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
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
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.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Hw 2
Julie…
I like how you say that to be an “absolute individual” we would have to be separated from our society. We seem to connect with each other in some ways even if we do not know everything about each other. And you admit that you have no idea what to write about :P
You are scared when you picture the line “trapped within our own minds”. Are you too afraid to figure out how this is reality for all of us?
Just like you, many others seem to have many big questions about this concept. The thing is that even though we are living our life like this day to day for years, we still have no right answer. Is there a right answer?
I think that you have many thoughts and ideas to share with us, but you are stuck. I think that you should answer the questions that you have written towards the end. It will definitely help you dig deeper and you may even be able to get an answer out of all of this. In your writing you seem rushed, maybe this is the way you write, but you should proofread your work.
After reading this, I am starting to wonder about the questions you asked and build off of them. Why are we spending our time in class thinking about absolute individuality?
It was nice reading your thoughts, I will like to read more soon.
Eric…
I like how you put Banach’s lecture in your own words, so readers understand what you think about it. You like to connect his lecture to yourself as well.
You do not know what is going on in other people’s lives; neither do they know about what is going on in your life. You say that the absolute freedom of an individual “is a person who is different and knows that there experiences are different from others and accepts it as to not be shackled down by the constant need to know what people have gone through in there lives”.
Many people seem to agree with Banach’s idea of us not knowing about each other, even if we are to be standing so close, our secrets are locked up within ourselves and can never be revealed.
Reading your thoughts shows that you only talk about what you think as your own person about the lecture. You should take it a step further and maybe try to think about what other people have to say about this. Is it the same things you have said or is it different? Why do you think so? I would also go back and check on those grammar mistakes.
Reading your ideas helps me make many connections; I am able to think more about my thoughts after reading you post. This seems to connect to our course since we are figuring out why we are here living in this world, and all the concepts surrounding this idea.
It was interesting to read your thoughts, I would like to read more soon.
I like how you say that to be an “absolute individual” we would have to be separated from our society. We seem to connect with each other in some ways even if we do not know everything about each other. And you admit that you have no idea what to write about :P
You are scared when you picture the line “trapped within our own minds”. Are you too afraid to figure out how this is reality for all of us?
Just like you, many others seem to have many big questions about this concept. The thing is that even though we are living our life like this day to day for years, we still have no right answer. Is there a right answer?
I think that you have many thoughts and ideas to share with us, but you are stuck. I think that you should answer the questions that you have written towards the end. It will definitely help you dig deeper and you may even be able to get an answer out of all of this. In your writing you seem rushed, maybe this is the way you write, but you should proofread your work.
After reading this, I am starting to wonder about the questions you asked and build off of them. Why are we spending our time in class thinking about absolute individuality?
It was nice reading your thoughts, I will like to read more soon.
Eric…
I like how you put Banach’s lecture in your own words, so readers understand what you think about it. You like to connect his lecture to yourself as well.
You do not know what is going on in other people’s lives; neither do they know about what is going on in your life. You say that the absolute freedom of an individual “is a person who is different and knows that there experiences are different from others and accepts it as to not be shackled down by the constant need to know what people have gone through in there lives”.
Many people seem to agree with Banach’s idea of us not knowing about each other, even if we are to be standing so close, our secrets are locked up within ourselves and can never be revealed.
Reading your thoughts shows that you only talk about what you think as your own person about the lecture. You should take it a step further and maybe try to think about what other people have to say about this. Is it the same things you have said or is it different? Why do you think so? I would also go back and check on those grammar mistakes.
Reading your ideas helps me make many connections; I am able to think more about my thoughts after reading you post. This seems to connect to our course since we are figuring out why we are here living in this world, and all the concepts surrounding this idea.
It was interesting to read your thoughts, I would like to read more soon.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Hw # 1
In the world today we are surrounded by other creatures that live with us, eat with us, breathe with us... Yet even if they are standing a centimeter away from us in a crowded elevator, we do not know a single thing about them. Their name, hobbies, age are all unknown things. Even though we are standing so close, it seems that we are standing miles and miles away. This connects to Banach's idea of "absolute individuality", and how we are the only ones that know the most about ourselves compared to anyone else; our likes, dislikes, etc... We seem to be too busy about what is going on with us and our lives, to care about what is going on with others. We live in a pool of our own thoughts, ideas, and feelings and don't have the time to have any interest about others. "Other people only see us from the outside. No one else can feel what we feel, and we cannot feel what is going on in any one else's mind." This is absolutely true if you live in today's world. We don't seem to give any interest on what is going on with others. We seem to know more about them from their physical experience than we do from how they are in the inside.
Absolute individuals to me means that we are all on our own in the world, we keep everything to ourselves because it's not anyone else's business. Since we keep all these things to ourselves, we are all alone in this world. I agree with Banach at some level because this is true at some point. We all seem to keep everything private from each other, and people have adapted to the idea of "minding their own business".
While being an absolute individual, we have absolute freedom as well. The same way we are able to keep our thoughts and feelings to ourselves, we are able to have our own freedom to do what we want. Absolute freedom of individuals means that we are able to make our own choices on deciding to be an individual like keeping everything to our self, or letting the whole world know all about who you are, what you think, or what your feelings are. This all depends on what you want as an individual. To me human happiness is having the freedom to do what you want whenever you want. You are not told what to do, or how to live, you do what you want as your own person. A code that can emerge would be letting others do what they want because they have their freedom and their own rights to share or not to share certain things. It all depends on what they want to do.
What seems strange to me is that Banach wrote this lecture based on if people do not know each other at all, they would be "absolute individuals". We are not absolute individuals to everyone in this world; yes to many we are, but not to our family and close friends. They all know what we like or dislike, what we feel, etc... To me this lecture is based on how we are "absolute individuals" to others in the world surrounding us.
I guess that now a days we are not "absolute individuals", I would say that we are individuals but we are able to connect with others in our world. This is possible by modern technology, we are able to use digital/electronic media to help us connect with others and let ourselves be heard. Maybe not to every single person on this planet but we do make an effort to let ourselves be heard by others. The repercussion of this would be if we lived in a world with no digital technology what so ever. We would only be heard by the people living with us. How would this differ from the world we live in today?
Absolute individuals to me means that we are all on our own in the world, we keep everything to ourselves because it's not anyone else's business. Since we keep all these things to ourselves, we are all alone in this world. I agree with Banach at some level because this is true at some point. We all seem to keep everything private from each other, and people have adapted to the idea of "minding their own business".
While being an absolute individual, we have absolute freedom as well. The same way we are able to keep our thoughts and feelings to ourselves, we are able to have our own freedom to do what we want. Absolute freedom of individuals means that we are able to make our own choices on deciding to be an individual like keeping everything to our self, or letting the whole world know all about who you are, what you think, or what your feelings are. This all depends on what you want as an individual. To me human happiness is having the freedom to do what you want whenever you want. You are not told what to do, or how to live, you do what you want as your own person. A code that can emerge would be letting others do what they want because they have their freedom and their own rights to share or not to share certain things. It all depends on what they want to do.
What seems strange to me is that Banach wrote this lecture based on if people do not know each other at all, they would be "absolute individuals". We are not absolute individuals to everyone in this world; yes to many we are, but not to our family and close friends. They all know what we like or dislike, what we feel, etc... To me this lecture is based on how we are "absolute individuals" to others in the world surrounding us.
I guess that now a days we are not "absolute individuals", I would say that we are individuals but we are able to connect with others in our world. This is possible by modern technology, we are able to use digital/electronic media to help us connect with others and let ourselves be heard. Maybe not to every single person on this planet but we do make an effort to let ourselves be heard by others. The repercussion of this would be if we lived in a world with no digital technology what so ever. We would only be heard by the people living with us. How would this differ from the world we live in today?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
