Frankl-y Speaking

Man's Search for Meaning is a unique account of the Holocaust. Unlike Elie Wiesel in Night, Frankl was an adult while in the camps and saw it through his background in psychiatry. This allowed him to analyze the mindset of the prisoner, and examine what made people persevere in the face of intense suffering. I was surprised by how much of a difference it made to have something to hope for, to look forward to. Frankl thought not only of his wife but of the manuscript of his book that was destroyed in Auschwitz. He credits his survival, besides some luck, with his determination to re-write the book. The importance of one's mental state was demonstrated in a story about of of Frankl's friends who had a dream they'd be liberated by March 30th. As the day approached, it was pretty obvious they weren't close to being liberated. The man became ill with typhus and died on the 30th. Frankl believes that the man was so set on being free that day, that when he realized he wouldn't be he lost the will to live. Sometimes the difference between life and death was just a mindset.

A Classmate I'm Thankful For

A classmate I'm thankful for is Victor Kong. As I have known since gym class sophomore year, Victor is a funny and sometimes eccentric person. In philosophy he always makes interesting connections to things I wouldn't have thought of. Whether it's sharing his apparently extensive knowledge of superheroes or discussing teletubbies, Victor's comments never fail to entertain me. Even though they can be a little off topic at times, his comments make me laugh and bring something different to the discussion. So thanks Victor, for improving our knowledge on random topics and making philosophy class an even more interesting place to be.

A Direction the Class Needs

I really enjoy this class and the discussions we have. They are relevant and thought-provoking, and I always get something out of them. Similarly, the books we read are interesting and help spark interesting discussions. Although some might disagree, I like group work because it helps me get a different perspective on certain issues in the book, or reminds me of things I forgot. But the blogs can be kind of a mixed bag, depending on the topic or question. Sometimes I just don't have much to say on whatever the topic might be, and other times it makes me think more in-depth about it. Overall I guess it is good because I have time to think about and process what we discuss in class, before sharing my opinions. The only big problem I have with the class is that it's right before my 8th period lunch, so that's mostly what I'm thinking about. It can be a little hard to focus. If it were any other class, though, paying attention would be much harder. Because the discussions really are worth being part of, I try to stay alert. This class gets an A in my book.

Voltaire and Camus - Who would they vote for?

The philosopher-writers Voltaire and Camus both had developed political views, sometimes with overlap. Both of them tended to lean left. Voltaire criticized most authority figures during his time, because he was strongly against the aristocratic system that much of Europe was governed under. He was a friend of Ben Franklin and supported the American system of government. But that doesn't tell us whether he would vote Republican or Democratic today. Because he was against the aristocracy, who were handed their power and money from their parents, I don't think he would vote for Mitt Romney. Romney's father was governor of Michigan and made a lot of money. Sure, Mitt started his own business and made money for himself, but he had a head start. Voltaire would support Barack Obama because he was progressive for his time, and if he were alive today he would vote for the Democratic Party.
Camus leaned left in politics, which leads me to believe he wouldn't vote Republican. The question is, would Camus vote at all? There's a possibility that he would be too estranged with the system, because he encouraged revolt.

Stranger Meaning

In The Stranger, Meursault seems to live a pretty boring, meaningless life. It's a simple life, but he never seems to despair. In fact, he seems quite content with the way his life is going. I think we all can find happiness in the small things. Though the daily grind can sometimes be monotonous, there are a couple ways I try to make it more enjoyable. One way to do that is by laughing. Joking around with friends and having fun just makes the day so much more worthwhile. I also find myself thinking towards the future to get through the day. Like where I'll go to college, or where I'll live as an adult, whether in Chicago, somewhere in the U.S., or abroad. I like traveling and learning about places, so I like the idea of living out of state next year. Looking to the future is a way of saying, sure it might be boring now, it'll be better soon. This might not be a great mindset if it doesn't change eventually, because then I won't ever be happy with where I am, I'll always be looking towards the next thing. I don't really see that being the case in the long term though.

Candide's Punishments: Do They Fit the Crime?

Candide faced extreme hardships throughout his journey, especially for someone so innocent, who had been sheltered for so long. He's conscripted into the Bulgarian Army and brutally beaten. He's caught in a shipwreck on his way to Portugal, and when he finally reaches the shore there's an earthquake, and soon after he's flogged for being a philosopher (while Pangloss is hanged). At this point, Candide hasn't done anything wrong. His only crime was being pure and naive, which maybe led him to not see the consequences of being with Cunegonde. Cunegonde is really what gets him into trouble throughout he whole story. She's the reason he was kicked out of the castle and the reason he killed three people. I don't think his punishments were justified, because he only meant the best in each situation. The first two people he killed actually had done some pretty bad things. The third, Cunegonde's brother, was someone who was entrenched in the old ways of European hierarchy, and who got his position because of his looks. That doesn't mean it was okay to kill him; but it symbolizes getting rid of the old oppressive system.

How Do I Know What I Know?

Going back to the most basic knowledge one can have, Rene Descartes came up with the idea "I think, therefore I am." Because I am conscious I know I exist. Though we don't question our existence in everyday life, if you do it can get pretty confusing. So I say it's better (for this question at least) to stick to more concrete ideas. For example, how do I know simple things like stealing is bad? The easiest answer would be that this was taught to me by my parents and by society. But do all people need to be taught this? Sure, some people would (and do) steal regardless of what they were taught. But some people might naturally see it as wrong. If I had never been specifically told stealing is bad as a kid, I still think I wouldn't have done it. And if I had stolen something, maybe I would have learned from experience and seen the reaction of whoever it belonged to, and I would realize that it made them unhappy, so I shouldn't do it. Then again, there is the question of the concept of property. In order to steal, things have to belong to someone. If we weren't taught the concept of property, we couldn't learn through experience that you shouldn't steal because you don't believe the object belongs to them, regardless of what they believe.
Another interesting question is how do I know my parents really are my parents? Most young children, even if adopted, don't question this. They believe that the people who raised them are their parents, much like how a newly-hatched duckling believes the first living thing it sees is its mother (whether that's really true or not is another question). As we get older maybe we do see similarities between us and our parents, either in how we look or act or both, and that seems to confirm it. But if you think about it, if you're 'parents' have been saying since day one you have dad's nose, or mom's eyes, you're bound to believe it whether or not it's true, as long as it's not too long of a stretch. I'm not saying that parents have some sort of conspiracy going to make you believe you're their biological child, but it's an interesting way to look at how we get some of our very first knowledge.