Monday, March 31, 2008
responsibility
i have a choice to go two roads. one road i live a somewhat miserable and insane life in which i am constantly haunted by the uncertainty of every aspect of life and other nagging narcisistic issues. on the other path i endure great sacrifice in order to protect the rights of others to do anything they damn well please - and most of the time what they please is drinking, getting cancer, and being generally stupid and inconsiderate, but only to the point of being annoying, and not to the point where the law has any useful bearing on it. so which life does a person like me have the responsibility to? i have the resources to live a fairly comfortable existence and take advantage of the gifts of autonomy our forefathers and law personell have bestowed upon me, but i have the awareness such that i understand a certain responsibility to my fellow people. which life does the aware man rightly lead?
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Hugh Laurie in Street Kings
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dcXz-XjNbkM
maybe youve seen him in house. that doesnt make this nearly as funny. hugh laurie is hilarious. the interviewer is a moron. he mentions black adder, which happens to be comic genious as well, but hugh laurie is clearly at his best in jeeves and wooster; a british film adaptation of the pg wodehouse stories. watching jeeves and wooster makes you sad for what television humor is today, and for hugh laurie wasting his talents on movies like this. i mean, really? using violence like a composer?
maybe youve seen him in house. that doesnt make this nearly as funny. hugh laurie is hilarious. the interviewer is a moron. he mentions black adder, which happens to be comic genious as well, but hugh laurie is clearly at his best in jeeves and wooster; a british film adaptation of the pg wodehouse stories. watching jeeves and wooster makes you sad for what television humor is today, and for hugh laurie wasting his talents on movies like this. i mean, really? using violence like a composer?
More Unnecessary Frivolity in the Capital
thats a nice fuckin stadium though. nats braves. baseball opening night tonight. "woot. woot." as they say.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Sunday, March 23, 2008
534 Words
Existentialist thinkers have often been referred to as the anti-classical philosophers. Tired of not being able to apply the lessons of the Greeks into present tangible life, they saw it more important to live a life putting existence before consciousness. Such beliefs, it is obvious, come in clear conflict with Platonic thoughts, especially those on education.
In Plato’s most famous dialogue, The Republic, he presents an interesting theory on education through the voice of his mentor Socrates. He states, “Because a free man ought not to learn anything under duress. Compulsory physical exercise does no harm to the body, but compulsory learning never sticks in the mind…’ ‘Then don’t use compulsion…but let your children’s lessons take the form of play.’” (The Republic, 537a). Here we see that Plato was clear on the shortcomings of a traditional compulsory education. He knew for a fact that forced learning breeds apathy and disinterest. But rather than attack the root of these problems (the compulsory part) his response addresses merely the symptom. If compulsory education doesn’t “stick” then all we need to do is make it appear that it wasn’t education. By making it game-like, children will be tricked into learning and the system will hopefully succeed.
While existentialists would too reject compulsory top-down education, their answer to this would be far from tricking students into learning. Robert Brumbaugh describes existentialist educational theory as being concerned with “individual authenticity”. Such an ‘authenticity’ is found through self-realization, free from conformity. It would appear that to the existentialist education would embrace imagination and a very hands-on experience. The idea wouldn’t be to trick students in learning what some “enlightened” person thinks they should know, but provide them with the opportunities to find out what they want to.
Considering the differences between existentialist and Platonic educational approaches, it is of no surprise that Platonic theory offers little support for existentialist theory. When attempting to classify different educational approaches by assigning them to different rungs on the Platonic dividing line, Robert Baumbaugh assigns existentialism to the lowest rung (imagination). Surely, from a Platonic perspective this classification is justified. For ‘imagination’ is a mere distraction form pure reason and a pursuit of the good.
From the existentialist perspective, imagination and experience is simply the only being man can know. It is silly to spend life pursuing intangibilities, especially when one must be tricked into taking such a path. No amount of thought or reflection will be able to get man close to the good or the truth. It is much more worthwhile to accept the life given, and explore that which is personally intriguing.
From my perspective, what is most distressing about Platonic philosophy is the circumvention of the true problem with compulsory education never sticking. Instead of taking a more existentialist path in solving the problem, Plato simply figures that misleading children to the good is more important. Is not the majesty of the pursuit of the good defamed when one must be mislead in order to have a chance of reaching it? Surely, from an existentialist perspective, if the good was really to have a bearing on one’s life that pursuit would be embarked upon without an education rooted in deception.
In Plato’s most famous dialogue, The Republic, he presents an interesting theory on education through the voice of his mentor Socrates. He states, “Because a free man ought not to learn anything under duress. Compulsory physical exercise does no harm to the body, but compulsory learning never sticks in the mind…’ ‘Then don’t use compulsion…but let your children’s lessons take the form of play.’” (The Republic, 537a). Here we see that Plato was clear on the shortcomings of a traditional compulsory education. He knew for a fact that forced learning breeds apathy and disinterest. But rather than attack the root of these problems (the compulsory part) his response addresses merely the symptom. If compulsory education doesn’t “stick” then all we need to do is make it appear that it wasn’t education. By making it game-like, children will be tricked into learning and the system will hopefully succeed.
While existentialists would too reject compulsory top-down education, their answer to this would be far from tricking students into learning. Robert Brumbaugh describes existentialist educational theory as being concerned with “individual authenticity”. Such an ‘authenticity’ is found through self-realization, free from conformity. It would appear that to the existentialist education would embrace imagination and a very hands-on experience. The idea wouldn’t be to trick students in learning what some “enlightened” person thinks they should know, but provide them with the opportunities to find out what they want to.
Considering the differences between existentialist and Platonic educational approaches, it is of no surprise that Platonic theory offers little support for existentialist theory. When attempting to classify different educational approaches by assigning them to different rungs on the Platonic dividing line, Robert Baumbaugh assigns existentialism to the lowest rung (imagination). Surely, from a Platonic perspective this classification is justified. For ‘imagination’ is a mere distraction form pure reason and a pursuit of the good.
From the existentialist perspective, imagination and experience is simply the only being man can know. It is silly to spend life pursuing intangibilities, especially when one must be tricked into taking such a path. No amount of thought or reflection will be able to get man close to the good or the truth. It is much more worthwhile to accept the life given, and explore that which is personally intriguing.
From my perspective, what is most distressing about Platonic philosophy is the circumvention of the true problem with compulsory education never sticking. Instead of taking a more existentialist path in solving the problem, Plato simply figures that misleading children to the good is more important. Is not the majesty of the pursuit of the good defamed when one must be mislead in order to have a chance of reaching it? Surely, from an existentialist perspective, if the good was really to have a bearing on one’s life that pursuit would be embarked upon without an education rooted in deception.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Sunday, March 2, 2008
The Lost Puppy Song
Through the best of times,
Through the worst of times,
Through Nixon and through Bush,
Do you remember '36?
We went our seperate ways.
You fought for Stalin.
I fought for freedom.
You believe in authority.
I believe in myself.
I'm a molotov cocktail.
You're Dom Perignon.
Baby, what's that confused look in your eyes?
What I'm trying to say is that
I burn down buildings
While you sit on a shelf inside of them.
You call the cops
On the looters and piethrowers.
They call it class war,
I call it co-conspirators.
'Cause baby, I'm an anarchist,
You're a spineless liberal.
We marched together for the eight-hour day
And held hands in the streets of Seattle,
But when it came time to throw bricks
Through that Starbucks window,
You left me all alone.
You watched in awe at the red,
White, and blue on the fourth of july.
While those fireworks were exploding,
I was burning that fucker
And stringing my black flag high,
Eating the peanuts
That the parties have tossed you
In the back seat of your father's new Ford.
You believe in the ballot,
Believe in reform.
You have faith in the elephant and jackass,
And to you, solidarity's a four-letter word.
We're all hypocrites,
But you're a patriot.
You thought I was only joking
When I screamed "Kill Whitey!"
At the top of my lungs
At the cops in their cars
And the men in their suits.
No, I won't take your hand
And marry the State.
'Cause baby, I'm an anarchist,
You're a spineless liberal.
We marched together for the eight-hour day
And held hands in the streets of Seattle,
But when it came time to throw bricks
Through that Starbucks window,
You left me all alone.
p.s. does anarchy even exist?
Through the worst of times,
Through Nixon and through Bush,
Do you remember '36?
We went our seperate ways.
You fought for Stalin.
I fought for freedom.
You believe in authority.
I believe in myself.
I'm a molotov cocktail.
You're Dom Perignon.
Baby, what's that confused look in your eyes?
What I'm trying to say is that
I burn down buildings
While you sit on a shelf inside of them.
You call the cops
On the looters and piethrowers.
They call it class war,
I call it co-conspirators.
'Cause baby, I'm an anarchist,
You're a spineless liberal.
We marched together for the eight-hour day
And held hands in the streets of Seattle,
But when it came time to throw bricks
Through that Starbucks window,
You left me all alone.
You watched in awe at the red,
White, and blue on the fourth of july.
While those fireworks were exploding,
I was burning that fucker
And stringing my black flag high,
Eating the peanuts
That the parties have tossed you
In the back seat of your father's new Ford.
You believe in the ballot,
Believe in reform.
You have faith in the elephant and jackass,
And to you, solidarity's a four-letter word.
We're all hypocrites,
But you're a patriot.
You thought I was only joking
When I screamed "Kill Whitey!"
At the top of my lungs
At the cops in their cars
And the men in their suits.
No, I won't take your hand
And marry the State.
'Cause baby, I'm an anarchist,
You're a spineless liberal.
We marched together for the eight-hour day
And held hands in the streets of Seattle,
But when it came time to throw bricks
Through that Starbucks window,
You left me all alone.
p.s. does anarchy even exist?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)