizing aspect in life.After all, as Ralph Waldo Emerson said,“life is a journey, not a destination.”
Thursday, June 27, 2013
The Pests
by Jio Deslate
Critchley talks about philosophers as a sort of anarchic force in society. Those that seek to destroy the status quo by their systematic non-conformance to its norms. We see here disruptive figures who might seem eccentric – as the story of Thales and his silly fall into the well suggests– and even alien compared to the usual personalities we are accustomed to. Their thoughts, words, and actions are unsettling especially for those of us who have spent our whole lives finding comfort in the traditions of society. Most people, including myself, have been conditioned to abide by certain rules that we forget - or we aren't even aware - that everything we have come to know and love is in fact shaped by powerful institutions that have risen – time and time again – from the ashes of history. The victors of it, in fact, as the cliché goes. With this in mind I think it is safe to ponder that what we were taught – what we are being taught – is not absolute. It’s certainly not objective and therefore should be taken with a grain of salt. This notion is frightening to most of us, perhaps because it has been given the label of “Marxist” by friends and foes alike. A term that immediately translates into rugged men in the mountains with dangerous arms and even more dangerous ideas coming to wreak havoc on the peaceful, God-fearing, towns that we happily reside in. How different are these philosophers from them? They preach the same idea of revolution after all – going against the status quo in whatever way can still be seen as a revolutionary. Wouldn’t it be better to just keep these seditious men from preaching their insidious ideas to the innocent citizens of society?
The idea of change will forever be frightening to mankind. We are the same animals who chose to put up huts – and eventually castles and skyscrapers – to settle in while the rest of the so-called beasts hunted from place to place in their fight for survival. But change is a fact of life that we are subject to, no matter how much we resist. It's just that it has become part our nature to seek stability in all things, a sort of constant reassurance that no leopard would to prey on us. A beautiful house, a nice car, a loving family. Things that fall under the American dream – a dream a lot more universal than they think - those are what we aspire for. And while all of that is fine and dandy there is, believe it or not, a danger in this comfort we find in them. We are so deeply caught up in the pursuit of society’s ideal life that we don’t see anything wrong with the society itself. After all playing by its rules will help us achieve these goals so why rebel against them. We are so unaware of the flaws and injustices in our society that we feel so uneasy when someone tries to point them out. When some gadfly pricks us in the ass and tells us there’s something wrong with it we scream “that's unpatriotic! that’s communist! that’s treason!” The things we repeat to ourselves in response to our cognitive dissonance. But the fact of matter is…well that is right. The treason part at least. These philosophers are treacherous to the sacred cows of society. They are the ones who betray the established orders so that we could be enlightened about what’s really happening in the world. So that we can distance ourselves, even for a while, and look at society as an outsider would do, as these philosophers actually do. It is quite difficult to see a picture when our eyes are intensely glued to it.
The idea that philosophy seeks to spread anarchy in society is a misconstrued one. It is not so much about destroying the status quo but pointing out how it is so unyieldingly solid. That, to us, it seems as if it is an immovable giant. A giant that ironically enough we cannot even see . A giant that we must obey. Philosophers are the mosquitoes of the world. The little pests who seek to spread the contagious and fatal disease of critical thinking and questioning. They are the nuisance in society that try to pester the "gentle" giants. The swarm that attacks the elephants so that we may be reminded that it is just another animal. An animal, just like us, who are subject to errors and slaves to change.
Critchley talks about philosophers as a sort of anarchic force in society. Those that seek to destroy the status quo by their systematic non-conformance to its norms. We see here disruptive figures who might seem eccentric – as the story of Thales and his silly fall into the well suggests– and even alien compared to the usual personalities we are accustomed to. Their thoughts, words, and actions are unsettling especially for those of us who have spent our whole lives finding comfort in the traditions of society. Most people, including myself, have been conditioned to abide by certain rules that we forget - or we aren't even aware - that everything we have come to know and love is in fact shaped by powerful institutions that have risen – time and time again – from the ashes of history. The victors of it, in fact, as the cliché goes. With this in mind I think it is safe to ponder that what we were taught – what we are being taught – is not absolute. It’s certainly not objective and therefore should be taken with a grain of salt. This notion is frightening to most of us, perhaps because it has been given the label of “Marxist” by friends and foes alike. A term that immediately translates into rugged men in the mountains with dangerous arms and even more dangerous ideas coming to wreak havoc on the peaceful, God-fearing, towns that we happily reside in. How different are these philosophers from them? They preach the same idea of revolution after all – going against the status quo in whatever way can still be seen as a revolutionary. Wouldn’t it be better to just keep these seditious men from preaching their insidious ideas to the innocent citizens of society?
The idea of change will forever be frightening to mankind. We are the same animals who chose to put up huts – and eventually castles and skyscrapers – to settle in while the rest of the so-called beasts hunted from place to place in their fight for survival. But change is a fact of life that we are subject to, no matter how much we resist. It's just that it has become part our nature to seek stability in all things, a sort of constant reassurance that no leopard would to prey on us. A beautiful house, a nice car, a loving family. Things that fall under the American dream – a dream a lot more universal than they think - those are what we aspire for. And while all of that is fine and dandy there is, believe it or not, a danger in this comfort we find in them. We are so deeply caught up in the pursuit of society’s ideal life that we don’t see anything wrong with the society itself. After all playing by its rules will help us achieve these goals so why rebel against them. We are so unaware of the flaws and injustices in our society that we feel so uneasy when someone tries to point them out. When some gadfly pricks us in the ass and tells us there’s something wrong with it we scream “that's unpatriotic! that’s communist! that’s treason!” The things we repeat to ourselves in response to our cognitive dissonance. But the fact of matter is…well that is right. The treason part at least. These philosophers are treacherous to the sacred cows of society. They are the ones who betray the established orders so that we could be enlightened about what’s really happening in the world. So that we can distance ourselves, even for a while, and look at society as an outsider would do, as these philosophers actually do. It is quite difficult to see a picture when our eyes are intensely glued to it.
The idea that philosophy seeks to spread anarchy in society is a misconstrued one. It is not so much about destroying the status quo but pointing out how it is so unyieldingly solid. That, to us, it seems as if it is an immovable giant. A giant that ironically enough we cannot even see . A giant that we must obey. Philosophers are the mosquitoes of the world. The little pests who seek to spread the contagious and fatal disease of critical thinking and questioning. They are the nuisance in society that try to pester the "gentle" giants. The swarm that attacks the elephants so that we may be reminded that it is just another animal. An animal, just like us, who are subject to errors and slaves to change.
"Yo Dawg I Heard That You Like Insights"
by John Belmonte
25 June 2013
Discussed Text: Critchley, "What Is A Philosopher?"
Fr. Roque Ferriols, S.J., "Insight"
Insight. That was what covered today’s lecture. To gain insight, by convention, is to learn more from something known. It can also mean to gain experience and be able to attain something by reflection. The pettifogger probably has some degree of reflection to the matters that are of concern to him, just not as apparent or of greater magnitude to the philosopher. With that said, insights are possessed by each and every one of us and can come in so many varieties and magnitudes. My coach from high school told me when I was about to compete in a tournament, “There was nothing to lose and everything to gain.” It makes me wonder though, do all insights provide some kind of learning experience? Do all insights provide something better? In fact, what defines an insight to even be of any merit?
After some thinking, I made a little insight about making insights. Every insight that I’m able to form leads to new insights, leading to even more insights. It’s an unending cycle that always has some form of input from me. We will always have new views on life, whether they be completely new, a view that has been changed from a preceding notion, or a view of life reinforced by more information.
I also think the whole idea of “better insights” exists. Everyone has their own personal bias and as objective as we try to be, there is still that slight tinge of favoritism existing. (I actually think that the previous statement itself has some form of bias.) Some insights made will be more beneficial to others possibly because of its appropriate timing. This is similar to limit situations, wherein we seek to learn the reasons behind why these things happen or why we feel this way. We tend to receive advice that helps us cope or make us feel better. Aside from convenience, insights can also be significant from sentimentality. We have some kind of special bond with some very simple things, like children that receive their very first toy. For other people, it’s just a toy, while to the children, it may very well be the happiest moment of their lives. Like the children, we each have our own way of thinking that is unique to ourselves. The uniqueness comes from the cultivation of our thoughts from our lives and in turn provides different insights.
That is probably my most important point about making insights. We are all different, and in that difference, we are able to create a near-infinite amount of ideas. Indeed, we sometimes have coinciding claims with one another but more often than not there is something slightly different with how each of us think. In each of our lectures, just a few of us tend to speak, but those few are able to have an amazing amount of input for everyone to take in. Our personal beliefs, upbringings, and attitudes provide so much to discuss and that’s just from a few of all 65 of us. (I doubt if we could fit everyone’s thoughts in one period though.)
We make insights to make even more insights that create more insights. I just made an insight about insights. This will lead to insights about making insights that lead to making insights about making insights.
25 June 2013
Discussed Text: Critchley, "What Is A Philosopher?"
Fr. Roque Ferriols, S.J., "Insight"
Insight. That was what covered today’s lecture. To gain insight, by convention, is to learn more from something known. It can also mean to gain experience and be able to attain something by reflection. The pettifogger probably has some degree of reflection to the matters that are of concern to him, just not as apparent or of greater magnitude to the philosopher. With that said, insights are possessed by each and every one of us and can come in so many varieties and magnitudes. My coach from high school told me when I was about to compete in a tournament, “There was nothing to lose and everything to gain.” It makes me wonder though, do all insights provide some kind of learning experience? Do all insights provide something better? In fact, what defines an insight to even be of any merit?
After some thinking, I made a little insight about making insights. Every insight that I’m able to form leads to new insights, leading to even more insights. It’s an unending cycle that always has some form of input from me. We will always have new views on life, whether they be completely new, a view that has been changed from a preceding notion, or a view of life reinforced by more information.
I also think the whole idea of “better insights” exists. Everyone has their own personal bias and as objective as we try to be, there is still that slight tinge of favoritism existing. (I actually think that the previous statement itself has some form of bias.) Some insights made will be more beneficial to others possibly because of its appropriate timing. This is similar to limit situations, wherein we seek to learn the reasons behind why these things happen or why we feel this way. We tend to receive advice that helps us cope or make us feel better. Aside from convenience, insights can also be significant from sentimentality. We have some kind of special bond with some very simple things, like children that receive their very first toy. For other people, it’s just a toy, while to the children, it may very well be the happiest moment of their lives. Like the children, we each have our own way of thinking that is unique to ourselves. The uniqueness comes from the cultivation of our thoughts from our lives and in turn provides different insights.
That is probably my most important point about making insights. We are all different, and in that difference, we are able to create a near-infinite amount of ideas. Indeed, we sometimes have coinciding claims with one another but more often than not there is something slightly different with how each of us think. In each of our lectures, just a few of us tend to speak, but those few are able to have an amazing amount of input for everyone to take in. Our personal beliefs, upbringings, and attitudes provide so much to discuss and that’s just from a few of all 65 of us. (I doubt if we could fit everyone’s thoughts in one period though.)
We make insights to make even more insights that create more insights. I just made an insight about insights. This will lead to insights about making insights that lead to making insights about making insights.
Monday, August 27, 2012
New Perspectives
by Jason Dacuyan
A few days ago, my gastritis had struck again and since the pain was unbearable, I really had to go out and buy medicine from the drugstore. Mercury Drug Katipunan wasn’t far since I live in the Ateneo university dormitory but it was still a challenge for me with my stomach all fiery and painful. So I mustered up my courage and took a “trike” (short for tricycle) going to Mercury Drug. And did I mention how much I dislike trikes? They drive so recklessly fast leaving me kind of nauseated every time I go down. To add to that, the brakes on their motorcycles sound like those annoying sounds one makes when scratching the chalk board. Okay, so I buy my medicine but before I’m able to leave the drugstore, heavy rain fell and just my luck, I forgot to bring an umbrella. After faring the heavy rains for a few minutes, I finally found a trike going home. And it was on this trike ride that David Foster Wallace’s speech entered my mind.
At that moment in time, I was really tired and frustrated not to mention the gas pains that were currently happening in my stomach. “This is Water”, I told myself. As I paid attention to the heavy rains, the cars on the road beside my trike, the people on the sidewalks in umbrellas, and even the trike driver himself —I finally began to understand. I am not the center of the universe. I thought how the cars around me could have more urgent problems than me wanting to go home or how the trike driver might not have had lunch yet or he might also be sick but he’s risking his health to earn money for his family. I thought of the people who have to walk home under the heavy rain—only then that I felt lucky to be riding on a trike. I can control how and what I think, that’s what I realized. And once I was aware that I was aware, everything seemed okay.
The rain didn’t frustrate me anymore. I began to see it merely as rain, not some external factor giving me discomfort. The screeching brakes of the trike didn’t seem to matter anymore. The trike driver must have spent a lot just to have those brakes work properly and maybe he couldn’t do anything about the screeching sound anymore without spending more money. This experience has surprised me in a lot of ways. It has allowed me to see the bigger picture—that I am part of a greater whole. This must be what Simon Critchley meant when he said that philosophers seem to be elsewhere. And I was elsewhere. I was at that moment the same Jason but my mind was on the things around me. The experience was a big surprise and I was amazed at the realization. Although I already knew about these things after reading the articles, it really is different if you experience the realization firsthand.
Because of this experience, I also remembered Heidegger’s article about being in Being. I never really quite understood what it meant but now I think I have gained some understanding. By looking at the bigger picture and being aware of the things around me, I was moved. I was moved by Being. This must be what Heidegger meant about Philein which he described as a kind of harmony that reveals to us what it means to love and be sensitive to the vibration of the other. I think for a moment there, I experienced Philein with the people around me. I thought to myself, “If I’m already bothered and frustrated with all this rain, how much more the trike driver. He’s soaked from the rain.” Also, during my ride home, one car even splashed some water on the trike I was riding as it sped past a rain puddle. Normally, I would’ve been pissed. But because of my awareness, I was able to let it go and remind myself that I am part of a greater whole. I usually don’t bother thinking about these kinds of things at all. But I did think of these things. And because of that, I finally realized what Heidegger said about “being gathered together in Being” meant. Me, the trike driver, the cars, the road, the passersby, the tees—we’re all connected. We’re all expressing our Being, the dynamic act of existence, in a singular way. It means that we are part of something greater. I am part of something greater, something beyond and outside myself.
Everything seemed to connect —from Critchley, to Wallace, to Heidegger, and finally to Ferriols’ insight—seeing what something actually means as it exists. Who knew a mere tricycle ride could help me philosophize, gain some insight about the world and change my perspective. I choose what I think about. I get to consciously decide what has meaning and what doesn’t. I am part of a greater whole.
A few days ago, my gastritis had struck again and since the pain was unbearable, I really had to go out and buy medicine from the drugstore. Mercury Drug Katipunan wasn’t far since I live in the Ateneo university dormitory but it was still a challenge for me with my stomach all fiery and painful. So I mustered up my courage and took a “trike” (short for tricycle) going to Mercury Drug. And did I mention how much I dislike trikes? They drive so recklessly fast leaving me kind of nauseated every time I go down. To add to that, the brakes on their motorcycles sound like those annoying sounds one makes when scratching the chalk board. Okay, so I buy my medicine but before I’m able to leave the drugstore, heavy rain fell and just my luck, I forgot to bring an umbrella. After faring the heavy rains for a few minutes, I finally found a trike going home. And it was on this trike ride that David Foster Wallace’s speech entered my mind.
At that moment in time, I was really tired and frustrated not to mention the gas pains that were currently happening in my stomach. “This is Water”, I told myself. As I paid attention to the heavy rains, the cars on the road beside my trike, the people on the sidewalks in umbrellas, and even the trike driver himself —I finally began to understand. I am not the center of the universe. I thought how the cars around me could have more urgent problems than me wanting to go home or how the trike driver might not have had lunch yet or he might also be sick but he’s risking his health to earn money for his family. I thought of the people who have to walk home under the heavy rain—only then that I felt lucky to be riding on a trike. I can control how and what I think, that’s what I realized. And once I was aware that I was aware, everything seemed okay.
The rain didn’t frustrate me anymore. I began to see it merely as rain, not some external factor giving me discomfort. The screeching brakes of the trike didn’t seem to matter anymore. The trike driver must have spent a lot just to have those brakes work properly and maybe he couldn’t do anything about the screeching sound anymore without spending more money. This experience has surprised me in a lot of ways. It has allowed me to see the bigger picture—that I am part of a greater whole. This must be what Simon Critchley meant when he said that philosophers seem to be elsewhere. And I was elsewhere. I was at that moment the same Jason but my mind was on the things around me. The experience was a big surprise and I was amazed at the realization. Although I already knew about these things after reading the articles, it really is different if you experience the realization firsthand.
Because of this experience, I also remembered Heidegger’s article about being in Being. I never really quite understood what it meant but now I think I have gained some understanding. By looking at the bigger picture and being aware of the things around me, I was moved. I was moved by Being. This must be what Heidegger meant about Philein which he described as a kind of harmony that reveals to us what it means to love and be sensitive to the vibration of the other. I think for a moment there, I experienced Philein with the people around me. I thought to myself, “If I’m already bothered and frustrated with all this rain, how much more the trike driver. He’s soaked from the rain.” Also, during my ride home, one car even splashed some water on the trike I was riding as it sped past a rain puddle. Normally, I would’ve been pissed. But because of my awareness, I was able to let it go and remind myself that I am part of a greater whole. I usually don’t bother thinking about these kinds of things at all. But I did think of these things. And because of that, I finally realized what Heidegger said about “being gathered together in Being” meant. Me, the trike driver, the cars, the road, the passersby, the tees—we’re all connected. We’re all expressing our Being, the dynamic act of existence, in a singular way. It means that we are part of something greater. I am part of something greater, something beyond and outside myself.
Everything seemed to connect —from Critchley, to Wallace, to Heidegger, and finally to Ferriols’ insight—seeing what something actually means as it exists. Who knew a mere tricycle ride could help me philosophize, gain some insight about the world and change my perspective. I choose what I think about. I get to consciously decide what has meaning and what doesn’t. I am part of a greater whole.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)