Walking and talking

A passage from the reading that stood out to me that describes a person who wants to commit suicide has always been a question in my mind. I have also questioned why people feel the need to end it all and leave everything behind. I personally get why most people in a state of depression feel this way but why? A quote from the passage “On the one hand, I am what I may justifiably be taken by others to be in the course of living out a story that runs from birth to my death” what I think Macintyre is saying is that when we meet other people in out lives it has no meaning and when we live and we die thats all what we are capable of. Later in the reading he states “When someone complains- as do some of those who attempt or commit suicide- that his or her life is meaningless” This is where I am getting the idea that when people think this way they think that their life is meaningless and “lacks any point” I would question this theory by asking how do they get to this point in life where they would like to end it all. In many cases I would say they want the easiest way out as possible, for example what if this person gets beaten everyday and has been abandoned all their life. Im not saying suicide is good but I am saying that most people don’t seek the help they could get without the right information. How Macintyre says “Humans are dependent rational animals” makes be question myself I’ve seen people become broken and lost and the only way back I through help. This leads to my second theory, that “Others are accountable for a narrative that includes me” this is something that personally illustrates my identity because the people that I have met have made an impact on me in some way. I gain experience and growing up I’ve met bad and good people by bad and good I mean people who have tried to bring me down and people who have brought me up. This relates to my identity because this is personal that the people I have met did change me in a way, and the way of looking at life or my thinking have changed. Suicide has always been a bad thing to me because life is what makes us feel this way and most of the time it makes us stronger and it makes a connection to finding help because you won’t know who you will meet that could change your life forever.

WC:441

I do agree with Leonard’s statement that we need mirrors to remind ourselves who we are. In the movie, Leonard uses pictures as reminders(mirrors) to figure out where he left off at and who he is. The mirrors in the movie are a representation of Leonard’s broken mind. For example, mirrors appeared frequently as tattoos or photos but could be corrupted by just writing or by others. Leonard has multiple tattoos on his body to remind him of his goal and that’s to kill his wife’s killer. In a scene from the movie he looks down at his hand and sees “remember Sammy Jankis” which leads him to telling a story he remembers from his past life before his injury. I would say this is the mental strain he put himself under and another example is a tattoo on his chest that could only be read in the mirror. I find it interesting the usage of the word “Mirror” is a reminder for Leonard but in multiple scenes from the movie every time he looked in the mirror he forgot who he was and what he was doing.

I personally believe mirrors could be something people use to remind themselves who they are and where they come from. Like a foundation of what they become and a reminder they are human and could always think. I also think mirrors are something for progressing and making it through life. It could be used in many ways like a motivation or a reminder/ goal. Constructing your own identity from mirrors could make a connection to Hume and a way of thinking also to Leonard. Hume sees the self as a single thing that can continue over time. Looking at Leonard he uses mirrors to show what he needs to do but also shows a way of how easily people are deceived.

How Hume sees himself and how it relies on mirrors fits into Hume’s theory by his way of thinking; he says he doesn’t believe in the idea of identity and says that the mirrors are false. Hume states “Had we no memory, we never should have any notion of causation, nor consequently of that chain of causes and effects, which constitute our self or person.” By stating this he explains that mirrors are irrelevant for portraying the self and mirrors are creating false identities of figuring out who we are as people.The mind and our memories are not the most trustworthy and can also leave us trying to figure out what’s real or not.

wc:425

Hume believes that the “self” is an illusion and fiction. He has stated that “I may venture to affirm of the rest of mankind, that they are nothing but a bundle or collection of different perceptions, which succeed each other with an inconceivable rapidity, and are in a perpetual flux and movement.”. He is saying, he believes that the idea of self is not true and it’s something that we create and only we can decide who and what we become.

Hume uses an analogy, “The mind is a kind of theater”. In other words, I believe that Hume is trying to say our minds take all these images and there’s so much going on that the mind can’t tell what’s real. Theaters are meant for plays and movies but we are taking them as real but in reality they are not real at all also comparing this to the mind and perception. Therefore, Hume is explaining how our minds can take untrue thoughts and leads us to false perceptions about ourselves and others.

For Hume’s argument about self, I believe and agree with him. I agree on how we can create this false idea of self and who we are and who want to be. However, when he states that everyone is a collection of perceptions throughout their lives, it is true. But this is what creates a self identity and who we are. Everything we go through and the personal experiences, is what creates the type of person we become and are the outcomes of those things. Without our own “collection of perceptions” we believe that we are dead, not living, feel, we also believe it’s a perception of ourselves and can’t tell what we want.

Hume states that we basically cannot rely on our mind because they create false opinions about ourselves. However, Hume later explains how we cannot live without our perceptions and relying on them. But our minds are something we use to make opinions and think and use our minds to figure stuff out.

I agree on the part that we do need our senses, even though past philosophers have stated how they are deceiving, we still use them and need them everyday. Then I agree with Hume. Our senses are something we need to use and help us get through life.

WC:387

The “Cogito” is the fact that I am acknowledging that I am a being because I am able to think. The saying “I think therefore I am” refers to this idea of cogito because we are not sure we are dreaming and may not be a person. It could be an illusion as we are still a human from the fact that we are aware and have the ability to think. From the writing he says “Undoubtedly I believe myself to be a man. But what is a man? Shall I say a reasonable animal”. This way of thinking can’t occur without something doing the thinking and action, therefore there is something or someone that is committing these motives of thinking. This shows that the mind is separate from the body and doubting that there is a body and a mind. We can’t doubt that we don’t not have a mind because a mind allows us to be conscious and aware. Our minds allow us to think and do everything we can do that requires us to use our minds. 

The wax example, Descartes demonstrates that when we explain wax is as a body something that resembles us as a being. By doing this, this shows that we are judging with our minds and not merely using our senses like just touching or seeing. We are able to make the judgement in our minds by thinking which later Descartes brings up imagination. In relation to dualism, the wax example helps support the idea that the mind and body are separate from one another. Dualism refers to the mind and body. This representation shows that the mind and body are connected by using the essence and the aroma from the wax could be a demonstration of mind and body. With this connection the body without the mind is useless and shows the question why? What can the body do without the mind and in conclusion the dualism of the mind begins the mind connection to the body.

The problem that Princess Elisabeth asks Descartes to explain comes from the passage that the soul of a human being is only a thinking substance, how can it affect the bodily spirits, in order to bring about voluntary actions? Which leads to the question how does the soul move the body if one is material and the other immaterial? because it seems that how a thing moves depends on how much it is pushed, the manner in which it is pushed, or the material and shape of the thing that pushes it.The Princess is  asking Descartes that since he claims that the mind can think without the body, what happens to the mind then once a person has died and all that is left is their spirit. Descartes then explains, in short, that the body is like an extension, it is the figure and the movement. He also says that the soul are thoughts, perceptions, and will. Together the body and soul are a union and work with one another. The force of the soul is what moves the body and the force of the body is to cause feelings and passions basically. Descartes tries to use a notion with weight that weight is the force of moving the body down towards the earth which somehow relates to how the soul moves the body. Elisabeth, I still question Descartes’ claims and she is not fully satisfied with his claims especially with his example of weights. It just doesn’t make sense about the movement and connection between the soul and body and how weight has some correspondence to the soul moving the body down to earth. She explains how Descartes previously stated that there is no motion at a distance which makes the body and soul connection and she says it makes it more mysterious. He says, “to conceive the union existing between two things is to conceive them as one thing alone” and Descartes says it is used by imagination. I personally question his way of thinking and have doubts with his weights example.

WC:681

First Descartes discovers that he has many false beliefs and sets out to find a way to ensure he has research to be true. He has stated that he has been tricked by his own senses and cannot trust his own senses and chooses to get rid of any sensory beliefs he has. In paragraph 3 he says “ I have accepted as most true and certain I have learned either from the senses or through the senses; but it is sometimes proved to me that these senses are deceptive”. On his path to finding knowledge he throws away his senses to not make the same mistake of believing false beliefs of his senses. Descartes doesn’t stop the argument after the senses can’t be trusted because he compares this to a matter of sleeping. He believes when he is asleep and he is dreaming most of his beliefs would be false. He can’t prove that he is awake or dreaming which leads him to doubt his beliefs even further or that he is controlled by something more. By saying this he says “At the same time we must at least confess that the things which are represented to us in sleep are like painted representations which can only have been formed as the counterparts of something real and true” as he goes further talks about science and how it relies on beliefs. He says that science can have the senses and claims “That is possibly why our reasoning is not unjust when we conclude from this that Physics, Astronomy, Medicine and all other sciences which have as their end the consideration of composite things, are very dubious and uncertain”. By the end of Meditation 1, Descartes is on the path to get rid of his desire for knowledge all together. Descartes goes on to say “conspires with these agreeable illusions that the deception may be prolonged, so insensibly of my own accord I fall back into my former opinions, and I dread awakening from this slumber” and by saying this you can see he’s giving up on acquiring knowledge and the senses. 
WC:351

Adventure time is a way of art that can appeal to young viewers in many ways in this modern day of age. This show was created with the intent of being entertaining and insightful in life lessons depicted by this young boy Finn the human who wants to be the greatest hero of Ooo and his best friend Jake the dog who is also Finn’s brother and fights countless battles with each other. This show aired in 2010 which has a value for me because I grew up with this show both me and the main protagonist Finn. A show having the main character being a young boy had a different effect on young viewers such as myself because it was different from other shows at that time. This show also shared life values of being a young also with the emotional feelings that kids have at that time going through life experiences and have the young mindset of having fun and not thinking about consequences.

Throughout the show Finn goes through changes and in the first season it was first insight to his past and shows him as a baby abandoned in the woods. The infectiousness of the show is original because it grows with the views and brings them closer and can express the meaning of being young and just wanting to have fun. The show was one of the best representations of wanting to be the greatest person(Hero) and having morals to everything I do growing up.

The shows clearness can be expressed by the feelings each character has and the deeper connection they have to each other. Adding more characters through the show leans more toward the skill of limitations and I could feel that connection and use that to life by watching and being an adult now. I see what Finn learned and how to use the expression of clearness through Tolstoy’s three values of art.

The sincerity of the show I could see the emotional and meaningful intent the show has on young viewers and also on myself at the time the show was out and how the each episode aired it had the values of a good show and the sincerity of Tolstoy’s definition of art. Tolstoy’s says “To evoke in oneself a feeling one has once experienced, and having evoked it in oneself, then by means of movements, lines, colors, sounds, or forms expressed in words, so to transmit that feeling that others may experience the same feeling – this is the activity of art.” This show probably doesn’t tie in with his definition of art because this being a show could be confusing to him and to his three conditions of what art is.

The way Tolstoy defines infectiousness as a standard for art is the amount the artist puts in the time, emotion, and the connection to his art form. Tolstoy says the more the artist isn’t using emotion and feeling to get the attention of others it doesn’t define itself as art. The more he uses (infectiousness) in art he explains that the better the art helps it reach the standard of good art. What I think he means by standard is the three conditions the art has to reach. How the art affects others in such a way where the artist isn’t doing his art for fun or a hobby but for meaning and a deeper thought of reality. Tolstoy says in his writing “We are accustomed to understand art to be only what we hear and see in theaters, concerts, and exhibitions, together with buildings, statues, poems, novels. . . . But all this is but the smallest part of the art by which we communicate with each other in life.” This shows a deeper meaning in his way of thinking and connecting this to humans. The way Tolstoy tells us to evaluate art is by seeing the infectiousness of art which can show us the good art from even better art. The three conditions individuality, clearness, and sincerity is what makes his standard for good art. The art is a form which most artists don’t use their understanding of and can be in Tolstoy’s definition of bad art. This can be useful to a degree, because the way we look at art can be random but also has a deeper meaning. Which is what Tolstoy is saying the artist must be committed to their art to have the three standards which can be effective for the viewers of the art. Looking for quality in art can be helpful because what’s in the content of the art is what matters. For example “This special importance has always been given by all men to that part of this activity which transmits feelings flowing from their religious perception, and this small part of art they have specifically called art, attaching to it the full meaning of the word”. Anything that connects to us emotionally can be put in Tolstoy’s standard of art because of the effect it has on the viewer. What I would do to change his proposal of art is the questioning of what makes this art significant to me, and to look at it from a view of benefit towards people instead of the three standard.

WC:424

The types of imitation Aristotle identifies in poetry and tragedy are the imitations of what is described in the reading “actions of good men” ( higher type). He describes these actions as in Higher and Lower classes of poetry. The other form of imitation is that of the act of (Lower type) of action. Aristotle then explains that this leads to two directions poetry leads into such as the evolution of poetry. The types of action found in poetry and tragedy are those found in higher types of that form of imitation. Lower form of imitation can be connected to the imitation of comedy. 

I believe Aristotle does have a positive sense of the role of imitation of art because when he talks about the evolution of poetry and the two forms of imitation, he describes”the instinct of imitation is described in man”. This just shows how he interprets the imitation connected to man throughout life. Aristotle then states men are able to see what is being imitated in the art and be part of the imitation and what is found.

I believe Aristotle’s understanding of art can be used in many ways such as the imitation of art and seeing the natural ways it could be made. His knowledge of art can help others understand in a less delusional way other than Plato’s way of expressing artists ways of imitations of art. Aristotle’s point of view about art is that men see a sort of completion with art instead of corruption. Aristotle meaning of this is (Catharsis) and this means the purification of the baser parts. The pity of his examples are to feel sympathy for what we are looking at and what forms it comes in. The fear part of catharsis is to put ourselves in their shoes and share the same feeling. He explains how we do not get more confused but we use this knowledge of imitation to see different ideas of thinking. Aristotle’s way of breaking down the imitation of art shows us what he has done to find the importance of art. He has a clear way of explaining art and a wrong way of thinking by describing a painter who paints randomly but with beautiful colors. This just shows how he interprets the imitation of art.

word count:382

The film Existenz has many references to Plato’s way of explaining his beliefs of reality. Existenz fits into Plato’s hierarchical scheme of reality by showing how video games can affect the minds of others just like Plato’s example of his time with painters and poets. Just as Plato’s says painters can deceive the average mind of individuals by imitating appearances and not showing the actual image. This corresponds to the film because the many levels of virtual reality can be so realistic, and that the players in the game have a hard time deciphering true reality from the game they are playing. Just like how Plato describes painter and poets art they are so skilled people can’t tell the difference between reality. Then this leads to a connection to Book 10 and the examples of beds, “the real world is a copy of a copy” from this example is the craftsmen and makes a bed from what he thinks a bed looks like. Then this starts a perception of what a bed looks like and a artist will recreate a painting of the bed in the craftsman image and leads away from reality. The movie has so many gruesome aspects and intriguing moments which lead the people watching and waiting for more interesting moments. The viewers are so fixated on wanting more which ties into Plato’s reality. Plato says people can be deceived into thinking what is true reality and can be lost in the layers of reality which none can escape. Plato explains this is exactly what he is concerned about, how artists are showing people the wrong way of reality and more are pulled into this wrong belief of the real world.

Trancendenz fits into Plato’s way of thinking because just like Existenz it is another level of reality. In the beginning of the movie the viewers are put in the place where Existenz meets reality. But in the actual real life Existens is a game inside Trancendenz, which leads to the fact no one knows the true reality and tricking people into thinking what is real and what isn’t real. At the end of the movie even the players out of the game don’t actually know if they are in the game or not. With each character and their forced identities they have no idea of the true reality.

word count:391

The idea of beds in the world comes from Plato’s beliefs, he can only believe everything in physical form isn’t its real form and this puts it in his mind that this isn’t his reality. He sets “Beds in the world” aside because he doesn’t meet his reality.

The idea of a bed is when a bed is in its truest form. The idea of a bed is the maker of that bed and becomes real, and the creator is God. This gives the idea of the creator of the bed and god have the right to call it theres.

This leaves art in his reality by understanding that the idea of the bed is in the physical world meets reality. This is where art is left. Art is the way it imitates the beds in the real world, which imitates the idea of a bed. They use the poet and painter as a way to use the world in any way they want. The poets use his words as well as the painter using his paintings as a way to control the physical world. This idea is to copy all aspects of a teacher in their own way.

The ways Plato says art deceives us, he uses a painter and a poet to explain how painters can deceive the mind and by bending the rules of reality with his art can fool anyone just by painting a portrait. The painter can paint anything with his imagination and his will to make whatever he would like. Painting a chair meets his reality in the physical world and by believe thats a chair but in reality he doesn’t know how to build a chair. This can be deceiving by painting to his own agenda. On the other hand a poet uses his words to decide the mind my speaking of how to live a happy life just by saying the words he wants to say ca fool anyone who is listening thats how to live happily.

I disagree with his criticism, he uses a broad source of reasoning which makes you think of many possibilities of deception and reality. For example the explanation of the idea of a bed is it meets reality because of the creator and God is in a way, also a creator of the bed and the idea of beds in the world defeats the purpose of reason. Having the ability to bend reality with words or art is different because if shows the imagery of the artist.

word count :419