A Direction the Class Needs

I honestly don’t believe the class needs a new direction.  I believe a class needs a new direction if I’m not learning, if the class is difficult, or I’m not enjoying the class.  

I’m definitely learning and how I’m learning differs from other classes. Learning fact upon fact or learning one true method of doing something is truly boring. In philosophy, there are often no right answers and we learn to develop our own methods of thinking. It is different and somewhat difficult to answer something that has no right answered but enjoyable nevertheless.

The class isn’t difficult either. I think you would have to almost try to fail this class or do close to nothing. The reading isn’t hard or difficult to grasp like the non-fiction literature we get in other classes.  We often form opinions and that’s way easier than trying to remember what year something happened or what some character said.

“If its not broken, don’t fix it.” That quote applies perfectly to my philosophy class.   The class isn’t difficult and I enjoy the teacher. Mr.  McCarthy seems more laid back and efficient than some of the more strict, uncompromising or arguably incompetent teachers I have had. A bad teacher, for me, can ruin my favorite subjects, and McCarthy does not do this.

I believe other classes need a new direction.  They could learn a lesson from this class. Most teachers often  teach for the paycheck and they do not care about how they teach or even if the kids are learning. They ignore all the complaints and failure and blame the kids.

Father and Son, Mother and Daughter, Mother and Son, Father and Daughter

Father and Son, Mother and Daughter, Mother and Son, Father and Daughter.  They are all parent and child relationships but they  couldn't be any more different.  Each one being different  in terms of bonding and protection. 

The father and son relationship, from what I have experienced, is the defining factor in the son's transition from a boy into a man. The father should teach and guide the son with the use of experience and the use of space because if the father attempts to control instead of guide the son, this relationship can be the most antagonistic and violent of all. This relationship should result in a closer connection between father and son because of the bonding between the two for educational and recreational purposes. The father should protect the son so the son can learn and one day protect himself.  My father attempts to do with his difficult childhood experience and wisdom to direct me from his mistakes and encourage my success. 

 The relationship I share with my mother is far from this. As my father teaches me to be a man, my mother tries to teach me to be a better man. She compliments his success orientated lessons in manhood, pride, and happiness with how I can achieve them.  My mother is almost like my failure's greatest enemy. She will teach me to learn from them and how to avoid them. 

I hope to develop the same beneficial and necessary relationships with my own children. I only want them to succeed at what makes them happy. 

How Do I Know What I Know?

How do I know what I know? Rene Descartes altered the course of philosophy by raising this question. Descartes’ method of doubt questioned beliefs, both scientific and religious, that could be known with utter certainty. Descartes was able to show most of our, scientific, mathematical, religious, and everyday beliefs really cannot stand up to that kind of assessment.  

This systematic doubt brought an issue that philosopher would debate upon for decades to come. Do we learn about the nature of things, through our physical senses or by logic or reasoning? A great philosopher by the name of Immanuel Kant tried to resolve this issue. He argued that we in fact never have understanding of reality but only of things as they appear to us, and that the mind itself supplies the form in which we know appearances.

What do I think of all this? Even before I took this class, I often wondered about my and others’ perceptions of reality. I used to think what if my entire life was a dream or a hallucination? How do I know if the things around me even exist and do they exist to others? It’s really terrifying to think about and I believe that the phrase ignorance is bliss truly sums up what I think about it. Would you want to know if you were a brain in a jar or would you rather continue believing that you are an organism who actually interacts with his environment?  We would say a scenario like that is highly improbable but how do we know?

God in 2010

The God of the Christian faith has definitely lost his a great deal of his impact on this planet. We have come a long way from societies where religion was the absolute truth and anything against it was blasphemy.    Societies were formed around God and government's claimed to act according to the will of this God. Now, the frequency of how many times God is mentioned or how important his history and impact on the world are mere fractions of what they used to be. Instead of being thanked for keeping a civilization in power or functioning. He is thanked for meaningless things such as academy awards or touchdowns.
Why has this happened? Man has the ability to manipulate and question their environment unlike any other creature that has ever existed or continues to exist. The questions and answers evolve as we do.  Early answers to our existence claim that many gods are responsible for many things that are out of our control.  This explained everything for awhile and then human's questions and answers evolved once more and humans believed that if there was a higher power, there would only be one. The answer would then evolve into what we know as Christianity. Christianity answered arguably the most important question of all time. How did we come to exist on this planet so its only logical that the religion would have extreme significance on any and everything.
What does Christianity mean today? Some would say truth. Some would say its mythology. What do I say? Control.    Christianity arguably has kept the world from destroying ourselves and the planet with ideas of what's right and wrong.

Candide’s Punishments, Do They Fit the Crime?

Candide was naive and innocent but these are the only things he was truly guilty of in the beginning. He was taught the world he lived in was the best of possible worlds only to be nearly destroyed by it. Why? Pangloss, the man who was supposed to teach and inform Candide to the best of his ability,  taught him an act considered an unforgivable crime, something that only led to his banishment and the beginning of his suffering,.  After his banishment, he nearly had his skin flayed from his body for "deserting" the army of another nation.
Candide, like his namesake, is innocent. He is like a child really. Children don't understand the cruelty, suffering and corruption of the world. This can cause them to be manipulated, abused, and suffer in an unforgiving and challenging world. If a child imitated what he saw his teacher do or followed the teachings of those more experienced, should he be banished? It's pretty extreme right? This also applies to when Candide was forced to run the gauntlet, a punishement where a line of men strike him with weapons. He simply went for a walk and it was declared desertion. Desertion is punishable by either execution or the gauntlet.
The people in the world Candide lives in practice their beliefs to the most extreme. Instead of simply accepting that maybe everyone may not have the same ideas and beliefs they do or even know of them, they punish them with the most  harsh or extreme sentences imaginable.

The Modern Gadfly

The modern gadfly would have to disguise his own agenda of addressing wrongs by asking questions or coming  off as being irritant in our modern age. Socrates did this by  questioning civilians around him but the range of his agenda was very limited. With the use of technology of our time, the gadfly can work on his agenda on a much larger scale. The gadfly can question, inform, or irritate hundreds of people now with the internet,  television, etc. but who in this modern age has the same goals of Socrates? Asking the hard questions, providing radical and different opinion, and  questioning the "truth"?
Thanks to the civil liberties in our country, anyone can be a modern gadfly. Bloggers and political pretend to be ignorant, find ignorance in the government, and question the "truths" our government or otherwise has told us but really anyone can do it. Many people in Socrates's  era feared the government and freedom of speech was not a liberty for all and this explains why so few questioned their surroundings but we are not executed for freedom of speech. Most internet tools like message boards, social sites, and blogs are used by gadflys to spread their wisdom and inform the people.
I may not be able to think of a real person who questions the government like Socrates did, but the idea of a modern gadfly reminds me of the fictional character Andrew Ryan. Ryan rejected the idea's of the well established forms of government and order (the american government, communism, and christianity) He   wondered  if you worked for something, then why can't you and you alone  enjoy the fruits of your labor? The fruits of your labor shouldn't help the government or the poor(the american government) shared by the people(communism) or they belong to God( Christianity), he believed. He and Socrates were similar in the fact that they questioned the the lives given before them and considered them not worthy of living. (Socrates going as far to choosing to be executed instead of accepting a lower sentence and Ryan going as far as building his own city based on his ideals)

The Unexamined Life is not Worth Living?

"The unexamined Life is not worth living" 
-Socrates


Is the unexamined life worth living?  I think so. This means, to me, that simply living is not enough. You have to question and analyze life to reveal things both unique and new. If you don't, then you are merely wasting your life with ignorance and bitter acceptance. 
What do I think? What activities and traits that waste your life are simply opinions. People who chose not to question their lives probably have good reasons. The truth may be more disturbing or more horrifying than they can comprehend. Ignorance is bliss. Can you imagine a  future world where there were no lies and we knew everything? Every dark secret known, every lie disproved, every question answered. To some, this would end wars and create peace among the human race. On the contrary, the result will be anarchy. We would know all the evil that has happened,  that is happening, and that will happen. Could we all live together knowing the evil we are capable of , the evil we have done, and the evil we will do to each other?
Also, if the point of examining your life is to not waste it, why not just embrace and celebrate life instead? If you simply ask questions all your life, you'll never be happy.  There will always be someone to disprove you and answers will only lead to more questions. In the beginning, you were ignorant, and in the end you will be ignorant, right? Its not like you keep examining, you will answer all life's questions. so what's the point? to die a little smarter?  

Eulogy

Well it seems that Malik  has left the world of the living. OK let's get this over with. Malik spent his life living trying to spread his seemingly endless joy with others with his sense of humor and enjoying pleasures both simple and complex, whether it be enjoying nature or drawing.   He often listened to others and lightened the mood. Life has never been easy for Malik but he still sought to make other people happy before himself because he considered this more important. He grew up feeling unwanted and alienated by his own immediate family. Ironic, isn't it? The people who are supposed to love and accept him made him feel like a freak with their relentless criticism and dissatisfaction with almost anything he ever accomplished. He quickly learned  how cruel the world could be at an early age with own family and sought to relieve sadness in others  with his humor and charity and relieve his own pain with his art. 

Sadly he died, without knowing the same joy he has instilled in others.   He died thinking that no one ever understood him or even cared if he lived or died.... just another joke to laugh at.  I can't say that I blame him.  How many of us here can say they truly knew him? Do not grieve for him for he would not want it. Malik didn't try to think about these things too hard, for they would add a darkness to his soul that he both feared and suppressed. Instead of where of most people saw gloom, Malik would try to see light, whether it be in others in himself. There was almost nothing he couldn't find good with.