I will journal.
Today was fine. Funny word to describe a day.
We all live in these gardens, menageries of wonder. Behind every smile, every inquisitive eye, every coy and daring gesture, there is a world in need of exploration. This is why I love people. Why do we run from these worlds? We should embrace people. (Of course these worlds are gated; many have high walls. I believe, and curiosity would agree, that every wall should be scaled.)
Continue reading “My morning.”
Freire’s educational philosophy is largely political and social in nature. This aim of his message is to bring attention to the structures that govern our perceptions. These structures are generative themes that frame perceptions and our real consciousness. In doing so an ‘awareness’ can be achieved. It is this very process of approaching these structures that develops our critical consciousness, or a phronesis of practical wisdom, which uses the praxis of reflection and action. Freedom is achieved through the development of this critical consciousness as we confront reality.
Exploring and confronting reality need to occur for knowledge to be acquired. It is the critical consciousness that is responsible for this task. However, he believes that we all operate in generative themes that are framed by real consciousness that contains limited perceptions. He sees that a critical consciousness using praxis of reflection and action takes one beyond real consciousness into the potential consciousness where new themes can be generated. A supposition for the confrontation of reality is that an objective reality exists independently from the consciousness that can be explored. However, he believes that our understanding and knowledge is limited by the generative themes, the perceptions of this reality, which are historically and culturally rooted. Since all humans exist independently and are integrally experiencing reality, he believes that communal discourse allows for reality to be mutually explored which in turn yields a much more comprehensive understanding.
The mutual exploration requires that humans see each other as equal subjects. As subjects, we should exercise our critical consciousness to solve the pressing dilemmas that are relevant and approximate to us. We should live as beings in ourselves, as ends in ourselves, fully employing our creative faculties of freedom to confront the demands of reality that lead to a fulfilling life. According to Freire, “People are fulfilled only to the extent that they create their world (which is a human world), and create it with their transforming labor. The fulfillment of humankind as human beings lies, then, in the fulfillment of the world. If for a person to be in the world of word is to be totally dependent, insecure, and permanently threatened- if their word does not belong to them- the person cannot be fulfilled. Work that is not free ceases to be a fulfilling pursuit and becomes an effective means of dehumanization.” (145)
In sum, every human possesses the ability to exercise their critical consciousness, to reflect and act on the world, in order to transform it to meet their approximate dilemmas. This is their labor. We are ends in themselves. In contrast to animals which merely live in the context appropriate to it, and do not transcend contexts and communicate about it, human activity is characterized by reflection and action, theory and practice. This is how knowledge is garnered. Knowledge is simply the product of reflection and action.
However, due to the oppressive structures that characterize their existential experience, many people do not develop a critical consciousness. As a result, this critical conscious is underdeveloped. Oppression, in all the manifestations mentioned, subdues this critical consciousness.
You cannot separate freedom from humanity. It is distinct. Likewise, you cannot separate knowledge from humanity. As long as humans exist in reality there are themes that give it context and meaning. The question is whose context and meaning. Are the people generating these themes, this knowledge about the world and personal problems, themselves from their direct experience? Or are they prescribed or dictated these themes and knowledge by other people?
Freire’s message is that oppression robs people of their freedom to confront their own problems which thus subdues the critical consciousness. Oppression occurs when humans objectify their fellow man instead of see them as subjects. This translates to subjects who own, and objects who are possessed. This manifests as those who own labor, and those who are labor; those who prescribe knowledge, and those who receive knowledge; those who make rules, those who follow rules; those who teach, those who memorize. To retain power and dominance, the subjects do not want the dominated objects to develop a critical consciousness as subjects and think. This would upset the power balance and strip the oppressive subjects of their ability to control.
Learning occurs when problems are posed and the critical consciousness confronts and rises above the current perceived limitations of the real consciousness. (113) The aim is to for the critical consciousness to move beyond the real consciousness into the potential consciousness where generative themes can be synthesized to solve the pressing problems. It is important to recognize knowledge as cultural and historically rooted. It is relative to the place and problems of the people. To substitute direct experience and the contradictions that arise from that experience is to strip life of its meaning.
Our current academic institutions operate in this oppressive teacher-student, subject-object, dichotomy under the banking method, where knowledge is transferred from a teacher who is ‘enlightened’ to a student who is ‘unenlightened’. This is the wrong way to approach education because it reinforces the oppressive structure by preventing the student from developing their critical consciousness, thus suppressing their ability to critically cognize knowledge for themselves. The transfer of knowledge in this method is static, absolute and lifeless.
On the contrary, education should be a dialogical in a mutual, cooperative, co-intentional exploration of the problems relative to the individual. Under the problem posing method, a teacher is not the ‘teacher-of-the-student’ but rather a ‘teacher-student’, and the student is not the ‘student-of-the-teacher’ but rather a ‘student-teacher’. Mutual learning takes place in dialog between the student and teacher as they unveil reality together. There is a trust, humility, and love that unites the teacher and student to address the problems relative to the student. Knowledge in this method is treated as changing, relative, and lively.
Who are these teachers? They are those who have developed a critical consciousness and see the student not as an object, but a fellow subject, a fellow ‘I’, that aids in the exploration of reality and problems. If those who have a critical consciousness make the student an object, and thus manipulate and divide and conquer, they are not practicing the problem posing method characterized by love, trust and humility. Instead they are oppressing, just like the banking method. A human being as an object in the world and not as a subject suppresses their freedom, submerges the critical consciousness, and limits access to the potential consciousness which gives rise to developing our humanity more fully.
What effects would manifest in an oppressive society that is structured to suppress this critical consciousness? Regarding the malaise of our modern culture, let us suppose that the democraticAmericawe know and love is actually an oppressive system composed of an oppressive hierarchal structure composed of elites and the populous. In a world flooded with information and knowledge that has been pre-cognized and pre-objectified, where all of our answers have been prescribed for us, what does this do to our humanity, our critical consciousness and freedom?
All information that is not derived from personal experience is sloganized and robbed of the approximate and relevant meaning to the individual. News and media is simply precognized knowledge or propaganda presented and perpetuated by those who ‘know best’. I have to wonder if the repercussions to such oppression manifest as psychological ailments of society. What if there are no ‘Learning disabilities’, or if ‘depression’ and ‘bipolar’ and the like, are simply the manifestations of an oppressed humanity, an oppressed freedom, that cannot cope with the prescribed expectations and seemingly irrelevant and foreign demands of our culture?
If family structures reflect societal structures, then the majority of households operate within this oppressive structure. If this is the case with our current society, then most family structures are characterized by authority in the home, usually a dominating patriarch. In my own life, I found that I could not escape the oppression at home, or in school. When I attended school, or church, I was met with the same authoritative structure that dictated foreign demands and expectations. Teachers would lecture in front of the classroom and I was expected to engage in rote memorization, as if I were an empty receptacle to be filled with someone else’s cognitions of the world. In school, students are not given the opportunity, nor are they encouraged, to engage the world’s contradictions and coin relevant meaning. Instead, students are expected to passively consume someone else’s lifeless narrative of how things are. These structures suppress the critical consciousness, the curiosity for life and the world, by delegitimized our own ‘word’ and experience with the world. This oppression turns into listlessness, depression or rebellion against authority. These expressions are simply a result of ‘oppression’. Rebellion is a revolt against this authority. With this oppressive structure in mind, it’s queer to see how society treats us as problems and seeks to ‘prescribe’ its remedies. Children nowadays are diagnosed with a concoction of physiological dysfunctions that ranged from mood disorders to learning disabilities. Psychiatrists and psychologists attempt to assess and ‘treat’ patients with their own ideologies, and yet the rebellion continues.
I was personally met with this seemingly inescapable oppression which eventually drove me into rebellion as I sought escape from reality through drugs and alcohol. It wasn’t until after high school, when I was kicked out of my house and forced to live on my own that I experienced true freedom. For the first time in my life I was met with a profound freedom. The realization that I could be whoever and do whatever I wanted, that I could transform my life according to my passions and the dreams of my heart, that I experienced true joy in life.
From that point on I no longer struggled with substance abuse (although the habits and dependencies that had formed created challenges), nor did I see learning as a chore, a mindless endeavor of rote memorization with no significance or context. I could engage reality freely, independently, and create meaning and context as according to the passions and curiosities that affirmed my being. Everything came to life.
Any human, be it parents or teachers, should lay foundations of trust and love and humility as the starting point for all human development. Exploration of reality should be a cointentional effort.
However, one must wonder if there something lost by appeasing the undeveloped and nascent thematic understandings of reality in people. As much as Freire advocates a horizontal playing field where every relationship and community is to be considered valuable and legitimate at illuminating themes as a whole, understanding all people as equals creates an imbalance. People are at different stages of reflection. How can one expect effective discourse to take place when illiteracy and proper reason, poisoned by superstitions, is rooted in their minds? Freire addresses this in the opening preface by referencing a meeting with peasants where a fear of freedom led some to think that this revolution of the critical consciousness could lead to a fanaticism. He mentioned the factory worker that described his transition from being naïve to critical and that while he still didn’t have all the answers, he did not experience a collapse of his world.
If one argues that there are principles that first must me ‘instilled’ in students before exploration can begin, they are overlooking the very freedom contained in humanity that allows him to explore and transform and learn from reality. If these principles exist, we need to be critical and ask their origin, as well as what their functional aim intends. This objective reality is not privy space accessed only by the elites, but an objective reality that can be learned by every human so long as there is a relevant problem to be solved. While these principles seem to offer a starting point for reason and reflection, by exploring reality with a critical consciousness, these principles can be derived from direct experience. In this way people can come to understand and utilize these principles in a way that gives meaning and context while preserving their humanity.
Bibliography
Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed.New York: Continuum, 2000. Print.
When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.- Lao Tzu
I need to journal about this thought. What does it mean to me? Why is there struggle? These emotions should serve as an indication that my thoughts and actions are not aligning. More later.
Life. Inside me. I hate being conscientious. I hate wondering that my thoughts are correct, that they coincide with reality. What’s with this word ‘hate’ anyway? Why is it in my vocabulary?
I’m gonna let my thoughts flow freely for a bit…
I have a logic exam today. The book is peeled open and…
I find that when I’m stressed my mind operates at limited capacity. My ability to think critically and abstractly and creatively is severely hindered. I think of myself in a haze, a deep fog that extends just out of arms reach which veils the world in confusion.
We’re reading Pedagogy of the Oppressed in Philosophy of Education. While I haven’t read it straight through yet, I’ve been reading excerpts here and there, attempting to harvest his insights. The book it wholly inspiring.
Continue reading “Oppression”
Fuck adjectives.
I like people. I like people and places and things. Fuck adjectives. Fuck’em. I like verbs too a little. I need to work on my writing.
“Prose is architecture, not interior decoration.”-Hemmingway
What do I feel right now?
I feel like I’m going to lose my mind. I haven’t felt this way for a long time. I can’t hold my attention to a thought. I am always starting again. Like I keep waking up, and these responsibilities and goals are sitting there, unmoved and undisturbed. This is when the anxiety begins to creep into mind. I stress about…
Where is my life going? I’ve been having dark thoughts recently. Terminal thoughts. Its not healthy. Its stress induced. Like there is a wall of challenges that I keep walking up to, and I begin climbing, only to realize it was a dream, and the wall still lies before me.
I am behind on work.
I am making poor decisions. Decisions that I have decided were ‘not poor’, but were ‘reasonable’. These delusions are leaving me worse off. I am feeling defeated. I am unhappy. I have trouble enjoying myself and others without alcohol, so it seems.
I went to panama city beach this weekend. As I was told, it proved to be an exhilarating experience. With my fellow frat mates and their dates, we drowned ourselves in alcohol from the early hours of the morn into the wee hours of the night. When fatigue struck, due to overexposure or sheer inebriation, we popped uppers and chugged caffeine to restore our energy levels. And as often as possible, we had drunken sex with total strangers. These were, of course, our frat brothers dates. Date swapping is encouraged. I clocked in a few hours of sleep in the midst of it all. ‘How?’ is well beyond me.
I used to be a behaved boy. These tendencies to ‘rage’ like an animal, to indulge in these fantastic sensations of the body, were instinctual in my pubescent years. They came all too naturally, like a tsunami hitting the shoreline, decimating every inhibition in its path until the hunger subsided. As I grew older reason became a more trustworthy judge that shielded my inhibitions from destruction. Now I find myself rationalizing these behaviors. My moral compass has become a relative game of spin the bottle. My powers of manipulation have refocused themselves on my ethical operations, and its taking a toll.
Who are these people that encourage my demise? No. These voices? In my head. I am losing my mind.
I have work to do. Instead, I lie in bed. I hide my head from the faces around me. The shame in myself. My lack of attention in school, in the classroom, has caused my self confidence to erode. I cannot simply ‘rage’ like a mad man and maintain a composer that produces. I am not that person. I have never been that person. My attention span is that of a fly. This is why goals, concise and succinct, have been my beacon in dark hours. They provide a flickering blaze on the horizon that orients and alleviates the tension of being lost. But where have my goals gone? I can barely remember my motive for college.
Perhaps this weekend temporarily jostled my brain fluids. Perhaps the sleep deprivation has simply caused stress to double its intensity. Perhaps all these dark thoughts that weigh so severely on my conscience are merely short lived delusions that will burn off with time.
I don’t think thats the case. I am wrestling with something inside me. Something that needs to come out. I know better. While I have not eradicated the demons, I have managed their trouble. My escapades have led me astray. I have failed to keep them at bay and they are wreaking havoc on me.
So I sleep. I escape with dreams. Dreams of the world I seek to escape. It is a horrible nightmare.
Where does this inadequacy stem? Why do I feel so out dated, so expired. In my delusions, my efforts are monitored by harsh critics. My job is to increase the criticism so that I am prepared for the worst. What happens is that I destroy the only confidence I have so that I flounder when it counts. My lack of ease is alarming. Is my only refuge sleeping? Reading! Time wasters. Anything to preoccupy my mind. I steal away into these altered realities. Only here is my attention suspended completely, for a moment. The nagging anxiety melts away as I absorb into the narrative. There is no judgement. There are no peers and professors and red ink and critical counter claims. There is nothing but a suspension. A weightless wonderful suspension.
Until, of course, my habits of routine kick in and I am forced to attend maintenance responsibilities: go to class, show up to frat parties, submit work at an immovable deadline.
These deadlines are the only ones that seem to have any effect on this world that is perpetually postpone. I am not making myself into anything. I am beginning anew with every moment. This is torture. This is hell on earth. Culminated efforts with no direction. I focus and take aim, flexing and commanding my mind to hit the mark, but the direction is lost upon release and I am left wondering where my energy is being invested.
I am a wayward ship tormented by shape shifting skies.
These feelings need to get out. I need to exorcise them.
Smoking cigarettes makes me ill. But I do it anyway. Where are my values?
Why do I hate myself? Why do I hate the contradiction?
And I wake. And I am lost. This world is foreign, these faces are new. They seem to move to and fro as if I were a familiar fixture in their landscape. But who is it that they know? I am unknown to myself. I would give them that person. I would jest for their satisfaction just to give myself I place, just to restore that place in myself.
I am disconnected. Uprooted, I am artificially nourished with lies and delusions.
There is a rhythmic knocking above me: Back and forth, high and low. Intermittent melodies varying in pace and tempo. The beatings begin again. Sex. I want it to stop.
I had sex this weekend. A few times. With a few people. I can’t say I felt great about the encounters. At the end of a wild night, after a long day of intoxication, I am left with a surging desire for affection. I am left in need of a woman’s love, their body in my arms, on my body.
Continue reading “One. Night stand.”
Not gonna lie, I’m a big fan of eclectic indie bands. Anything chill, harmonious, abstract, or the like. Speaking of…. not eclectic music… I was listening to pandora and owl city came on. Some song “Captains and Cruise Ships”. The song was alright, but what stuck out was the mention of… WEST PALM BEACH. Sweet.
I am stuck in L.A.
Through the week and can’t get away
And you’re alone on the pier
In West Palm Beach on your holiday
Stormy night, reawake
…etc.
What is the first business of philosophy? To part with self-conceit. For it is impossible for anyone to begin to learn what he thinks that he already knows. ~Epictetus, Discourses
If I knew I should die tomorrow, I would plant a tree today. ~Stephen Girard
Theres something transcendental about that quote. It causes me to look beyond. To see the value in my actions. A potential that should not be overlooked. A permanency that grows.
Regarding T.H. McLaughlin’s “Beyond the Reflective Teacher”
The essay begins with the appeal to the underlying educational practitioner philosophy of reflection. Author McLaughlin thinks that there needs to be a shift away from the notion of a reflective teaching practitioner and advocates moving beyond to a more comprehensive model. He believes the current conception of a ‘reflective teacher’ has become a mere slogan used to gain appeal and consensus about the methods of teaching.
His inquiry looks into the concept of ‘reflection’, begging critical questions such as how reflection should be understood, what value it possesses, and how reflection is properly developed. From there he gives an in depth analysis that addresses the concepts and processes involved with the practice of teaching. His aim is to reconcile the current demands of teaching with training, a difficult task when using the current conception of reflection. In the end he establishes a need to address the individuality of teachers as a vital component of teaching. To him, character and personality, integral to a teacher’s individual traits, supersede the ability of mere reflection to facilitate knowledge to pupils.
otiose
o·ti·ose[oh-shee-ohs, oh-tee-]
–adjective
1. being at leisure; idle; indolent.
2. ineffective or futile.
3. superfluous or useless.
In his essay Foundational Investigations of the Phenomenological Origin of the Spatiality of Nature, Edmund Husserl explores the conception of motion in relation to bodies. While an exhaustive summary and examination could be undertaken on the essay as a whole, I would like to begin with examining an excerpt that characterizes the essay’s foundational theme that establishes the origin of the spatiality of nature. After all, as Husserl stressed, it is the implicit formations of such parts that give rise to the unity in which we perceive the whole.
“We must not forget the pregiveness and constitution belonging to the apodictic Ego or to me, to us, as the source of all actual and possible sense of being, of all possible broadening which can be further constructed in the already constituted world developing historically.”
What is the future?
Perceived events to-come? A something ‘before us’ containing an unpredictable, all-too-predictable, universal structure of immanence? A dangerous ‘understanding’ to come?
Journal thoughts on this notion and conception of future. Look at events that have shaped our apprehension ‘for’ the future. Uncover the essence of ‘future’, not as a physical phenomenon, but as a subjectively charged, intuitively constituted, exploding experience.
Interesting…
Educate is from L. educatus, pp. of educare “bring up, rear, educate,” which is related to educere or “bring out,” from ex- “out” + ducere “to lead”. Ducere is from where the word “duke” is derived.
Educate= to lead out.
Max Born (1949), Natural Philosophy of Cause and Chance
From “Metaphysical Conclusions”, pp. 124-28
[My emphasis added in bold]
“[T]he principle of objectivity…provides a criterion to distinguish subjective impressions and objective facts, namely by substituting for given sense-data others which can be checked by other individuals. […] It is perhaps the most important rule of the code of natural science of which innumerable examples can be given, and it is obviously closely related to the conception of scientific reality. For if reality is understood to mean the sum of observational invariants – and I cannot see any other reasonable interpretation of this word in physics – the elimination of sense qualities is a necessary step to discover them.
“Here I must refer to the previous Waynflete Lectures given by Professor E.D. Adrian, on The Physical Background of Perception, because the results of physiological investigations seem to me in perfect agreement with my suggestion about the meaning of reality in physics. The messages which the brain receives have not the least similarity with the stimuli. They consist in pulses of given intensities and frequencies, characteristic for the transmitting nerve-fibre, which ends at a definite place of the cortex. All the brain ‘learns’ (I use here the objectionable language of the ‘disquieting figure of a little hobgoblin sitting up aloft in the cerebral hemisphere’) is a distribution or ‘map’ of pulses. From this information it produces the image of the world by a process which can metaphorically be called a consummate piece of combinatorial mathematics: it sorts out of the maze of indifferent and varying signals invariant shapes and relations which form the world of ordinary experience.
“This unconscious process breaks down for scientific ultra-experience, obtained by magnifying instruments. But then it is continued in the full light of consciousness, by mathematical resoning. The result is the reality offered by theoretical physics.
“The principle of objectivity can, I think, be applied to every human experience, but is often quite out of place. For instance: what is a fugue by Bach? is it the invariant cross-section, or the common content of all printed or written copies, gramophone records, sound waves at performances, etc., of this piece of music? As a lover of music I say No! that is not what I mean by a fugue. It is something of another sphere where other notions apply, and the essence of it is not ‘notions’ at all, but the immediate impact on my soul of its beauty and greatness.
“In cases like this, the idea of scientific objective reality is obviously inadequate, almost absurd.
“This is trivial, but I have to refer to it if I have to make good my promise to discuss the bearing of modern physical thought on philosophical problems, in particular on the problem of free will. Since ancient times philosophers have been worried how free will can be reconciled with causality, and after the tremendous success of Newton’s deterministic theory of nature, this problem seemed to be still more acute. Therefore, the advent of indeterministic quantum theory was welcomed as opening a possibility for the autonomy of the mind without a class with the laws of nature. Free will is primarily a subjective phenomenon, the interpretation of a sensation we experience, similar to a sense impression. We can and do, of course, project it into the minds of our fellow beings just as we do in the case of music. We can also correlate it with other phenomena in order to transform it into an objective relation, as the moralists, sociologists, lawyers do – but then it resembles the original sensation no more than an intensity curve in a spectral diagram resembles a colour I see. After this transformation into a sociological concept, free will is a symbolic expression to describe the fact that the actions and reactions of human beings are conditioned by their internal mental structures and depend on their whole and unaccountable history. Whether we believe theoretically in strict determinism or not, we can make no use of this theory since a human being is too complicated, and we have to be content with a working hypothesis like that of spontaneity of decision and responsibility of action. If you feel that this clashes with determinism, you have now at your disposal the modern indeterministic philosophy of nature, you can assume a certain ‘freedom’, i.e., deviation from the deterministic laws, because these are only apparent and refer to advantages. Yet if you believe in perfect freedom you will get into difficulties again, because you cannot neglect the laws of statistics which are laws of nature.
“I think that the philosophical treatment of the problem of free will suffers often from an insufficient distinction between the subjective and objective aspect. It is doubtless more difficult to keep these apart in the case of such sensations as free will, than in the case of colours, sounds, or temperatures. But the application of scientific conceptions to a subjective experience is an inadequate procedure in all such cases.
“You may call this an evasion of the problem, by means of dividing all experience into two categories, instead of trying to form one all-embracing picture of the world. This division is indeed what I suggest and consider to be unavoidable. If quantum theory has any philosophical importance at all, it lies in the fact that it demonstrates for a single, sharply defined science the necessity of dual aspects of complementary considerations. Niels Bohr has discussed this question with respect to many applications in physiology, psychology, and philosophy in general. According to the rule of indeterminacy, you cannot measure simultaneously position and velocity of particles, but you have to make your choice. The situation is similar if you wish, for instance, to determine the physico-chemical processes in the brain connected with a mental process: it cannot be done because the latter would be decidedly disturbed by the physical investigation. Complete knowledge f the physical situation is only obtainable by a dissection which would mean the death of the living organ or the whole creature, the destruction of the mental situation. This example may suffice; you can find more and subtler ones in Bohr’s writings. They illustrate the limits of human understanding and direct the attention to the question of fixing the boundary line, as physics has done in a narrow field by discovering the quantum constant ℏ. Much futile controversy could be avoided in this way. To show this by a final example, I wish to refer to these lectures themselves which deal only with one aspect of science, the theoretical one There is a powerful school of eminent scientists who consider such things to be a future and snobbish sport, and the people who spend their time on it drones Science has undoubtedly two aspects: it can be regarded from the social standpoint as a practical collective endeavor for the improvement of human conditions, but it can also be regarded from the individualistic standpoint, as a pursuit of mental desires, the hunger for knowledge and understanding, a sister of art, philosophy, and religion. Both aspects are justified, necessary, and complementary. The collective enterprise of practical science consists in the end of individuals and cannot thrive without their devotion. But devotion does not suffice; nothing great can be achieved without the elementary curiosity of the philosopher. A proper balance is needed. I have chosen the way which seemed to me to harmonize best with the spirit of this ancient place of learning.”
When you are walking along, and a pebble finds its way into your shoe, what do you do?
You stop and remove the pebble.
Perhaps I place a pebble in my shoe and begin walking.
Why?
Both situations yield equivalent experience. One is to address a necessary demand, the other is the creation of an unnecessary demand.
The first leads to an ordinary accumulation of knowledge. The second, creative, act leads to an extraordinary accumulation of knowledge.
This is curiosity.
Perhaps we could save ourselves much discomfort by only attending the problems that find their way to us? Or, perhaps it is this curiosity that provides the ultimate satisfaction?
I like to think of philosophy as being charged with the task of creating ideas that better serve man.
People go about their life, never questioning, never reflecting on the source from where they came. For many, the formulation of God as a super divinity overflowing with answers is enough to assuage the task of inquiry. However, these formulations, whether belief or superstition or paradigm, need to be traced. An origin must be uncovered. As something, we do not sprout from nothing. We should assume that thoughts, a product of natural processes, follow the same principled behavior as other matter. No matter is created or destroyed, but constantly transfers and transforms. Thoughts and beliefs have a source, and if one should ever wonder where they are going, they should ask from where they came.
Discussion with philosophy professor
I feel like I annoyed him with my ideas, like I was violating an unspoken truism that questioning professors violates the teacher student relationship. That his conceptions are already rooted and these foreign thoughts of mine, however (seemingly) viable, should not be tolerated.
First of all, I am open. As open as ever. I admit that my search has not ended, and will not end, as long as I am alive, and as long as I feverently aspire to reconcile belief and truth in my quest for knowledge and understanding. The more I know, the more I do not know- further confirming my duty to seek out understanding.
Anyone who is unwilling to shed biases, look beyond the ego, rise above the forces of conditioning, and continually start anew in the pursuit of truth is self-deceived, and unapologetically so. Also, before we begin discussing, just as you can pronounce the fault of youth and years of inexperience, so too can I pronounce the fault of age and the years of conditioning that only serve to further entrench beliefs (and leave men with the delusion that they are proficient enough in the art of their reason. But this satisfaction is limited to ones own ratiocination, and does not extend to other men).
You apply faith to the unknown (supernatural conceptions outside the sanctifications of observed reality, derived from inherited historical and cultural constructions) in exchange for an assurance that rescues from the angst of the unknown.
Continue reading “Letter between friends: Regarding faith and science”
Pursuing a means to the end. And writing about it.
The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can’t read. -Twain
“A man should conceive of a legitimate purpose in his heart, and set out to accomplish it. He should make this purpose the centralizing point of his thoughts. It may take the form of a spiritual ideal, or it may be a worldly object, according to his nature at the time being; but whichever it is, he should steadily focus his thought forces upon the object which he has set before him. He should make this purpose his supreme duty, and should devote himself to its attainment, not allowing his thoughts to wander away into ephemeral fancies, longings, and imaginings. This is the royal road to self-control and true concentration of thought. Even if he fails again and again to accomplish his purpose (as he necessarily must until weakness is overcome), the strength of character gained will be the measure of his true success, and this will form a new starting point for future power and triumph.” Allen, James
“When I was young, I asked more of people than they could give: everlasting friendship, endless feeling. Now I know to ask less of them than they can give: a straightforward companionship. And their feelings, their friendship, their generous actions seem in my eyes to be wholly miraculous: a consequence of grace alone.” -Albert Camus
“Every man I meet is my superior in some way. In that, I learn of him.” -RWE
“The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion.” – Thomas Paine
“Everyone thinks of changing the world but no one thinks of changing himself.” -Tolstoy
There was never any more inception than there is now,
Nor any more youth or age than there is now,
And will never be any more perfection than there is now,
Nor any more heaven or hell than there is now.
WW
“If I were to wish for anything, I should not wish for wealth and power, but for the passionate sense of the potential, for the eye which, ever young and ardent, sees the possible. Pleasure disappoints, possibility never. And what wine is so sparkling, what so fragrant, what so intoxicating, as possibility!”
-Kierkegaard
So I read this quote:
‘A noble man compares and estimates himself by an idea which is higher than himself; and a mean man, by one lower than himself. The one produces aspiration; the other ambition, which is the way in which a vulgar man aspires.’
Marcus Aurelius
So I was like, whats the difference between aspiration and ambition?
Interestingly enough:
aspiration
1530s, “action of breathing into,” from L. aspirationem (nom. aspiratio), noun of action from aspiratus, pp. of aspirare (see aspire). Meaning “steadfast longing for a higher goal, earnest desire for something above one” is recorded from c.1600 (sometimes collectively, as aspirations).
ambition
mid-14c., from L. ambitionem (nom. ambitio) “a going around (to solicit votes),” from ambitus, pp. of ambire “to go around” (see ambient). Rarely used in the literal sense in English; the sense of “eager or inordinate desire of honor or preferment” goes back to the Latin.
While they are virtually synonymous in modern semantics, their historical roots differ quite a bit. Aspiration is breathing into, like breathing life into an idea. Whereas ambient is going around, like going around with, or soliciting, the idea. Cool, I think.
Revolt! You are free to be! Now dream and pursue freedom with passion! Escape societies noisy clamour, throw off the chains that drag you downward. Create yourself! There is no path where you are meant to go! Blaze anew, for there are no limits to the wanderlust of dreams! Gather your gaze and seek yourself out! Pour out the paltry perceptions of pain and problem, for you are beyond the grasp of trouble!
Decide and create! There is no need for the reassurance of petty peddlers. You needn’t ask the world a thing. Demand it from yourself, and the world will respond in bounty! Brave the unknown, lay siege to the remote and mysterious- for possibility awaits! And where possibility abounds, so does life!
What is Freedom?
The question of freedom poses itself when explaining why people convert to god. If a conversion towards god is a result of a lack of responsibility for accepting and exercising our freedom, we must define and determine the nature of freedom as it relates to sentient volition- or free will
The notion of free will supposes an inherent ability to choose. The choice lies in the decision to act or not to act, as well as to choose among alternative actions. Ideally, this choice is autonomously made. However, to what extent are we autonomous? Is there such a thing as freedom of choice? Or, are actions mere precipitations of mechanical chain reactions?
Answering these questions requires the exploration of the science or philosophy of mind.
So a group of dialectically attuned friends and I were conversing on the subject of the existence of God, whilst consuming liquid courage. It serves to loosen the dialog.
So our conversation, at one point, degenerated into poetically poignant and grandiose rants on man’s origin. As a disclaimer to philosophical and theological discussions, I always explain beforehand that I am in favor of discovering the possibility of the existence of God, so long as we abide by the known principles governing reality.
We landed on the topic of ‘order’ as plausible evidence for a higher power. The notion of Life- incredibly intricate systems of order that beget order- seems to run contrary to the sum will of the universe- which we agreed was entropy. I conjectured that popular understandings of order may be faulted.
So my friend says:
Nature tends towards that state in which energy is randomized to the greatest extent possible (disorder).
I replied:
Only in isolated (closed) systems. Entropy of a system that is not isolated (open) may decrease, leading to an increase of order. The second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy of any system cannot decrease other than by increasing the entropy of some other system. We know the earth is not a closed system because of the energy exchange between the sun. The suns increasing total entropy reduces the total entropy of the earth through the transference of its energy- which is radiation, heat, and light.
Assuming a closed system, the net effect in the solar system (or the universe) is still towards increased entropy. (Is this also why the universe is expanding?–probably a question well beyond my current powers of comprehension.)
Relating back to the discussion about God and order, the question remained: Is the reduction of entropy- leading to increased order and life on earth- really proof of Intelligent design? Or for that matter, the existence of God? Not convinced.
Personal Review of Beyond the Reflective Teacher by Terence H. McLaughlin
The essay begins with the appeal to the underlying educational practitioner philosophy of reflection. Author McLaughlin thinks that there needs to be a shift away from the notion of a reflective teaching practitioner and advocates moving beyond to a more comprehensive model. He believes the current conception of a ‘reflective teacher’ has become a mere slogan used to gain appeal and consensus about the methods of teaching.
His inquiry looks into the concept of ‘reflection’, begging critical questions such as how reflection should be understood, what value it possesses, and how reflection is properly developed. From there he gives an in depth analysis that addresses the concepts and processes involved with the practice of teaching. His aim is to reconcile the current demands of teaching with training, a difficult task when using the current conception of reflection. In the end he establishes a need to address the individuality of teachers as a vital component of teaching. To him, character and personality, integral to a teacher’s individual traits, supersede the ability of mere reflection to facilitate knowledge to pupils.
This essay was a provoking call to reexamine the semantics of educational theory and root them in a practical working understanding that combines a refined definition of reflection borrowed from Aristotle’s notion of phronesis, coupled with personal character qualities of individual teachers.
Having recently reflected on ‘reflection’ myself, I was intrigued by the dilemmas McLaughlin brought to light. Academic words like ‘reflection’ are all too often thrown around without much thought that a consensual and pragmatic understanding of such words are up to date. One is inclined to think of reflection as almost synonymous with learning, but this, as McLaughlin says, is the very fault of the ‘reflections’ current paradigm.
Regarding its educational applications, reflection is loaded with relative meaning. It is not simply the act of ‘thinking’. It contains varying complexities that manifest according to the intention of reflection, as well as when material being reflected upon. McLaughlin pulls apart the explicit and intuitive functions of reflection called for specific applications. He refers to Aristotle’s notion of the techne to illustrate how skilled professionalism, such as research, requires skill derived from explicit reflection.
Additionally, there is a further spectrum concerned with the proximity of objects under reflection. Not only does reflection vary in application, it varies in the scope and object of reflection as well. This is on a continuum ranging from specific, present and particular, matters, to more general, contextual, matters. These levels emerge as important for framing reflection to suite the object of reflection. By not recognizing these levels, there is an inherent danger of limiting the scope in which matters are considered, leading to potentially overlooking interconnections among parts.
As McLaughlin moves on in his critique, he arrives at the dilemma of establishing a definitive value of reflection as it relates to effective classroom performance. Establishing the connection of phronesis as ‘uniting good judgement and action’ with effective teaching, there arises the question of defining what it means to be a good teacher. This brings him to the dilemmas of researching the dynamics of teacher and pupils as well as the very quality of their reflection in question.
His last critique relates educational theory’s innate duty to establish rational principles. While this duty appears to be a sincere and worthwhile undertaking, there is the threat of post-modernism that ridicules the possibility of rationalism that leaves to any sort of ‘general standards of judgment’ from existing at all. To most, it would seem absurd to abandon such a duty. However, this forces the question of issues concerning evaluative basis of education itself.
Lastly, McLaughlin moves beyond the analysis and inquiry to formulating a position of launching a new paradigm that he refers to as ‘beyond reflection’. As aforementioned, he stresses the importance of valuing the qualities of character each individual teacher posses. These qualities, he believes, are what consider the relation between teacher and student, and bridge a gap that allows for the connection of the teacher as a ‘whole person’ with the pupils.
Continuing with this connection, while retaining the conviction in reflection as phronesis, he constructs a position that emphasizes the role of rooted, established communities unified by mutual commitments. Because of contemporary educations concern with pluralism and diversity, the utility of these communities have yet to be fully explored.
In conclusion, McLaughlin does wonderful work analyzing the varying semantic of reflection, and presents a convincing platform for the further analysis of reflections role in unified communities that emphasizes a strong link to a teacher character in effective education.
What is spirituality?
What does that mean? Pious and impious use the word to describe a transcendental mental attitude or world view.
Because I was indoctrinated at home from an early age, I didn’t convert to Christianity on my own volition, per se. I do remember moments in my religious walk where I renewed commitments to God and reaffirmed my belief. This caused an awakening within me which inspired my efforts to bridge the gap between ‘God’ and myself.
The process of conversion requires the displacement of ego in exchange for ‘God’s Will’. The very idea of displacing the self is a powerful and transformative experience. In Christianity, you’ll often hear the ‘testimonies’ of people coming to Christ who refer to the exchange of self for ‘God’s will’. I remember growing up hearing that we need to ‘die to self’ in order to lead a ‘God centered’ life.
Normal
0
false
false
false
MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
What is autonomy? (Auto-: Self; Nomos:-Law/Regulation/Custom)
Does free will exist, or are we governed by deterministic mechanical processes?
If free will exists, it must be reconciled with determinism. There is a need for the clarifying the limitations of autonomy.
Determinism would have us believe that choice is limited. I posit: choice is limited to combinations of environmental exposure and perceived experience, something that cannot be adequately described as limited. Determinism would blind us to our ability to recall and create.
Inspiration:
“The first and best victory is to conquer self.” -Plato
“Men are anxious to improve their circumstances, but are unwilling to improve themselves; they therefore remain bound. The man who does not shrink from self-crucifixion can never fail to accomplish the object upon which his heart is set. This is true of earthly as of heavenly things. Even the man whose object is to acquire wealth must be prepared to make great personal sacrifices before he can accomplish his object; and how much more so he who would realize a strong and well-poised life.” James Allen
“Rule your mind or it will rule you.” -Horace
“Well begun is half done.” -Aristotle
“You can never conquer the mountain. You can only conquer yourself.” – Jim Whittaker
“Beware of endeavoring to become a great man in a hurry. One such attempt in ten thousand may succeed. These are fearful odds.” —Benjamin Disraeli
“Be not angry that you cannot make others as you wish them to be, since you cannot make yourself as you wish to be.” — Thomas á Kempis
Hashing out thoughts…
It is a wonder…
Despite being armed with the deftest faculties of reason, we are wary to relinquish the comforting notions of a moral curator and universal architect and brave the cold indifference that existential freedom bestows upon meaning and truth. We hesitate to open unknown doors, seeking the shackles of delusion before the responsibility of liberty. We fear the unknown, not because it is unknown to us, but because we are unknown to ourselves. Liberty and freedom are only known to the will, the mechanism of choice. Freedom propagates only more of what we are, exposing our ability to be, which terrifies. To be known to ourselves requires the responsibility of choice, and acceptance of who we are. Contrary to our fears, we are infinite.
Inactive freedom casts an ominous shadow, a think blanket of darkness, on potential. It bleeds the rivers of change and chokes the ground of growth. Never mind the stark realities; we are coddled by these chains, pacified by our delusions. We offer our will, our most sacred possession, as a living sacrifice for comfort and security. This is in the name of God- of truth. The irony is searing.
Say we undertake the yoke of freedom. While freedoms brilliancy illuminates ignorance and unveils truth, we are left obligated, forced to exist and bear the responsibility for that existence. We are an end in ourselves. Existence and being is now our affair. We are the intercessors of fate, the arbiters of potential, the beginning of essence. And to whom are we accountable? I, the self, freedom incarnated. But we are unknown to ourselves, the freedom and I. For just as we wearily shirk from the unknown, we shirk from the abysmal darkness within us, unknown and unexplored. From whence did we come? From whence will we go? Must I choose?
So the huddled masses congregate, feverishly maintaining the conception of an invisible, powerless God.
***************************************************************************
Thoughts…
Spirituality…
What does that mean? Pious and impious use the word to describe a transcendental mental attitude or world view.
Because I was indoctrinated at home from an early age, I didn’t convert to Christianity on my own volition, per se. I do remember moments in my religious walk where I renewed commitments to God and reaffirmed my belief. This caused an awakening within me which renewed me efforts to bridge the gap between ‘God’ and myself.
The process of conversion requires the displacement of ego in exchange for ‘God’s Will’. The very idea of displacing the self is a powerful and transformative experience. In Christianity, you’ll often hear the ‘testimonies’ of people coming to Christ and refer to the exchange of self for ‘God’s will’. I remember growing up hearing that we need to ‘die to self’ in order to lead a ‘God centered’ life.
But what, or who, is God? There is a spectrum of conceptions that evolve as we accrete understanding of ourselves, our world, and what/who ‘God’ might be. Generally, this evolution of mind correlates with an increased openness towards the world and a transcendent mental attitude- or spirituality- that allows us to see the interrelation of all things.
The first conception, and most primitive, is the anthropomorphized patriarch with a long gray beard seated at his throne in heaven- presumably located somewhere between the sky and space.
As our holistic understanding increases, we accept the irrationality of God existing as a literal being. Instead we adopt a God that can, as far as our current understanding will allow, rationally exist within the confines of reality and constraints of nature. This God is an invisible power that maintains a sentient and forcible will. This God is actively involved with the affairs of men. Actively believing and adhering to religious dogma- prayer, doing good works, following commandments, tithing, attending religious services- are all attempts to gain ‘God’s’ favor and align with his will.
I’ll postpone the discussion of how and why religious adherence and beliefs foster self-fulfilling prophecies for God’s existence due to naturally fundamental and beneficial principles within the doctrine.*
The next conception of God revolves around the congruency of belief and outcome. If one hopes to lay claim to being, one must familiarize with reality and the laws of nature. This inevitably exercises the powers of reason, which forces the mind to reconcile the irrefutable nature of statistical probability. Outcomes are determined through circumstance that only the actions of individuals or the mechanics of nature can induce. As a result, one comes to grips with changing outcomes by influencing or predicting God’s will. No amount of prayer will suspend gravity, solve global warming, prevent wars, or achieve any desired outcome without intervention.
At this point, a believer could easily transition into a Deist by maintaining the existence of an impersonal, yet Supreme Being. I’ll skip this for now.
The final conception is that God is a disassociated projection of the internal man. As self knowledge is garnered and ideals coalesce, we are left with the formation of the conscience. The conscience functions as a subliminal consciousness that reconciles actions with desired outcomes and what should be. Perhaps this is the voice of God; the Holy Spirit’s whispering convictions. Because mans thoughts and imaginings are not limited by the laws of nature and confines of reality, they are infinite. When mans ideals about what should be are misconstrued with what is, internal dissonance occurs. As a result, we must disassociate ourselves by objectifying our ideals. By projecting these ideals onto something or a figure outside of us, their value can be realized and sought after, without being tainted by our current limits. This inversion allows for the manifestation of ‘God’ as the sum of all that should be, a mere projection of the best of our, albeit limited, understandings.
Here is a complementary quote:
“Consciousness of God is self-consciousness, knowledge of God is self-knowledge, by his God thou knowest the man, and by the man his God; the two are identical. Whatever is God to a man, that is his heart and soul; and conversely, God is the manifested inward nature, the expressed self of a man– religion the solemn unveiling of a man’s hidden treasures, the revelation of his intimate thoughts, and the open confession of his love-secrets.” [Feuerbach]
There are two conversions that occur relating to God. From an atheist to a believer, and a believer to an atheist. Both produce massive reversals of mind that overturn entire frameworks for world view. I mentioned that the conversion to God involves a displacement of self. This is incredibly invigorating and, seemingly, liberating.
(Brief tangent: From my experience, most people that convert to God, especially later in age, do so in hopes of achieving a salvation. This salvation is from their pain, their emotional baggage. This is objectified as sin. People who experience conversions to God do so in order to relieve their state. Their previous beliefs in themselves, in their past, about life caused dissatisfaction. The delusion of God, however seemingly justified, is a scape goat for their suffering. It would be all the more fitting to say a lamb. What these people fail to realize is that suffering is a result of misaligned expectations. These misaligned expectations are a result of a lack or avoidance of responsibility. Freedom is terrifying. They cannot conceive who they want to be, so they remain as they are, unknown to themselves. These are the people that subscribe so desperately to various doctrines and beliefs of mainstream culture, never ‘thinking’ or willfully contemplating who they ought to be. This weakness, this ignorance, allows the will to atrophy as habituation and conditioning fully inundate.)
Back to the conversion to God…
The experience of conversion to God is liberating because the displacement of self with God. As we place our faith in a something outside of us, we are not left with the responsibility of changing our circumstances. Changing our circumstances requires the acknowledgment of certain limitations due to circumstance- in knowledge, emotion, or physicality. Instead, the conversion suspends choice and freedom in exchange for the belief in God (be it the manifestation of God as a projection of self-knowledge, or the interpretation of religious texts, or in between). The benefit for the conversion to God and displacement of self is baited with reward and possibility. Rewards generally concern an ideal afterlife, not tainted with earthly inadequacies. Possibility and empowerment is achieved as we align ourselves to Gods will. Of course these benefits vary precisely from religion to religion.
Many religious assert warnings that ‘idolatry’ and idol worship is ‘evil’. Who would worship inanimate objects? Anyone who seeks to displace the self.
Spirituality…
My conversion from a believer in God to a non-skeptical realist (essentially agnostic), was marked by a decision to seek understanding, dispel delusions, and eliminate self-deception. The process was slow and gradual, yet I retained a certain spirituality. I find that when many people are asked if religious, they reply that they are spiritual. I responded similarly.
As far as I was concerned, spirituality was the residue of my faith in God. God represented possibility. Recall: “In Christ all things are possible” etc. The conversion to God opens one up to possibility by suspending limited beliefs and opening the mind to possibility. Spirituality is faith in possibility. Conversion away from God can leave the faith in possibility intact.
Spirituality exists on a wide spectrum among religious and irreligious alike.
Some people join religions because they recognize the value in certain universal principles of good within the doctrine, while others seek the escape from responsibility of self that it brings.
Pretty burnt out from writing. Not sure this makes sense. We’ll see when I go back to reread it later. pzz.
***************************************************************
*Religious beliefs cause a variety of psychological effects: Confirmation bias (Biases influence interpretation of Positive feedback to be used as evidence for maintaining and confirming biases and reinforcing pre-existing beliefs- aka, I prayed that it wouldn’t rain, and its sunny out, therefore God answered my prayer, or I prayed that God would cure my aunt of cancer and she survived, so God is real), Hawthorne effect (Awareness that you are being observed influences your behavior- aka, knowing people look at/treat you as a Christian example causes you to maintain Christian behaviors),Pygmalion effect (Aware of higher expectations lead to high performance- aka God is watching leads to more mindfulness, better behavior), Stereotype threat (when facing a disruptive concern, we evaluate based on negative stereotypes)- aka Anyone who is not a Christian is a sinner and evil, so when bad things happen its because of non-Christians), etc., etc.
*******************
It is much easier to keep the ball rolling than start the ball rolling.
Get into action… know who you are, and you will suddenly realize what you are to do.
