After reading more than half of the book, Mersault has finally reached his climax of grief. He finally admits his emotions and lets his feelings be known by others. Nobody really knows why he killed the Arab, but when he is testifying in front of the judge in chapter 2 part 2 he states: “…that for the first time in years I had this stupid urge to cry, because I could feel how much all these people hated me” (89-90). Since the beginning of the book Mersault did not show one bit of emotion. He was very neutral and did not enjoy much of what he was doing at any time. He did what his life leads him to do; he had no control over what happened in his life. He did everything because he had to do it, not because he wanted to do it. For example when Maman died, he went to her funeral just because he had to go and offer his kindness. He did not like being there one bit; he only went to the ceremony because he had to go and if he did not do so then what would his society think of him?
After killing the Arab at the end of chapter 6 part 1, Mersault has gained his character and is beginning to realize many things he hadn’t before. When he is locked up in the prison he realizes that his freedom is very limited compared to the way it was before. He cannot do anything that he wanted to do; before ending up in prison he never realized his freedom. He really misses his girlfriend Marie, and he is realizing this after he ends up in jail. Before this incident Mersault acted as if Marie was some item in his life. He would use her when he desired her love, but after a while he would treat her as if she had no feelings. Now when he is locked up in jail and Marie visits him he wants to touch her, he notices many things about her that he did not before: “All I could see was the sparkle of her teeth and the little folds of her eyes.” (75) When Mersault spent his time with Marie he only noticed the things that were sexual about her, now he actually realizes what love is really about. Mersault has changed a lot when digging deeper into his emotions and love for Marie. When he is taken away from the real world and locked up in a jail cell he realizes what he had and how everything has changed compared to the way everything was before in his life.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Who is This Guy?
I agree with the students that read The Curious Incident of The Dog in The Night Time. I feel like the characters of both of these books connect with each other. Both of their lives seem to be robotic in some ways. The setting is kind of strange; especially in The Stranger because while reading the book it feels like the main character is in some unknown part of the world living his life. I feel like the feelings the book gives me while I am reading is sort of a depressed, sad kind of tone. He seems to live a really black and white kind of life, there are no colors as Marco stated in class today. This is why I think the chalkboard idea went really well in Lucy’s animations with the story in The Stanger.
I feel like the main character is human because different people experience one thing in many different ways. For example if someone’s mother recently died, they would be sad and in mourning state. Everything in life would be bland for them. They would be depressed and wouldn’t really have any interest to do anything. In The Stranger the main character seems to just move on with his life; the fact that his mother died does not seem to make a difference for him: “It occurred to me that anyway one more Sunday was over, that Maman was buried now, that I was going back to work, and that, really, nothing had changed” (24). Nothing seems to have affected him after his mother’s death. I actually feel like he is more free to do whatever he desires. He is on and off with this lady named Marie and he is usually out with his neighbor Raymond. I guess he hasn’t really had the chance to feel like something is missing in his life. I wonder how his relationship with his mother was before she passed away.
Personally I don’t think I know anyone like him. He is a pretty strange guy in many ways, but I guess that’s what makes him unique. Sometimes in the outside world I would be walking on the street or be in a subway car with someone who I have never seen before, but then again I wonder how their life is. By their facial expressions they seem to look depressed and sad, yet I do not seem to know if this is true. Maybe in their personal life experiences they do seem to relate to the main character in the story. I can’t say anything because this may not be true.
To be honest I don’t really have an idea of what people are supposed to be like. They can be like whatever they feel like. I guess the society thinks that people are supposed to fit these standards and if they don’t then they are just different from us. I think that every human being is different in their own way. Nobody is in the same level or class or what ever category there is out there. I feel like everyone creates their own standards from what they feel is right and if they are comfortable with it. In The Stranger the story starts out about a man whose mother recently died. Throughout the book many readers feel like the main character does not really seem to be affected by his mother’s death. Just because someone has passed away we are automatically supposed to feel sad, shed tears and mourn for them. Reading the book we can tell that he is doing the total opposite. I guess we all think this way because this is how we are raised by our families and by society. It’s like a set of rules, we never seem to think beyond that, and when we see it like in this book then we act really surprised.
I think Camus wanted to make this character this way because he wanted us to break the shell of limited possibilities for everything. In our world today, expectations seem to be limited. I guess the author just wanted to give us another way we can look at a certain situation. We seem to automatically think and expect something without having to think through alternatives. Just like I said before it’s like a set of rules we have to follow, and if we break them its like OMG how can this happen. We make it seem like an alternative to a situation is nearly impossible.
I feel like the main character is pretty quiet throughout the book, he just talks when he wants to. Other than that he just does what he is told to do; he seems to be controlled by others. One person that seems to control him is one of his neighbors that turns out to be one of his friends named Raymond. Raymond discusses his problems with the main character about his girlfriend. He asks him to do a favor and the main character agrees automatically. Another example is when Raymond invites him to the beach: “He told me that a friend of his had invited me to spend the day Sunday at his little beach house, near Algiers. I said I’d really like to, but I’d promised to spend the day with a girlfriend. Raymond immediately told me that she was invited too” (40). Later on we find out that he chooses to go to the beach with his friend. I don’t know about other readers, but I feel like the main character was really not in the mood to spend his Sunday with all of them. He wanted to spend some time just with his girlfriend. Keeping this in mind, he still dismisses his thoughts and decides to go to the beach with all of them. I feel like he needs to do what he wants to do and not let others make him do things that he doesn’t seem to fancy much.
Hmmmm, can we really understand what it’s like to be a stranger? I guess by reading the book I can get to know better what it feels like to be a stranger, but then again everybody has their own interpretations. By reading The Stranger I am able to read through this random guy’s point of view, but I feel like I will have the answer to this question after I finish reading this book.
I feel like the main character is human because different people experience one thing in many different ways. For example if someone’s mother recently died, they would be sad and in mourning state. Everything in life would be bland for them. They would be depressed and wouldn’t really have any interest to do anything. In The Stranger the main character seems to just move on with his life; the fact that his mother died does not seem to make a difference for him: “It occurred to me that anyway one more Sunday was over, that Maman was buried now, that I was going back to work, and that, really, nothing had changed” (24). Nothing seems to have affected him after his mother’s death. I actually feel like he is more free to do whatever he desires. He is on and off with this lady named Marie and he is usually out with his neighbor Raymond. I guess he hasn’t really had the chance to feel like something is missing in his life. I wonder how his relationship with his mother was before she passed away.
Personally I don’t think I know anyone like him. He is a pretty strange guy in many ways, but I guess that’s what makes him unique. Sometimes in the outside world I would be walking on the street or be in a subway car with someone who I have never seen before, but then again I wonder how their life is. By their facial expressions they seem to look depressed and sad, yet I do not seem to know if this is true. Maybe in their personal life experiences they do seem to relate to the main character in the story. I can’t say anything because this may not be true.
To be honest I don’t really have an idea of what people are supposed to be like. They can be like whatever they feel like. I guess the society thinks that people are supposed to fit these standards and if they don’t then they are just different from us. I think that every human being is different in their own way. Nobody is in the same level or class or what ever category there is out there. I feel like everyone creates their own standards from what they feel is right and if they are comfortable with it. In The Stranger the story starts out about a man whose mother recently died. Throughout the book many readers feel like the main character does not really seem to be affected by his mother’s death. Just because someone has passed away we are automatically supposed to feel sad, shed tears and mourn for them. Reading the book we can tell that he is doing the total opposite. I guess we all think this way because this is how we are raised by our families and by society. It’s like a set of rules, we never seem to think beyond that, and when we see it like in this book then we act really surprised.
I think Camus wanted to make this character this way because he wanted us to break the shell of limited possibilities for everything. In our world today, expectations seem to be limited. I guess the author just wanted to give us another way we can look at a certain situation. We seem to automatically think and expect something without having to think through alternatives. Just like I said before it’s like a set of rules we have to follow, and if we break them its like OMG how can this happen. We make it seem like an alternative to a situation is nearly impossible.
I feel like the main character is pretty quiet throughout the book, he just talks when he wants to. Other than that he just does what he is told to do; he seems to be controlled by others. One person that seems to control him is one of his neighbors that turns out to be one of his friends named Raymond. Raymond discusses his problems with the main character about his girlfriend. He asks him to do a favor and the main character agrees automatically. Another example is when Raymond invites him to the beach: “He told me that a friend of his had invited me to spend the day Sunday at his little beach house, near Algiers. I said I’d really like to, but I’d promised to spend the day with a girlfriend. Raymond immediately told me that she was invited too” (40). Later on we find out that he chooses to go to the beach with his friend. I don’t know about other readers, but I feel like the main character was really not in the mood to spend his Sunday with all of them. He wanted to spend some time just with his girlfriend. Keeping this in mind, he still dismisses his thoughts and decides to go to the beach with all of them. I feel like he needs to do what he wants to do and not let others make him do things that he doesn’t seem to fancy much.
Hmmmm, can we really understand what it’s like to be a stranger? I guess by reading the book I can get to know better what it feels like to be a stranger, but then again everybody has their own interpretations. By reading The Stranger I am able to read through this random guy’s point of view, but I feel like I will have the answer to this question after I finish reading this book.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Huckabees Blog Post Assignment
Hmmm, now that’s a question to think deeply about. Well I think it all depends on the individual. For me I think that life is mainly meaningful. We are here to live our life and learn about new things everyday. For some our lives are planned out for us; for others we have to dig our own paths and make room for ourselves in this world. I think it also depends on what community you are living in and what the rules are. For example I live in the U.S.A. like many my use in life is to go to school, after finishing school go to college and major in what I’m interested in and then go on from there. This is what it’s like for many other students that live in the same area as me. I feel like life is pretty meaningful for me because I am given one chance to live this life and I have goals that I want to accomplish in my life.
In I <3 Huckabees Tommy’s girlfriend states: “If nothing matters, how can I matter?” I disagree with this quote because I feel like everything does matter and everything happens for a reason. I think that everyone makes an impact to this world bad or good. Even though these impacts may vary in size we are still here and make our life meaningful. Everything does matter to me and this is why I think that living this life is meaningful. Everyone matters in this world because most of us are here to do something either if it’s for ourselves or for others. If some of us were to be vanished from this world than others would be able to feel a change in many ways.
“Everything is connected and everything matters! Every atom of your body has been forged in the furnace of the sun, isn’t that cool?” says Bernard in I <3 Huckabees. I agree with this quote because we are all connected to each other which makes each and every one of us meaningful. I think that some of us may say that we do not at all matter in this world; we don’t think that we make any kind of impact. Well I think this is sort of connects to suicidal thoughts because those are the kind of thoughts one may have when considering their life. If some of us were to be taken away from this world then wouldn’t our family and close friends mourn for us? If there is someone that would remember you after you were to be vanished from this planet, then I think that you matter a whole lot in this world. Let’s say if you were not to be remembered by anyone and nobody had any kind of feelings towards you than I would say that you were not living a meaningful life. This would be pretty sad because if nobody seems to remember you in this world than what impact did you make? It would have been better if you didn’t exist at all…am I right?
I think that the reason this movie was a comedy was because many people may have mixed feelings about the idea of living a meaningful life. I don’t blame them, this is a pretty big concept to think about and each individual has their own way to interpret it. I feel like the movie I <3 Huckabees was created to make this question be thought about more. We all just seem to live our life day to day like robots doing all the work that we are supposed to do. We have responsibilities and have places to where we belong. We never seem to ask our self these big questions; I guess not many of us get the chance or time to do so. By creating this movie all of the viewers were able to connect to this main idea and compare it to themselves. I feel like this helps all of us understand why we are here living this life and why we are chosen to live it because it isn’t our decision to be here. Why do most of us seem to accept the offer of living this life?
In I <3 Huckabees Tommy’s girlfriend states: “If nothing matters, how can I matter?” I disagree with this quote because I feel like everything does matter and everything happens for a reason. I think that everyone makes an impact to this world bad or good. Even though these impacts may vary in size we are still here and make our life meaningful. Everything does matter to me and this is why I think that living this life is meaningful. Everyone matters in this world because most of us are here to do something either if it’s for ourselves or for others. If some of us were to be vanished from this world than others would be able to feel a change in many ways.
“Everything is connected and everything matters! Every atom of your body has been forged in the furnace of the sun, isn’t that cool?” says Bernard in I <3 Huckabees. I agree with this quote because we are all connected to each other which makes each and every one of us meaningful. I think that some of us may say that we do not at all matter in this world; we don’t think that we make any kind of impact. Well I think this is sort of connects to suicidal thoughts because those are the kind of thoughts one may have when considering their life. If some of us were to be taken away from this world then wouldn’t our family and close friends mourn for us? If there is someone that would remember you after you were to be vanished from this planet, then I think that you matter a whole lot in this world. Let’s say if you were not to be remembered by anyone and nobody had any kind of feelings towards you than I would say that you were not living a meaningful life. This would be pretty sad because if nobody seems to remember you in this world than what impact did you make? It would have been better if you didn’t exist at all…am I right?
I think that the reason this movie was a comedy was because many people may have mixed feelings about the idea of living a meaningful life. I don’t blame them, this is a pretty big concept to think about and each individual has their own way to interpret it. I feel like the movie I <3 Huckabees was created to make this question be thought about more. We all just seem to live our life day to day like robots doing all the work that we are supposed to do. We have responsibilities and have places to where we belong. We never seem to ask our self these big questions; I guess not many of us get the chance or time to do so. By creating this movie all of the viewers were able to connect to this main idea and compare it to themselves. I feel like this helps all of us understand why we are here living this life and why we are chosen to live it because it isn’t our decision to be here. Why do most of us seem to accept the offer of living this life?
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Blog comments 3
Corey…
I appreciate your honesty throughout your post, you are confused at times and do not understand what Banach is saying, but you are able to get through reading it. You agree with Banach when he states that "The Existentialist's secret of happiness, then, is to get one's value from within oneself. In doing so, one loses the promise of external value, but they find a more real happiness, one that cannot be taken away by the external forces beyond their control." This is because you do not believe external value is possible.
I also agree with the example that he uses with the slaves throughout his lecture. It connects to what happened in history. This makes me think, how would have those times been different if everyone were to think this way.
Even though you have many great ideas, and have a lot to say it makes me a bit confused while I am reading it. I think it is because you are not separating your work out into paragraphs. If you do this for next time, then your reader will understand your work without any confusion at all.
After reading your ideas, I look into my life and agree with what you have to say about how “a person's desires influences them no matter what that person does to and thinks about other people.”
Nice work Corey.
Amber M.
Sam,
You have some really great points. It makes me reconsider what I think about Banach’s lecture. You are really honest and support all your opinions with evidence. I loved reading your ideas. You do not agree when Banach states “To be free, then, I must follow the golden rule and act only as I would have others act.” And you do not feel that we are free at all living in our world.
This connects to some of my thoughts about freedom. I as well do not think that we are completely free living in this world today. I also use the example of people killing others when I think of this whole freedom concept. I think it all depends on what ones true definition of freedom is and how they interpret it. But we are both on the same page here for our definitions of freedom
I agree with Carrie, I think that you should look at all the questions you answer throughout your post with different perspectives. How would your thoughts change if you were to do so?
After reading all these ideas, I think about everything in my life and all the statements you have made about freedom. Even though I think that by living in the USA we have more rights than others living around the world, we still have a lot more freedom that we can gain. But the question is what kind of freedom does everyone want? And is that “good” freedom? Will everyone agree with it?
Great work Sam, keep it up!
Amber M.
I appreciate your honesty throughout your post, you are confused at times and do not understand what Banach is saying, but you are able to get through reading it. You agree with Banach when he states that "The Existentialist's secret of happiness, then, is to get one's value from within oneself. In doing so, one loses the promise of external value, but they find a more real happiness, one that cannot be taken away by the external forces beyond their control." This is because you do not believe external value is possible.
I also agree with the example that he uses with the slaves throughout his lecture. It connects to what happened in history. This makes me think, how would have those times been different if everyone were to think this way.
Even though you have many great ideas, and have a lot to say it makes me a bit confused while I am reading it. I think it is because you are not separating your work out into paragraphs. If you do this for next time, then your reader will understand your work without any confusion at all.
After reading your ideas, I look into my life and agree with what you have to say about how “a person's desires influences them no matter what that person does to and thinks about other people.”
Nice work Corey.
Amber M.
Sam,
You have some really great points. It makes me reconsider what I think about Banach’s lecture. You are really honest and support all your opinions with evidence. I loved reading your ideas. You do not agree when Banach states “To be free, then, I must follow the golden rule and act only as I would have others act.” And you do not feel that we are free at all living in our world.
This connects to some of my thoughts about freedom. I as well do not think that we are completely free living in this world today. I also use the example of people killing others when I think of this whole freedom concept. I think it all depends on what ones true definition of freedom is and how they interpret it. But we are both on the same page here for our definitions of freedom
I agree with Carrie, I think that you should look at all the questions you answer throughout your post with different perspectives. How would your thoughts change if you were to do so?
After reading all these ideas, I think about everything in my life and all the statements you have made about freedom. Even though I think that by living in the USA we have more rights than others living around the world, we still have a lot more freedom that we can gain. But the question is what kind of freedom does everyone want? And is that “good” freedom? Will everyone agree with it?
Great work Sam, keep it up!
Amber M.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Blog post 3
Even though this lecture seems to confuse me a lot, I am able to get the main point. In part three to me the main point is that happiness cannot be found in materials. But the BIG question here is how do we find happiness within ourselves? I also feel like the main concept is to live your life and die; but I disagree with this because life is not something we should live for just to die. It’s much more than that; you do not live your life as a neutral human being without any emotions or feelings at all. That would be when our life is “meaningless” and there is no point to live it and we should all die; as stated in the lecture. I think that there are many ways one can find true happiness; it all depends on what the person likes. For example one may become happy while they are eating because they enjoy consuming food, another may be happy when socializing with others. It all depends on the individual. This also connects to if we are able to find true happiness in ourselves or is it just the things we have surrounding us that make us happy? As stated in the lecture “…real value came from within and was greater than any value that could come from external things since it couldn’t be taken away.” I agree with this quote, but to me it seems like in the world we live in today, this does not seem to be true for all of us. Maybe for some of us but definitely not for all. These days we find pleasure within the products surrounding us, so we do not consider the fact that we are able to be happy by finding happiness within ourselves.
In part four of the lecture it seems to me that all of us are living under the same rule. We need to treat others the way we want to be treated. It also talks about freedom, and are we really free to do what we want to do? For example if we are free to do something bad, then won’t others start to follow what we do and start to do bad things as well? In the lecture it states that “To be free, then I must follow the golden rule and act only as I would have others act.” I agree with this quote because this is a rule I follow in my life as well. I guess not at all times, but come on we can make mistakes. I usually treat people the way I would want them to treat me in any situation. Also the example of being a slave is a good one for this lecture since it shows how we are all in the same level. It’s not like one individual is better than the other, no we are all living equally and everyone should treat each other equally as well. After reading this, a question kept coming up in my head…what’s your definition of freedom? I think this whole concept of freedom all depends on what you think freedom is. Depending on your thoughts, your definition may be different from others. “Our actions, though free, are constrained by our situation in a community.” I agree with this quote since it does depend on the situation which leads to your choice in what you should do. To be honest all this is really confusing to me, but it may become easy to understand…hopefully soon
In part four of the lecture it seems to me that all of us are living under the same rule. We need to treat others the way we want to be treated. It also talks about freedom, and are we really free to do what we want to do? For example if we are free to do something bad, then won’t others start to follow what we do and start to do bad things as well? In the lecture it states that “To be free, then I must follow the golden rule and act only as I would have others act.” I agree with this quote because this is a rule I follow in my life as well. I guess not at all times, but come on we can make mistakes. I usually treat people the way I would want them to treat me in any situation. Also the example of being a slave is a good one for this lecture since it shows how we are all in the same level. It’s not like one individual is better than the other, no we are all living equally and everyone should treat each other equally as well. After reading this, a question kept coming up in my head…what’s your definition of freedom? I think this whole concept of freedom all depends on what you think freedom is. Depending on your thoughts, your definition may be different from others. “Our actions, though free, are constrained by our situation in a community.” I agree with this quote since it does depend on the situation which leads to your choice in what you should do. To be honest all this is really confusing to me, but it may become easy to understand…hopefully soon
Monday, September 28, 2009
ghijk
Julie…
I really appreciate your thoughts and ideas about my post; they help me think deeply about this topic. The questions you ask me are the most helpful since I can think about them as well and be able to answer them for my next post…hopefully. In my post I was focused on the happiness of humans and how it connects to having freedom. Your questions seem to be based on the idea of freedom and if all of our thoughts about it are similar or different. I mainly talk about how freedom leads into happiness for humans; you talk about how the ideas of all humans on freedom relate and differ with each other. Both of our thoughts are based on human freedom, but we find our own way into thinking about the main concept.
Amber M.
Corey,
Your answers to my questions really show that you really understand what I wrote about in my post. They really helps me in letting me know what other people think about my ideas and questions. After reading your answers I am able to make similar connections and differ from some things as well. This helps me dig deeper into the topic. In my post I talk about the human freedom and how it leads us all into happiness; you talk about how it relates to human culture and many other big questions, like why we live on this planet…what is the reason for our presence? We basically talk about the same things but at some places our ideas are a bit different, but of course that’s okay. If we all lived under one idea then there would be no difference between us…right? We both are on the same page here, but I am questioning more about the connections between human freedom and human happiness while you say that it has to do with American culture. We both have many thoughts and questions on this topic and we have our own ideas to answer them.
Amber M.
I really appreciate your thoughts and ideas about my post; they help me think deeply about this topic. The questions you ask me are the most helpful since I can think about them as well and be able to answer them for my next post…hopefully. In my post I was focused on the happiness of humans and how it connects to having freedom. Your questions seem to be based on the idea of freedom and if all of our thoughts about it are similar or different. I mainly talk about how freedom leads into happiness for humans; you talk about how the ideas of all humans on freedom relate and differ with each other. Both of our thoughts are based on human freedom, but we find our own way into thinking about the main concept.
Amber M.
Corey,
Your answers to my questions really show that you really understand what I wrote about in my post. They really helps me in letting me know what other people think about my ideas and questions. After reading your answers I am able to make similar connections and differ from some things as well. This helps me dig deeper into the topic. In my post I talk about the human freedom and how it leads us all into happiness; you talk about how it relates to human culture and many other big questions, like why we live on this planet…what is the reason for our presence? We basically talk about the same things but at some places our ideas are a bit different, but of course that’s okay. If we all lived under one idea then there would be no difference between us…right? We both are on the same page here, but I am questioning more about the connections between human freedom and human happiness while you say that it has to do with American culture. We both have many thoughts and questions on this topic and we have our own ideas to answer them.
Amber M.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Hw 3: Blog Post # 2
It seems to really confuse me, all these questions are starting to hurt my brain, but I want some answers.
I want answers to these questions so that I know what is the reason that I am here? How does an individual perceive human freedom? Why are we here right now? All these questions are taking up a lot of space in my brain, and I am on a mission to solve this problem.
I agree when Banach says "How, then, can I be free when most of my external circumstances are determined by forces beyond my control, when I cannot help where I was born, what type of body I have, and what type of abilities my brain has predisposed me towards?"Even though we have the most control over ourselves for many things, there are still many aspects that we will never be able to change. It's just the way it is, there is no way to turn back.
Are we really our own boss? I feel like we are for many things that are in our control; but when we see it as an alternative it doesn't seem to be in our full control anymore. An example is when Banach points out "An artist cannot control the nature of the canvas, nor of the paints that she has to work with. Nor can she control the nature of the subjects she will paint. But she can control how she will view them...We may not be able to control the various elements within our experience that come from outside us, but we can view them and combine them in any way we like." I agree with this statement, even thought it seems that we have the power over what we are doing or the materials we are using, when we look at it another way, these thoughts are altered.
But why do we seem to care about such things? Why are we so confused about one little aspect in life?
It may be impossible to get the straight forward answer for all of these questions, because it depends on the person and how they answer it. This is why to find the answer to these questions seems to be a bit confusing for many. Even though someone is able to receive the "right" answer, they will be wrong for many because it all depends on what the individual thinks. There will never really be a "right" answer.
Why does freedom seem to make the human race happy?
Banach states "We now need to see what view of human happiness and of morality arise from this conception of human freedom." What is human freedom? One may think of it differently from another, wouldn't they. To me human freedom is what makes you happy, you are allowed to do what ever fancies you. I guess after reading this lecture, we do not have complete freedom since we are not able to have control over all the aspects of our life (gender, parents, birthday). It's the way it is, and will be forever.
The point of total freedom is to gain happiness in yourself. If you are a normal person you would perceive it in a normal way. Meaning if you have total freedom you would not go down the street killing anyone you see because you feel like it and you know you can do it. You would respect others surrounding you, just like many others do to you as well.
Banach has many interesting things that he states through out his lecture. It is able to help me see many perspectives in life.
I think we all have different explanations about our freedom, but most of us are on the same page.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
