I'd have to say that poster's comment doesn't really fly with me.
For one thing, making a name for yourself in history does not mean you lived like you were supposed to live. There are bad names in history too, and we don't like them or praise them for living just because we remember who they are. We remember who they are so we can avoid being like them.
EVERYONE wants to live their life, finding some sort of happiness. There's nothing special about a person trying to get what they want and find this bliss, let alone a star who happens to do all the wrong things in such an attempt. Remember that special treatment we were talking about? The treatment we give to actors just because people idolize them and whatnot? We're still doing that, by making such a big fuss over all this. We're also still doing that by coming up with excuses for such behavior.
The problem with Charlie Sheen (and, a lot of people actually) is that in his search for happiness, he doesn't change what he does, and always gets the same results. He marries, then cheats and does drugs, then is divorced. The smart thing to do is try something new, maybe try and change your perspective in life, find other things to do. But no, Charlie Sheen decides to marry someone else, then do other drugs, then cheat with someone else, then get divorced again. History repeating itself.
I guess one big problem, ironically, is what the media perceives as gates to happiness. How many movies have we seen where the druggie is a hero, or hot babes are what all guys should go after, or that divorce or being a baby-momma isn't that big of a deal? Tons. Why? Because none of that is true, but with all the real problems people are facing out there, an hour or two of film where that stuff isn't so bad, is definitely going to sell. It acts as a sort of relief to reality.
And with all the TV shows we watch and our dependence on technology these days, lots of people make the mistake in believing all that, and end up mimicking and chasing over a fantasy life that has been seen so many times in movies or TV. A fantasy life that DOESN'T exist. Hence the term, fantasy.
Sure, there's some short term bits of happiness, but in the end, it can't ever go well.
What it means to live is to face your problems, find solutions, help others with their problems, and aim for being content with your life in the end. Looking out for others is important too, because if you don't, then you're being a nuisance, you're hindering others, and then chances of finding happiness in the end will close. Because if you're all alone, how can you be happy?
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Post # 5- the quite formal responce
It seems as though I must correct myself by answering my own thoughts on our French fellow, existentially. So we shall.
Meursault is straightforward, honest, and thinks for himself because that is who he chooses to be. Existentialists must create their own identity so as to not be wasting time doing anything else. So he is in being very descriptive in whatever he feels like describing.
His indifference, my dear child, is also a part of this identity, and existentialists all over praise this. Huzzah! Death is inevitable, and Meursault lives life with that in mind. He also seeks to be content, and with his self-absorbed personality, does as he pleases, when he pleases (or is indifferent), because that is who he is. That would be the reason he agreed to write for Raymond, because it doesn't matter if it hurts someone else, because it doesn't penetrate his world, and will thus be a-ok.
By doing what he wants, he is also rejecting meaning-given narratives, which is what we seem to be struggling with most here. His indifference seems socially unacceptable, but Meursault ignores what society thinks. So what if his mom died, or his girl friend wants to get married? He doesn't care! They're all parts of life that he feel have no influence in life or the world's order. Thus, he goes deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole of Existentialism. Good for him!
Sincerely yours,
Existential Danny.
2/8
Meursault is straightforward, honest, and thinks for himself because that is who he chooses to be. Existentialists must create their own identity so as to not be wasting time doing anything else. So he is in being very descriptive in whatever he feels like describing.
His indifference, my dear child, is also a part of this identity, and existentialists all over praise this. Huzzah! Death is inevitable, and Meursault lives life with that in mind. He also seeks to be content, and with his self-absorbed personality, does as he pleases, when he pleases (or is indifferent), because that is who he is. That would be the reason he agreed to write for Raymond, because it doesn't matter if it hurts someone else, because it doesn't penetrate his world, and will thus be a-ok.
By doing what he wants, he is also rejecting meaning-given narratives, which is what we seem to be struggling with most here. His indifference seems socially unacceptable, but Meursault ignores what society thinks. So what if his mom died, or his girl friend wants to get married? He doesn't care! They're all parts of life that he feel have no influence in life or the world's order. Thus, he goes deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole of Existentialism. Good for him!
Sincerely yours,
Existential Danny.
2/8
Monday, February 7, 2011
post Numba 4- the informal response
Sorry it's late, I've been out of town.
Now... Meursault...
In general, I read through what he thinks and how he analyzes things, and like how he's straightforward, honest, and thinks for himself. When I read his narration, I feel like I'm reading how I would narrate my own passing days, without too much detail on the day as a whole, and yet with so much on whatever catches his eye..... despite the fact that for him, apparently it is the gross stuff on old people's noses or flies on a lamp that grab his attention. Basically, what's important to him is what is in front of him, and the things he must do at the moment, and not much else. This is ok, to an extent.....
I can relate to his indifference to everything to the point in which he cares not of what happens to others. That is where I find him unbelievably selfish and inhumane. Sure, a lot of things that happen in life won't matter in the long-run, but that is no excuse to set a stranger up (being Raymond's 'moorish' girl) for pain in the future. Not giving a care about being married is another example. Compassion and care are what, I think, makes us who we are as humans, and working alongside in a world that, apparently, had no meaning, should be what we strive for. This guy is only looking out for himself, doing what feels good for him, caring very VERY little for how others feel. How he feels is his top priority, and I can't feel sympathy and relate to a character that refuses to feel sympathy and relate to others. Sorry Meursault, but I, for one, do not think you're 'a boss'.
2/7
I'll do post #5 tomorrow..
Now... Meursault...
In general, I read through what he thinks and how he analyzes things, and like how he's straightforward, honest, and thinks for himself. When I read his narration, I feel like I'm reading how I would narrate my own passing days, without too much detail on the day as a whole, and yet with so much on whatever catches his eye..... despite the fact that for him, apparently it is the gross stuff on old people's noses or flies on a lamp that grab his attention. Basically, what's important to him is what is in front of him, and the things he must do at the moment, and not much else. This is ok, to an extent.....
I can relate to his indifference to everything to the point in which he cares not of what happens to others. That is where I find him unbelievably selfish and inhumane. Sure, a lot of things that happen in life won't matter in the long-run, but that is no excuse to set a stranger up (being Raymond's 'moorish' girl) for pain in the future. Not giving a care about being married is another example. Compassion and care are what, I think, makes us who we are as humans, and working alongside in a world that, apparently, had no meaning, should be what we strive for. This guy is only looking out for himself, doing what feels good for him, caring very VERY little for how others feel. How he feels is his top priority, and I can't feel sympathy and relate to a character that refuses to feel sympathy and relate to others. Sorry Meursault, but I, for one, do not think you're 'a boss'.
2/7
I'll do post #5 tomorrow..
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Justifying the Animoto (Mr Roboto)
I still think that existentialism is kinda dumb. That it contradicts itself and that it's like a chimpanzee screaming only to be heard. But the idea of how one should be individualistic is a good one, so that is what I focused on in my video. This video is not so much as me reacting positivity to existentialism, but more of simply approving some of its ideas. I guess you could say I just humor the rest. The 'there is no truth' idea still really bothers me. More like annoys. I think I posted about that earlier.
I think the 'choose your destiny' slide is pretty straight forward, emphasizing that you must decide what you are to do with yourself in life. Simply 'existing' is no good, because anyone can do that.
I think Jerry is a pretty good example of this. Most mice simply run away/ get eaten by cats, dogs, hawks, hobos, but Jerry's not gonna have any of that. Nope. He's going to define who he is, defy life. He's turning the food chain around, and putting the hurt on Tom. Or at least annoying him, in this one pic. Kind of like the 'absurd hero' we read about recently.
The word absurdity reminds me of a never ending cycle. Actually more of a snake eating itself. Like the one Benjamin Franklin drew for the colonial newspaper. It's a never ending cycle that has no possible ending except death in the end. Death and Taxes. So it like how the well dressed man is just going to end up running until he passes out from exhaustion. He isn't going any where. And people aren't going anywhere either. They are born and they die. Thus is the absurdity of life, according to existentialists.
Which is why he should get off that dumb cycle. Or the lemmings should, in fact, ALL wear life jackets/preservers. This is existentialism emphasizing how important it is to get off the 'absurd' bandwagon, and make something out of yourself. Stray from the norm, be better.
Spider-man is re quoting his uncle's saying, how great power brings great responsibility. We all have a responsibility to make something out of ourselves, to influence life so as to make it less absurd. No one's going to do it for us, so the responsibility in our part rests on our shoulders.
If you're not into video games, a 'continue' is when you lose your lives due to incompetence in the game, and are actually given the option to either continue playing, or quit. This forces you into a position where you have to make a decision, and for existentialism, you are deciding whether to go beyond simply existing (and how), or to do nothing with yourself. To either play the game, or accept a game over. The sonic picture ties in with this. Same with the toilet one. The point is that they all show some sort of state of indecision, which is very relatable, and I thought I would use a lot. Also, my pic is really funny. I can't believe we found a toilet in front of someone's house while trick or treating. I use the term 'influence' , by the way, because it is by being different, by playing the game, that you influence others, so I feel like the two go hand in hand.
Even though I don't agree with the idea of no truth (yadda yadda yadda), I thought it oh-so-brilliantly went along with the 'there is no spoon' idea from the matrix. And that is as far as we'll go in discussing that Idea.
The Charlie Brown picture goes back to the idea of defining who you are; if you plan to do this, it isn't going to be a free ride. Simply existing is the easier choice, whereas you will face obstacles as you try to be different, being mocked, misunderstood, all that fun stuff. They will be never-ending, actually. But you have to pull through. Just like Charlie Brown keeps trying to kick the ball.
I thought the me jumping from that pretty unstable branch to the small bit of ground is a pretty cool representation of how you should strive to make an influence and be different. Or if you want to think more deeply, I am leaping over the watchful eyes of society, ignoring its rejection of water through my defining leap in the air, in order to reach the end, satisfied, untouched by the waters. Even though it would probably be easier to simply walk on the water and get my shoes soaked, I decide to be different, use my mind, and find an alternative solution to reaching the common goal.
And scene.
I think the 'choose your destiny' slide is pretty straight forward, emphasizing that you must decide what you are to do with yourself in life. Simply 'existing' is no good, because anyone can do that.
I think Jerry is a pretty good example of this. Most mice simply run away/ get eaten by cats, dogs, hawks, hobos, but Jerry's not gonna have any of that. Nope. He's going to define who he is, defy life. He's turning the food chain around, and putting the hurt on Tom. Or at least annoying him, in this one pic. Kind of like the 'absurd hero' we read about recently.
The word absurdity reminds me of a never ending cycle. Actually more of a snake eating itself. Like the one Benjamin Franklin drew for the colonial newspaper. It's a never ending cycle that has no possible ending except death in the end. Death and Taxes. So it like how the well dressed man is just going to end up running until he passes out from exhaustion. He isn't going any where. And people aren't going anywhere either. They are born and they die. Thus is the absurdity of life, according to existentialists.
Which is why he should get off that dumb cycle. Or the lemmings should, in fact, ALL wear life jackets/preservers. This is existentialism emphasizing how important it is to get off the 'absurd' bandwagon, and make something out of yourself. Stray from the norm, be better.
Spider-man is re quoting his uncle's saying, how great power brings great responsibility. We all have a responsibility to make something out of ourselves, to influence life so as to make it less absurd. No one's going to do it for us, so the responsibility in our part rests on our shoulders.
If you're not into video games, a 'continue' is when you lose your lives due to incompetence in the game, and are actually given the option to either continue playing, or quit. This forces you into a position where you have to make a decision, and for existentialism, you are deciding whether to go beyond simply existing (and how), or to do nothing with yourself. To either play the game, or accept a game over. The sonic picture ties in with this. Same with the toilet one. The point is that they all show some sort of state of indecision, which is very relatable, and I thought I would use a lot. Also, my pic is really funny. I can't believe we found a toilet in front of someone's house while trick or treating. I use the term 'influence' , by the way, because it is by being different, by playing the game, that you influence others, so I feel like the two go hand in hand.
Even though I don't agree with the idea of no truth (yadda yadda yadda), I thought it oh-so-brilliantly went along with the 'there is no spoon' idea from the matrix. And that is as far as we'll go in discussing that Idea.
The Charlie Brown picture goes back to the idea of defining who you are; if you plan to do this, it isn't going to be a free ride. Simply existing is the easier choice, whereas you will face obstacles as you try to be different, being mocked, misunderstood, all that fun stuff. They will be never-ending, actually. But you have to pull through. Just like Charlie Brown keeps trying to kick the ball.
I thought the me jumping from that pretty unstable branch to the small bit of ground is a pretty cool representation of how you should strive to make an influence and be different. Or if you want to think more deeply, I am leaping over the watchful eyes of society, ignoring its rejection of water through my defining leap in the air, in order to reach the end, satisfied, untouched by the waters. Even though it would probably be easier to simply walk on the water and get my shoes soaked, I decide to be different, use my mind, and find an alternative solution to reaching the common goal.
And scene.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
119
The sub said to title the response '119, 120, or 121' ...
.....how I feel about existentialism, let's see....
I agree with the whole 'have to make something out of yourself' message. Its true that you could either live your life and have no influence on anything around you, or make somehting out of your potential and contribute to society. And it makes sense that one should, in general, strive to have an influence, rather then be a stander-by. And there are, in reality, tons of people who just stand by in life, doing nothing but stroll around in their little world, consumed by their own little world.
One thing I am definitely going to have to disagree with though, is this idea of there being no absolute truth. This is, to me, like the unnecessary addition that was put in with existentialism that was made to annoy people. Like low-budget commercials.
That's basically saying that whatever you see cannot really be there because there is no absolute truth. Excuse me? You mean to say that the sky isn't actually blue? You mean to tell me that I am not actually typing on a computer to a blog so my teacher can grade it? You mean to tell me the spoon is not real? C'mon now. If there is no truth, then life is a lie. Because there is no life. And then there's nothing.
This probably bothers a lot of people, this whole 'nothing is true' idea. But to me it doesn't. Y'know why? Because life without any absolute truth is impossible. Nonsense. And if it's impossible, why waste your time wrapping your mind around an impossible idea? It's like forming an argument on how exactly Mr Santa Clause gets his hand on genetically enhanced reindeer and utilizes their power + Christmas spirit in order to haul out tons of toys and whatever else children ask for in a one man sleigh to the 2.2 billion (and counting) children in the world, all located in different spots on earth, in only 24 hours, with a diet of only milk and cookies.
If you wanted to be creative, I suppose you could tackle such a challenge, but you get the idea.
.....how I feel about existentialism, let's see....
I agree with the whole 'have to make something out of yourself' message. Its true that you could either live your life and have no influence on anything around you, or make somehting out of your potential and contribute to society. And it makes sense that one should, in general, strive to have an influence, rather then be a stander-by. And there are, in reality, tons of people who just stand by in life, doing nothing but stroll around in their little world, consumed by their own little world.
One thing I am definitely going to have to disagree with though, is this idea of there being no absolute truth. This is, to me, like the unnecessary addition that was put in with existentialism that was made to annoy people. Like low-budget commercials.
That's basically saying that whatever you see cannot really be there because there is no absolute truth. Excuse me? You mean to say that the sky isn't actually blue? You mean to tell me that I am not actually typing on a computer to a blog so my teacher can grade it? You mean to tell me the spoon is not real? C'mon now. If there is no truth, then life is a lie. Because there is no life. And then there's nothing.
This probably bothers a lot of people, this whole 'nothing is true' idea. But to me it doesn't. Y'know why? Because life without any absolute truth is impossible. Nonsense. And if it's impossible, why waste your time wrapping your mind around an impossible idea? It's like forming an argument on how exactly Mr Santa Clause gets his hand on genetically enhanced reindeer and utilizes their power + Christmas spirit in order to haul out tons of toys and whatever else children ask for in a one man sleigh to the 2.2 billion (and counting) children in the world, all located in different spots on earth, in only 24 hours, with a diet of only milk and cookies.
If you wanted to be creative, I suppose you could tackle such a challenge, but you get the idea.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Post #1 - Informal Response....response
This is the statement:
"When humans are born, they are undefined beings."
This is my response:
Basically, I completely agree with this statement. Babies are born without any knowledge whatsoever, and their background has little to do with who they are as a human being, or where they will go in life. It is what they learn and observe as they grow, that 'defines' what a person is. There is unlimited potential in every person that is born, but this potential closes up as the human is taught what is valuable, how to do things, and when grown, eventually defines itself by what he or she picked up from others. Characteristics (color of eyes, skin, gender, etc) do not determine what kind of a human this person will become when older. Human's are born undefined; it is the surroundings and its people that guide to discover his or her identity
"When humans are born, they are undefined beings."
This is my response:
Basically, I completely agree with this statement. Babies are born without any knowledge whatsoever, and their background has little to do with who they are as a human being, or where they will go in life. It is what they learn and observe as they grow, that 'defines' what a person is. There is unlimited potential in every person that is born, but this potential closes up as the human is taught what is valuable, how to do things, and when grown, eventually defines itself by what he or she picked up from others. Characteristics (color of eyes, skin, gender, etc) do not determine what kind of a human this person will become when older. Human's are born undefined; it is the surroundings and its people that guide to discover his or her identity
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)