by Laura Hein
Descartes claimed that he could prove the existence of God. In human minds, God is infinite. But as human beings cannot come to the idea of infinity by inference, and the idea is not intrinsic to us, God must have put the concept into our minds.
I have trouble accepting this reasoning, however. The idea of infinity could have come to the human race in other ways. Our ancient ancestors used to look up at the sun, or even look down at the earth, and believed that both are infinite. And why not? When they woke up and a new day dawned, the sun was going to come out without failing. The ground that they slept on today would still be there when they woke up the next morning. They could count on the sun and the earth being there forever, unfailingly sustaining their existence. They could take those things for granted. The sun, the earth, the oceans would still be there even if they departed from the world. Time would simply go on and on.
Of course, the idea that the sun and the earth will always be here has been dispelled. We know now that even the universe cannot be infinite. All things must come to an end. Our ancestors did not know this, however, and the concept of infinity must have been easy to accept. The idea was then passed onto to us. This does not mean that I don’t believe in God. One day, the existence of God and the ideas of science may be reconciled, but Descartes’ explanation does not persuade me much.
Showing posts with label Meditations on the First Philosophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Meditations on the First Philosophy. Show all posts
Saturday, October 5, 2013
Monday, September 23, 2013
Existing and Ceasing To Exist
by Rexelle Piad
Existence is an essential part of being human. I think to some degree, all of us have known or felt that we exist. The thought had crossed our minds at our happiest moments or during the times when we've felt the most alive. We even affirm our existence when we feel extreme pain or sadness. When we jokingly say, "i'm dying from stress" or "Ayaw ko na mabuhay" during our hell weeks/months/sems, we understand that we are existing. The thought of our existence may not cross our minds everyday. I hardly think anyone wakes up in the morning and says to himself, "I exist. Hooray!" However, I feel certain that everyone has an understanding (or maybe at least a partial understanding) of their existence.
Many things in our world exist. I believe, though, that existence as human beings is slightly different. If we see and touch a rock or a tree, we know and say that it exists. However, If we see a person who has lost the ability to think, move, speak and is only capable of breathing-- we have a harder time in saying that that person actively exists in the world. In my opinion, that's one of the mysteries of being human. We do not just limit our existence to our physical presence. We don't limit ourselves to just breathing in and breathing out. There is something more to our existence.
So this leads me to believe that---maybe--- it isn't really about whether we exist or not. I think the real question is, what does it mean for us to exist.
According to Lujipen, we need to take certain steps to be able to understand properly the meaning of our existence. For example, we have to understand that the world exists to everyone in a different way and that the world cannot exist without a human being.
From our lesson, what really struck me the most was that to be/to exist is to be spoken of, thought about or acted on. This posed so much questions for me. If no one speaks of us, thinks about us or interacts with us, does that mean that we cease to exist? Of course, the very fact that we are thinking, according to Descartes (Cogito Ergo Sum), leads us to believe that we do, in fact, exist. However, does this still mean that we exist for other people?
Take for example, the poor and the oppressed. Although there are a lot of efforts to help those in need, a lot of people still turn a blind eye towards them. People who are apathetic towards the marginalized do not speak of them, they do not think of them and they do nothing to help them. It would be as if they did not exist for them. So now I wonder---since existence is a crucial part of being human, does this mean that the poor and the oppressed are treated as "less-than-human" to these apathetic people? It pains me to think that something like that continually occurs in our society.
If we treat people as if they didn't exist, would we be partially stripping them of their humanity? Maybe. I guess, it is somewhat of a our responsibility to speak of, think of and act on the people who surround us. We cannot be apathetic to the world around us and the people who live in it as well. I guess, that it isn't enough to know that we are existing-- we have really do have to understand that we are in existence with other people. We are never alone.
Existence is an essential part of being human. I think to some degree, all of us have known or felt that we exist. The thought had crossed our minds at our happiest moments or during the times when we've felt the most alive. We even affirm our existence when we feel extreme pain or sadness. When we jokingly say, "i'm dying from stress" or "Ayaw ko na mabuhay" during our hell weeks/months/sems, we understand that we are existing. The thought of our existence may not cross our minds everyday. I hardly think anyone wakes up in the morning and says to himself, "I exist. Hooray!" However, I feel certain that everyone has an understanding (or maybe at least a partial understanding) of their existence.
Many things in our world exist. I believe, though, that existence as human beings is slightly different. If we see and touch a rock or a tree, we know and say that it exists. However, If we see a person who has lost the ability to think, move, speak and is only capable of breathing-- we have a harder time in saying that that person actively exists in the world. In my opinion, that's one of the mysteries of being human. We do not just limit our existence to our physical presence. We don't limit ourselves to just breathing in and breathing out. There is something more to our existence.
So this leads me to believe that---maybe--- it isn't really about whether we exist or not. I think the real question is, what does it mean for us to exist.
According to Lujipen, we need to take certain steps to be able to understand properly the meaning of our existence. For example, we have to understand that the world exists to everyone in a different way and that the world cannot exist without a human being.
From our lesson, what really struck me the most was that to be/to exist is to be spoken of, thought about or acted on. This posed so much questions for me. If no one speaks of us, thinks about us or interacts with us, does that mean that we cease to exist? Of course, the very fact that we are thinking, according to Descartes (Cogito Ergo Sum), leads us to believe that we do, in fact, exist. However, does this still mean that we exist for other people?
Take for example, the poor and the oppressed. Although there are a lot of efforts to help those in need, a lot of people still turn a blind eye towards them. People who are apathetic towards the marginalized do not speak of them, they do not think of them and they do nothing to help them. It would be as if they did not exist for them. So now I wonder---since existence is a crucial part of being human, does this mean that the poor and the oppressed are treated as "less-than-human" to these apathetic people? It pains me to think that something like that continually occurs in our society.
If we treat people as if they didn't exist, would we be partially stripping them of their humanity? Maybe. I guess, it is somewhat of a our responsibility to speak of, think of and act on the people who surround us. We cannot be apathetic to the world around us and the people who live in it as well. I guess, that it isn't enough to know that we are existing-- we have really do have to understand that we are in existence with other people. We are never alone.
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
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 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.
Sunday, September 15, 2013
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.
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.
Thursday, September 12, 2013
I Can’t Think of a Title…(Pun Intended)
by Victor Uy
Existence presupposes thinking. This is primarily the reason why we, as human beings, are affirmed of our existence in this world – we are thinking beings. Because we can think, we are certain that we are alive.And by being alive, we are able to act on our own free will. But how do we think? What do we think about? Are we certain that whatever is in our minds is true? – These are just some of the questions that require, again, some form of thinking.
Thinking, as we are all capable of, is an affirmation of life. We undergo this process every single day, and we don’t even notice that we are thinking because it all comes naturally. Thinking is good. It provokes more ideas to flourish – it adds fuel to the fire that is doubt. Doubting has a bad connotation but isn’t necessarily detrimental; in fact, doubt could lead to the discovery of things and insights that we’ve never thought of before. An example would be the classic notion that the Earth is flat. Had there been no one to doubt it, we would still think that the Earth is, indeed, flat – had we just stopped there and accepted everything that was presented to us, we wouldn’t find out that the Earth is an oblate spheroid, that there are, in fact, other planetary bodies out there waiting to be discovered…so on and so forth.
Thinking is not just “thinking” anymore because we live in a vast world of subjectivity.The way I see it, people who doubt more are the ones who think more. Doubt canbe a vessel to be able to arrive at certitude. Sometimes we need to clear our minds first of anything and everything to be able to arrive at a certain insight.Accepting an idea or anything for that matter requires less thinking, as opposed to questioning the process, disagreeing with the norm, fighting for what you believe in, or what have you. Doubters often have this defensive stance with regards to different matters mainly because they want more physical proof. However, proof is not that easy to come up with. A classic example of this will be the existence of a God or a “higher being”.
We, including anything and everything in this world, are creatures. A creature, for it to be a creature, then presupposes that there is, indeed, a creator.This might sound all philosophical and abstract to some, if not to most people.Oftentimes, skeptics ask for proof. Unluckily, the world didn’t come in Blu-Ray format wherein you could just press rewind and watch everything from the very beginning to see if there really is a “higher being”.
Some people say, “to see is to believe” – and these kinds of peopleare the ones who are more skeptical because they want physical or scientific proof. The popular phrase is an overused argument when it comes to the existence of a God. A pilosopoway of catching these people off-guard is by responding to their argument with another question: “do you have a brain?” of course, the person would affirm that he or she has one. The next question is “have you ever seen your brain?” expect a moment of silence and prepare to tell him or her “that’s right...you don’t have a brain”. If the person you’re arguing with is tougher than most, he would respond, “How can I think if you don’t have a brain?” Then you can go hit him or her back with another argument, “How can you be a creature if there is no creator?” Following the to-see-is-to-believe logic, we could formulate a lot of fallacious statements.
There will always be a heated debate on topics regarding religion and we will find ourselves, most of the time, agreeing to disagree. Some people would be convinced by the fact that it is written in some document called “The Bible” or “Koran”, but the other side of the spectrum – the one composed of skeptic thinkers – will always yearn for that “proof”. However, up to the present, there is no way to prove God’s existence by means of intellectualization, for belief in God requires a “leap of faith”.
So as to close my blog entry, I have one question for you…Do you have a brain?
Existence presupposes thinking. This is primarily the reason why we, as human beings, are affirmed of our existence in this world – we are thinking beings. Because we can think, we are certain that we are alive.And by being alive, we are able to act on our own free will. But how do we think? What do we think about? Are we certain that whatever is in our minds is true? – These are just some of the questions that require, again, some form of thinking.
Thinking, as we are all capable of, is an affirmation of life. We undergo this process every single day, and we don’t even notice that we are thinking because it all comes naturally. Thinking is good. It provokes more ideas to flourish – it adds fuel to the fire that is doubt. Doubting has a bad connotation but isn’t necessarily detrimental; in fact, doubt could lead to the discovery of things and insights that we’ve never thought of before. An example would be the classic notion that the Earth is flat. Had there been no one to doubt it, we would still think that the Earth is, indeed, flat – had we just stopped there and accepted everything that was presented to us, we wouldn’t find out that the Earth is an oblate spheroid, that there are, in fact, other planetary bodies out there waiting to be discovered…so on and so forth.
Thinking is not just “thinking” anymore because we live in a vast world of subjectivity.The way I see it, people who doubt more are the ones who think more. Doubt canbe a vessel to be able to arrive at certitude. Sometimes we need to clear our minds first of anything and everything to be able to arrive at a certain insight.Accepting an idea or anything for that matter requires less thinking, as opposed to questioning the process, disagreeing with the norm, fighting for what you believe in, or what have you. Doubters often have this defensive stance with regards to different matters mainly because they want more physical proof. However, proof is not that easy to come up with. A classic example of this will be the existence of a God or a “higher being”.
We, including anything and everything in this world, are creatures. A creature, for it to be a creature, then presupposes that there is, indeed, a creator.This might sound all philosophical and abstract to some, if not to most people.Oftentimes, skeptics ask for proof. Unluckily, the world didn’t come in Blu-Ray format wherein you could just press rewind and watch everything from the very beginning to see if there really is a “higher being”.
Some people say, “to see is to believe” – and these kinds of peopleare the ones who are more skeptical because they want physical or scientific proof. The popular phrase is an overused argument when it comes to the existence of a God. A pilosopoway of catching these people off-guard is by responding to their argument with another question: “do you have a brain?” of course, the person would affirm that he or she has one. The next question is “have you ever seen your brain?” expect a moment of silence and prepare to tell him or her “that’s right...you don’t have a brain”. If the person you’re arguing with is tougher than most, he would respond, “How can I think if you don’t have a brain?” Then you can go hit him or her back with another argument, “How can you be a creature if there is no creator?” Following the to-see-is-to-believe logic, we could formulate a lot of fallacious statements.
There will always be a heated debate on topics regarding religion and we will find ourselves, most of the time, agreeing to disagree. Some people would be convinced by the fact that it is written in some document called “The Bible” or “Koran”, but the other side of the spectrum – the one composed of skeptic thinkers – will always yearn for that “proof”. However, up to the present, there is no way to prove God’s existence by means of intellectualization, for belief in God requires a “leap of faith”.
So as to close my blog entry, I have one question for you…Do you have a brain?
Infinities
by Miguel Co
A long time ago, I was at a retreat. I had it during a time when I was still young, trying out new things, and exploring the world. It wasn't really that eventful, at least until the last night of the retreat. During that time, I was sitting on the grass, with my back behind the tree. Then for some reason, something strange happened. I felt like I heard a voice, and I was talking to it. I honestly didn't know what to make of it, but it was relaxing and soothing. At the end of the entire retreat, I was seized by a fulfillment that I really can't quite put into words.
Looking back at the experience, I think it was an experience with the infinite. It's something that's indescribable and yet completely real. This infinite was experienced by my finite self, but it's not something that I can comprehend or fully understand. Trying to cram this idea of infinite into me is like trying to fit a house into a small hole: it just won't fit. Therefore idea of this infinite must have come from someone who is also infinite: God. That's what it means when it's said that the experience of God is such that he's in me without me understanding him. I can't comprehend what happened, but I know it's real, that it exists, and that it's a beautiful feeling.
From this experience of the infinite, of a God, I think that it's something that I can't objectify. If I tried to objectify it, then I'd just be dissecting the experience until it's nothing more than an aftertaste. And I'd be missing out on some things: feelings, worries, joys, and inhibitions. There are just some things that are too precious to be objectified because when we objectify, we lose something precious. This idea would best be expressed in this quote:
"Numbers and figures should not speak as loudly as our hearts."
Last year for one of my projects I went with a group of people to a cooperative, an institution made to help uplift the lives of people in its vicinity. They were an institution that did make some money, but they didn't care about the money as much as the welfare of their members and the community where they resided in. Of course, they need money to help these people. They need material to help the spirit grow. It's not all about the money and the profits, but in the end it's about the people and those around us. This is what we risk losing when we completely objectify everything, and why instead of taking everything apart and pursuing everything with an objective approach, there is merit in approaching things and God as a mystery, and as a gift.
A long time ago, I was at a retreat. I had it during a time when I was still young, trying out new things, and exploring the world. It wasn't really that eventful, at least until the last night of the retreat. During that time, I was sitting on the grass, with my back behind the tree. Then for some reason, something strange happened. I felt like I heard a voice, and I was talking to it. I honestly didn't know what to make of it, but it was relaxing and soothing. At the end of the entire retreat, I was seized by a fulfillment that I really can't quite put into words.
Looking back at the experience, I think it was an experience with the infinite. It's something that's indescribable and yet completely real. This infinite was experienced by my finite self, but it's not something that I can comprehend or fully understand. Trying to cram this idea of infinite into me is like trying to fit a house into a small hole: it just won't fit. Therefore idea of this infinite must have come from someone who is also infinite: God. That's what it means when it's said that the experience of God is such that he's in me without me understanding him. I can't comprehend what happened, but I know it's real, that it exists, and that it's a beautiful feeling.
From this experience of the infinite, of a God, I think that it's something that I can't objectify. If I tried to objectify it, then I'd just be dissecting the experience until it's nothing more than an aftertaste. And I'd be missing out on some things: feelings, worries, joys, and inhibitions. There are just some things that are too precious to be objectified because when we objectify, we lose something precious. This idea would best be expressed in this quote:
"Numbers and figures should not speak as loudly as our hearts."
Last year for one of my projects I went with a group of people to a cooperative, an institution made to help uplift the lives of people in its vicinity. They were an institution that did make some money, but they didn't care about the money as much as the welfare of their members and the community where they resided in. Of course, they need money to help these people. They need material to help the spirit grow. It's not all about the money and the profits, but in the end it's about the people and those around us. This is what we risk losing when we completely objectify everything, and why instead of taking everything apart and pursuing everything with an objective approach, there is merit in approaching things and God as a mystery, and as a gift.
Thursday, January 17, 2013
The Beauty of the Other
by Rimina Patolot
15 January 2013
Discussed Text: Levinas, "Secrecy and Freedom," Ethics and Infinity
In our last lecture, Levinas tried to show, through Descartes’ philosophy, the Face of the Other. There are certain insights in Descartes’ third meditation, Totality and Infinity, which can also do justice to the Other that Levinas has presented. This topic was very hard to digest for me as Levinas tried to show a structure of the idea of the Infinite – which involved thinking beyond thinking. And in this idea of the Infinite, we are be able to experience the Other as Face.
As Levinas goes back to Descartes’ philosophy, we recall the point where Descartes doubts everything, and is then left with just ideas in his mind. He then classifies the ideas left in his mind and comes with the idea of himself, on other persons, animals, and God – the Infinite. But then, where did these ideas come from? Either they came from him, or these ideas were put into him. Descartes then says that the idea of God is an infinite substance, eternal, immutable, independent, omniscient, omnipotent – an idea which is also found in traditional philosophy or metaphysics. However, he is interested in the structure, not in proving the existence of God. He goes on to point out that there are certain ideas in us which cannot be contained within ourselves. Thus, this idea which overflows may have been put into us, and not from us. Because, as Dr. Garcia has said, “How can a finite substance be the origin of an infinite substance? How can I contain something which I cannot contain? If the cause is finite, the effect cannot be infinite. The effect cannot be greater than the cause.”
From what we have learned last semester, Descartes says that an idea is true if it is clear and distinct. And this idea of the Infinite is very clear and distinct. He realizes this reality goes beyond our understanding – exactly why it is difficult for us to comprehend. And as God goes beyond our comprehension, we think more than what we can think when we think of Him. We can think about Him, but we don’t really know Him. Because a God that can be comprehended, cannot be a God. Descartes then ends his third meditation, in admiration and gratitude of this all perfect God.
I admit that I was perplexed by how Descartes illustrated the idea of the Infinite at first. I cannot even fully grasp it until now, so I'm trying to be careful in conveying my ideas about what I have understood from the lecture. But then, I realized that that was the point. To think beyond your thinking. To know that you don’t know. To understand that you can’t understand. This process of us trying to figure it out is part of the experience, because this reality can neither stand on mere reasons nor understanding. And in the end, this kind of thinking will make us admire this reality, and even be grateful for it.
So why did Levinas try to show this particular structure in Descartes' philosophy? Instead of saying that the idea of the Infinite is found in God, he said that it is in the Other - the Human Other, as philosophy has human experience as its basis. Thinking about the Other escapes the grasp of the "I." And from this, I realized that we do experience the Face of the Other as Infinite in our everyday lives. When we communicate with each other, we discover things that are beyond what we think. That's why it feels great to get to know someone you just met, and listening to other people's interests and experiences - we realize that there's something so much more than just the things in your mind. And from this, we become more thankful for such experiences because we are able to go beyond our thinking through the experience of the Other.
In line with the experience of the Other as Face, I'd like to share this "Youtube movie" with you, because I have personally experienced the Other in a very beautiful way through this 90-minute video. I have already watched this before, but watching it after our lecture, I came to appreciate it in a whole new way. Assembled by Kevin McDonald, "Life in a Day" is a compilation of videos uploaded by different users from all over the world, showing what it was like in a single day of their lives on a normal day, July 24, 2010. I was very emotionally involved with some of the stories, and I had many realizations upon watching it. I opted not to give an overview of the video, nor what my realizations were, as I want you to experience it first-hand. I hope that you find the beauty of the Face of the Other through this video - the beauty of the Other that escapes our grasps. And that even in this brief experience of the Other, we experience the Infinite.
15 January 2013
Discussed Text: Levinas, "Secrecy and Freedom," Ethics and Infinity
In our last lecture, Levinas tried to show, through Descartes’ philosophy, the Face of the Other. There are certain insights in Descartes’ third meditation, Totality and Infinity, which can also do justice to the Other that Levinas has presented. This topic was very hard to digest for me as Levinas tried to show a structure of the idea of the Infinite – which involved thinking beyond thinking. And in this idea of the Infinite, we are be able to experience the Other as Face.
As Levinas goes back to Descartes’ philosophy, we recall the point where Descartes doubts everything, and is then left with just ideas in his mind. He then classifies the ideas left in his mind and comes with the idea of himself, on other persons, animals, and God – the Infinite. But then, where did these ideas come from? Either they came from him, or these ideas were put into him. Descartes then says that the idea of God is an infinite substance, eternal, immutable, independent, omniscient, omnipotent – an idea which is also found in traditional philosophy or metaphysics. However, he is interested in the structure, not in proving the existence of God. He goes on to point out that there are certain ideas in us which cannot be contained within ourselves. Thus, this idea which overflows may have been put into us, and not from us. Because, as Dr. Garcia has said, “How can a finite substance be the origin of an infinite substance? How can I contain something which I cannot contain? If the cause is finite, the effect cannot be infinite. The effect cannot be greater than the cause.”
From what we have learned last semester, Descartes says that an idea is true if it is clear and distinct. And this idea of the Infinite is very clear and distinct. He realizes this reality goes beyond our understanding – exactly why it is difficult for us to comprehend. And as God goes beyond our comprehension, we think more than what we can think when we think of Him. We can think about Him, but we don’t really know Him. Because a God that can be comprehended, cannot be a God. Descartes then ends his third meditation, in admiration and gratitude of this all perfect God.
I admit that I was perplexed by how Descartes illustrated the idea of the Infinite at first. I cannot even fully grasp it until now, so I'm trying to be careful in conveying my ideas about what I have understood from the lecture. But then, I realized that that was the point. To think beyond your thinking. To know that you don’t know. To understand that you can’t understand. This process of us trying to figure it out is part of the experience, because this reality can neither stand on mere reasons nor understanding. And in the end, this kind of thinking will make us admire this reality, and even be grateful for it.
So why did Levinas try to show this particular structure in Descartes' philosophy? Instead of saying that the idea of the Infinite is found in God, he said that it is in the Other - the Human Other, as philosophy has human experience as its basis. Thinking about the Other escapes the grasp of the "I." And from this, I realized that we do experience the Face of the Other as Infinite in our everyday lives. When we communicate with each other, we discover things that are beyond what we think. That's why it feels great to get to know someone you just met, and listening to other people's interests and experiences - we realize that there's something so much more than just the things in your mind. And from this, we become more thankful for such experiences because we are able to go beyond our thinking through the experience of the Other.
In line with the experience of the Other as Face, I'd like to share this "Youtube movie" with you, because I have personally experienced the Other in a very beautiful way through this 90-minute video. I have already watched this before, but watching it after our lecture, I came to appreciate it in a whole new way. Assembled by Kevin McDonald, "Life in a Day" is a compilation of videos uploaded by different users from all over the world, showing what it was like in a single day of their lives on a normal day, July 24, 2010. I was very emotionally involved with some of the stories, and I had many realizations upon watching it. I opted not to give an overview of the video, nor what my realizations were, as I want you to experience it first-hand. I hope that you find the beauty of the Face of the Other through this video - the beauty of the Other that escapes our grasps. And that even in this brief experience of the Other, we experience the Infinite.
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
The Importance of Doubting
by Russell Virata
20 September 2012
Discussed text: Rene Descartes, Mediations on the First Philosophy
The common perception of people when it comes to the word “doubt” is something negative. To doubt means to question, to be unsure, or simply to distrust. When someone, say a close friend, doubts you, you will definitely get hurt or be offended (unless of course you know yourself that what you said to him or her was a lie). Reversing the situation, when you doubt someone, there is the possibility of losing your trust and bond with that person. However, as we have discussed in class, doubting can be positive and is an important step in doing philosophy.
Galileo, through the act of doubting that the sun is the one revolving around the earth, was able to discover that the opposite is true. Descartes also doubted the philosophical foundations during his time and was able to come up with his own method known as the “Universal Methodic Doubt”. He first doubted his senses, thinking that these can be a form of deception like when you are dreaming or when you are in reality a butterfly thinking that you are a man. (I personally had a similar experience in the past when I thought, what if I, together with other people, are just characters being controlled by someone who is playing “The Sims”? But then this sounds improbable given the fact that a Sims character should not have a thinking of his own and I, having this thought, am sure that I am thinking.) Descartes then also doubted the foundations of mathematics, thinking that there could be an evil genie who is tricking him to believe that a triangle is a three-sided polygon or that two plus three equals five. Finally, after doubting everything, Descartes came up with the conclusion that there is only one thing he cannot doubt, and that is he exists as a thinking thing which doubts. Through doubting, Galileo and Descartes were able to have their own thoughts.
Indeed, doubting the norm and the status quo, just like what these two did, is very important in philosophy. As Simon Critchley says, “The philosopher neither sees nor hears the so-called unwritten laws of the city, that is, the mores and conventions that govern public life.” Bear in mind that this does not mean doubting and philosophy is about contradicting socially accepted truths or proving new discoveries. This just means that in doing philosophy, one should not easily accept things and take them for granted even if they are universally accepted, but rather to be always open to inquiries, questions and possibilities. It is from these questions that insights, reflections and realizations come in. For example, I have my own experience, which I believe some of us have also encountered, where my parents instilled in my mind when I was still a child that I should be a doctor when I grow up because no one in our extended family has become a doctor yet and of course doctors have very high salary. As I grew up, I doubted that being a doctor was for me because I did not like science much and so I took up a course which was more interesting for me. If I accepted my parents’ advice for me and closed my mind from the other possible paths, then I am pretty sure I would not be enjoying college now.
Take the RH Bill debate as another example. We should not choose a side simply because many people are pro-RH Bill or because the Catholic Church is anti-RH Bill. Rather, we should carefully assess and inquire about the different advantages and disadvantages of it before thinking critically whether the bill is actually worth passing or not. And even after having your own stand, I think you can still doubt some more and increase your thoughts about both sides. This is just one of many situations where doubting can be relevant.
As we can see, doubting is not only relevant in the times of Galileo and Descartes, but also in the present. It is a very essential ingredient in philosophy, which is not meant to break the laws, but rather to enable one to think and reflect on his own. Let me end with a quote by George Iles, “Doubt is the beginning, not the end, of wisdom.”
Friday, September 21, 2012
Doubt
by Luigi Cho
13 September 2012
Discussed Text: Rene Descartes, Meditations on the First Philosophy
Doubt, the very word speaks with negativity. It means not to accept, not to compromise, not to agree. It brews up images of conflict, and mistrust. Doubt, to most people is something that leads to worse things. It can be likened to temptation which can be seen as the cause of evil things, like how doubt leads us to do things in retaliation to things that aren’t even true. However, like temptation, it isn’t wrong or evil to doubt. We must only learn to use it to our advantages.
Rene Descartes discovered how to make one of the biggest weaknesses of humanity into a great ally. His doubt of what truly exists, led him to pioneer the use of reason in the natural sciences. The method of doubt he used was methodological skepticism, which is to doubt everything, unless proven otherwise. One of the few absolutes that he can conclude is his own existence. He sums this up in a simple sentence, “Cogito ergo sum” or “I think, therefore I am”. If he can doubt something, that means something is making him doubt, or at least causing him to doubt. So by this logic, there exists something to make him doubt. His doubt, or more accurately, his use of doubt led him to go on a philosophical journey to discover himself.
To utilize doubt as a way to better ourselves, we need to know how Descartes did it. He expressed humility in his actions. He knew that knowledge found in a book would always pale in comparison to experience. No matter how well learned he was, he still managed to open himself up and say that there are still some things that he needed to learn.
This has got to be one of the biggest lessons that we can grab from Descartes. He doubted because he was open to the idea that he wasn’t perfect. He wasn’t content with what he knew, with what he could learn.
I guess that’s how we should be. We shouldn’t just be satisfied with what’s in a book, it’s in a book, that knowledge is one internet search or library search away. What should really matter to us is what we do in the real world. Doubt is a fork in the road. We just have to decide which road to take.
13 September 2012
Discussed Text: Rene Descartes, Meditations on the First Philosophy
Doubt, the very word speaks with negativity. It means not to accept, not to compromise, not to agree. It brews up images of conflict, and mistrust. Doubt, to most people is something that leads to worse things. It can be likened to temptation which can be seen as the cause of evil things, like how doubt leads us to do things in retaliation to things that aren’t even true. However, like temptation, it isn’t wrong or evil to doubt. We must only learn to use it to our advantages.
Rene Descartes discovered how to make one of the biggest weaknesses of humanity into a great ally. His doubt of what truly exists, led him to pioneer the use of reason in the natural sciences. The method of doubt he used was methodological skepticism, which is to doubt everything, unless proven otherwise. One of the few absolutes that he can conclude is his own existence. He sums this up in a simple sentence, “Cogito ergo sum” or “I think, therefore I am”. If he can doubt something, that means something is making him doubt, or at least causing him to doubt. So by this logic, there exists something to make him doubt. His doubt, or more accurately, his use of doubt led him to go on a philosophical journey to discover himself.
To utilize doubt as a way to better ourselves, we need to know how Descartes did it. He expressed humility in his actions. He knew that knowledge found in a book would always pale in comparison to experience. No matter how well learned he was, he still managed to open himself up and say that there are still some things that he needed to learn.
This has got to be one of the biggest lessons that we can grab from Descartes. He doubted because he was open to the idea that he wasn’t perfect. He wasn’t content with what he knew, with what he could learn.
I guess that’s how we should be. We shouldn’t just be satisfied with what’s in a book, it’s in a book, that knowledge is one internet search or library search away. What should really matter to us is what we do in the real world. Doubt is a fork in the road. We just have to decide which road to take.
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mushy, Lengthy, Inspirational Speeches
by Nats Barretto
18 September 2012
Discussed Texts: Rene Descartes, Meditations on the First Philosophy
Gabriel Marcel, "Primary and Secondary Reflection," The Mystery of Being
Reflection comes in the weirdest parts of the day. One minute you're hurrying on your way to school, one minute you're reflecting about existence. This happened to me once while I was crossing a street and a motorcycle slowed down to give way to me. I remembered philosophy class: the mere fact that the motorcycle driver slowed down for me was proof that I do exist.
I also find it hard to control when to reflect sometimes, since it only comes when I'm "in the mood". One time I was reviewing for a long exam when a line from a song suddenly popped into my head. The line was, "wish that you could see what I see when it's gone". I really couldn't remember what the song is, but I knew that it was a song I always listen to. Because of this "disquiet", I stopped reading what I was reading and searched my iTunes. I kept on browsing and browsing, listening to songs I felt was a good candidate for the line. I did this for more than an hour until I finally found the song I was looking for. It was a song I kept on ignoring for the past hour.
The thing is, I thought I knew the song too well that I wouldn't mistake it for as the origin of the line. But maybe that was the problem: I knew the song too well. When we're too familiar with something, we tend to have a hard time recognizing it sometimes.
This concept can also be applied to our relations with people. Knowing a person too well can make it hard for us to describe them sometimes. Many lectures ago, I remember Dr. Garcia summarizing this idea with, "the more we know, the more we don't know".
Those two reflections involved the totality of "me". It didn't just involve my body: it also involved my soul. It's center, or "fulcrum", was the totality of my being. Realizing my existence doesn't only involve the existence of my body, but also the existence something beyond my body, something which controls and gives life to my body: my soul. Realizing the meaning behind "knowing less as we know more" also just didn't involve my body. It involved the experiences of my body: listening to a song and being familiar with it, having a friend and knowing him for a long time.
Okay, I already have these insights. Now what do I do with it? I wrote about it, but maybe there's something more I can do with these insights. Maybe these insights can help me "convert" for the better. Knowing of my existence and being conscious of it can help me make better decisions in the future. For example, seeing a girl carrying a huge heavy block of wood, I know that I can help and I do help being aware that I can help. It's a menial example, but it can lead to something greater. Being aware that I exist, I know that I can help more people other than the girl carrying the huge heavy block. (Dr. Garcia suggested in class the corporal works of mercy.)
Reflection is the main source of wisdom. It is the source of the mushy, lengthy and inspirational speeches we usually hear at the end of a movie or a TV show. These reflections teach us about life. They are the ones that make our day "less bad", or in a more positive way, "more happy". Though maybe not all reflections have obvious "life applications", I think these reflections still contribute to how we think as a whole. The insight I've gained from my second account probably sounds too "theoretical" in a way that it's hard to put it into use. But then, maybe it doesn't have a direct use. Maybe it's just suppose to make you feel close to someone when you realize you find it hard to describe them. Maybe, maybe not, no one can really know. As Fr. Ferriols said, the totality of some insights are really hard to grasp. Maybe this is one of those insights.
Monday, September 17, 2012
Doubt and Existence
by Barbie Barlocher
13 September 2012
Discussed text: Rene Descartes, Meditations on the First Philosophy
Rene Descartes’ methological doubt has paved the way for the sciences. He also started the movement towards modern philosophy. Heck, he actually helped create a lot of things such as the Cartesian plane. But quite frankly, I am totally utterly confused by Descartes and his philosophy.
Rene Descartes was quite an ambitious fellow, really. He thought that he can separate what was real from what is not by observing a method which we call methological doubt. This means everything that is not certain is subjected to doubt and is therefore set aside. In a way, it’s like starting your very own framework of knowledge with absolutely nothing on it. So, in order to achieve absolute certainty, we must first doubt everything we know. What can we not doubt then? If everything we perceive is subjected to our interpretation and our own perception of it, is the thing which we perceive just a construct of our own imagination (considering our perception of things is prone to error)? With that way of thinking, Rene Descartes proves that thing that can only be absolutely certainly real and that is the self. Since he is able to think and ask of all of these things, there must be something capable of posing these questions and therefore ‘he’ exists. The ‘he’ in this situation should not be confused with the human body as Descartes separates that which is the body from the mind, which is known as the dualistic view of the human person.
Most if not all of us has faced a situation which caused us to doubt its reality. As for me, I usually end up questioning reality every time I wake up from a nightmare or a particularly good dream. It’s because I feel as if my mind is separated from my physical body whenever I dream. While I dream, everything I experience in it feels real and it is only when I wake up that I notice something peculiar in them. Inception is a science fiction movie that deals with these same ideas.
The main quest of Leonardo DiCaprio in Inception is to go into someone’s dream to extract information from them or to create an idea in their mind as they are dreaming. In the end of it all, we are made to question if whatever is shown indeed reality or if they are still stuck within a dream.
All that aside, I think that it is in doubting that we are able to understand. It is in questioning that we are able to ask ourselves important questions. And, it is in thinking that we are able to prove something to ourselves. By quoting Descartes, I can say that because I thought about all of these I exist.
13 September 2012
Discussed text: Rene Descartes, Meditations on the First Philosophy
Rene Descartes’ methological doubt has paved the way for the sciences. He also started the movement towards modern philosophy. Heck, he actually helped create a lot of things such as the Cartesian plane. But quite frankly, I am totally utterly confused by Descartes and his philosophy.
Rene Descartes was quite an ambitious fellow, really. He thought that he can separate what was real from what is not by observing a method which we call methological doubt. This means everything that is not certain is subjected to doubt and is therefore set aside. In a way, it’s like starting your very own framework of knowledge with absolutely nothing on it. So, in order to achieve absolute certainty, we must first doubt everything we know. What can we not doubt then? If everything we perceive is subjected to our interpretation and our own perception of it, is the thing which we perceive just a construct of our own imagination (considering our perception of things is prone to error)? With that way of thinking, Rene Descartes proves that thing that can only be absolutely certainly real and that is the self. Since he is able to think and ask of all of these things, there must be something capable of posing these questions and therefore ‘he’ exists. The ‘he’ in this situation should not be confused with the human body as Descartes separates that which is the body from the mind, which is known as the dualistic view of the human person.
Most if not all of us has faced a situation which caused us to doubt its reality. As for me, I usually end up questioning reality every time I wake up from a nightmare or a particularly good dream. It’s because I feel as if my mind is separated from my physical body whenever I dream. While I dream, everything I experience in it feels real and it is only when I wake up that I notice something peculiar in them. Inception is a science fiction movie that deals with these same ideas.
The main quest of Leonardo DiCaprio in Inception is to go into someone’s dream to extract information from them or to create an idea in their mind as they are dreaming. In the end of it all, we are made to question if whatever is shown indeed reality or if they are still stuck within a dream.
All that aside, I think that it is in doubting that we are able to understand. It is in questioning that we are able to ask ourselves important questions. And, it is in thinking that we are able to prove something to ourselves. By quoting Descartes, I can say that because I thought about all of these I exist.
Saturday, September 15, 2012
The Secret
by Kat Balonan
13 September 2012
Discussed Text: Rene Descartes, Meditations on the First Philosophy
Over the years I have heard a lot of tragic stories and tabloids of celebrities who started out showing exceptional skills and talents in line with their careers but gradually slipping down the path where they begin to depend on some of the vices as their only means of attaining happiness. In the discussion of the article by Descartes, one of the few lines that stood out the most, for me, is when he said: “It is not enough to have a good mind, rather the main thing is to apply it well. The greatest souls are capable of the greatest vices as well as of the greatest virtue:. In a lot of ways this can be connected especially in our society today.
In the fast- paced society today, a lot of people tend to forget the importance of simplicity and compassion especially towards others. Many of us are so busy in trying to concentrate in attaining our needs or our goals in life that we actually forget to LIVE our life. The saying: “Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever” by Mahatma Gandhi seems to gradually fade in the midst of our work, our school work and other “seemingly important priorities” Perhaps a lot of us still continues to search for the meaning of life and how to attain happiness in this chaotic world that we try to search these things in the various aspects of our lives. There are times where we search in the wrong places that we actually end up living only in temporary happiness through these vices. Others who search in the right places began to develop a sense of awareness not only in him but towards the people that surrounds him.
So then, where can we find the answer to the idea of life? I believe the secret is found in the “classics”, such as poetry, mathematics, writing, etc., that Descartes had described in his article. It is through these things that we begin to slowly understand and appreciate the beauty of the thought that is rooted deep in our society. It is by indulging in these things that we learn not only about ourselves but also our society. This is not to say that what we read or what we learn in these classic is the only way to live our life but it is more on the idea or the essence that we gain from these things. It’s kind of like traveling. It will be boring if we are given an instruction manual on where to travel first or what to do. It defeats its primary purpose. Traveling is more on self- discovery just like when reading these classics. It is more effective if we apply what we learn or what we experience in the way we lived. Try to recall a favorite book that you have read recently or a long time ago. Usually, you would remember this book because you were able to identify with the character or maybe the situation is somehow familiar. Most of all, it made an impact in your life no matter how small or big it is. It somehow made us think more about life and changes us in the inside. For me, the book that I can say influences me the most is perhaps Paolo Coelho's The Alchemist because it was the very first book that made me think about the meaning of life. It somehow changes my perspective that life is all about being what society wants you to be.
To end my entry I would like to share one of the poems that I learned in my Lit class that really help me think about the importance of finding ourselves and our happiness.
13 September 2012
Discussed Text: Rene Descartes, Meditations on the First Philosophy
“People are like stained- glass windows. They sparkle and shine when the sun is out, but when the darkness sets in, their true beauty is revealed only if there is a light from within”
- Elizabeth Kübler- Ross
Over the years I have heard a lot of tragic stories and tabloids of celebrities who started out showing exceptional skills and talents in line with their careers but gradually slipping down the path where they begin to depend on some of the vices as their only means of attaining happiness. In the discussion of the article by Descartes, one of the few lines that stood out the most, for me, is when he said: “It is not enough to have a good mind, rather the main thing is to apply it well. The greatest souls are capable of the greatest vices as well as of the greatest virtue:. In a lot of ways this can be connected especially in our society today.
In the fast- paced society today, a lot of people tend to forget the importance of simplicity and compassion especially towards others. Many of us are so busy in trying to concentrate in attaining our needs or our goals in life that we actually forget to LIVE our life. The saying: “Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever” by Mahatma Gandhi seems to gradually fade in the midst of our work, our school work and other “seemingly important priorities” Perhaps a lot of us still continues to search for the meaning of life and how to attain happiness in this chaotic world that we try to search these things in the various aspects of our lives. There are times where we search in the wrong places that we actually end up living only in temporary happiness through these vices. Others who search in the right places began to develop a sense of awareness not only in him but towards the people that surrounds him.
So then, where can we find the answer to the idea of life? I believe the secret is found in the “classics”, such as poetry, mathematics, writing, etc., that Descartes had described in his article. It is through these things that we begin to slowly understand and appreciate the beauty of the thought that is rooted deep in our society. It is by indulging in these things that we learn not only about ourselves but also our society. This is not to say that what we read or what we learn in these classic is the only way to live our life but it is more on the idea or the essence that we gain from these things. It’s kind of like traveling. It will be boring if we are given an instruction manual on where to travel first or what to do. It defeats its primary purpose. Traveling is more on self- discovery just like when reading these classics. It is more effective if we apply what we learn or what we experience in the way we lived. Try to recall a favorite book that you have read recently or a long time ago. Usually, you would remember this book because you were able to identify with the character or maybe the situation is somehow familiar. Most of all, it made an impact in your life no matter how small or big it is. It somehow made us think more about life and changes us in the inside. For me, the book that I can say influences me the most is perhaps Paolo Coelho's The Alchemist because it was the very first book that made me think about the meaning of life. It somehow changes my perspective that life is all about being what society wants you to be.
To end my entry I would like to share one of the poems that I learned in my Lit class that really help me think about the importance of finding ourselves and our happiness.
Richard Cory
Edwin Arlington Robinson
Whenever Richard Cory went down town,
We people on the pavement looked at him:
He was a gentleman from sole to crown,
Clean favored, and imperially slim.
And he was always quietly arrayed,
And he was always human when he talked;
But still he fluttered pulses when he said,
'Good-morning,' and he glittered when he walked.
And he was rich - yes, richer than a king -
And admirably schooled in every grace:
In fine, we thought that he was everything
To make us wish that we were in his place.
So on we worked, and waited for the light,
And went without the meat, and cursed the bread;
And Richard Cory, one calm summer night,
Went home and put a bullet through his head
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)