Dialectics: Freedom and Authority

Freedom and authority pose a very interesting dialectic. The definition of freedom itself has a dialectic nature. For example, in our post 9/11 world the United States government can tap your phone lines, intercept your emails, read your text messages, and access your web history. Many people say this is a violation of our personal freedoms, but the government claims these are measures to protect American freedom. Therefore, we must give up freedom to attain it.

In my previous example as in countless others, authority will sometimes limit your freedom in order to save it all together. Take the Romans for another example. They had written into their legislation that in a time of crisis, the elected leader could impose a military dictatorship to protect the empire. Although human nature made this policy imperfect and resulted in Caesars, the basic principal was the same. It was a sacrifice of freedom, for freedom.

Some philosophers argue though that freedom doesn't exist without authority. Philosophers such as Hegel and Holbach argue that we have no free will. Without free will there exists no freedom. You may feel free in your small portion of existence, but in the grand scheme of things you are not free. You answer to some greater authority at all times. This idea is also very post-modern. In post-modern theory, you exist as part of "the system" with no free will, much like the movie the matrix. You're only freedom is to find your niche in life, but you are never one hundred percent free. Authority determines your freedom at all times.

I then thought to apply this dialect relationship to my own experiences, and determined that high school is a perfect example of this struggle between freedom and authority. For instance, I cannot yell at my teachers when they annoy me, for then I would get a detention, clever restriction of freedom in which I am forced to sit in a classroom before or after school hours. I can also not leave whenever I want because I would get privileges taken away from me and not be able to have free period or open lunch. I also can't use my phone during class, because it would be taken away from me, and for added fun and enjoyment, I would probably receive several detentions. School is another authority that grants and relinquishes freedoms in an attempt to force obidience. Freedom has become the ultimate leverage for authorities of all kind.

Blogging Around

Merrick's blog post was about suicide, and whether or not we have the right to our lives.

Merrick this was an excellent post. I completely understand and respect your opinion, but I also disagree almost one hundred percent.

Life is a gift, but is existence itself a gift? To what degree should quality of life play a role in suicide regulations and your opinion of whether or not you have the right to your own life? Being raised Christian, I understand how Darrell and Merrick feel about God's greatest gift to us being life. but, for some people life a burden. Take for example someone that is paralyzed in a car accident from the neck down. Their quality of life is extremely low. Granted some people in this situation find new passions in life, many fall into depression. They can no longer do anything for themselves or lead any form of a "normal" life. They cannot even bathe themselves. For an adult that is completely degrading.

This applies to the terminally and chronically ill as well. If we keep them alive using our medicine and technology are they truly living, or are they merely existing? We need to realize that not everyone has the mental resiliency or faith in God to bear a life of such burden. Some people would honestly be happier if they didn't have to fight through the everyday battles life. I full heartedly believe that you have the right to your own life. Although suicide is selfish and tragic, it can be acceptable. People with incurable conditions that will force them to suffer physically or mentally through the rest of their lives should have the choice of whether or not they are up for the fight.

Chelsea's blog post described the terms of intimacy in our relationships.

I think I agree with you Chelsea, and Anna a little bit too. We definitely have a lack of intimacy in most high school relationships, like Anna pointed out. But with divorce rates at almost fifty percent, I think you're onto something Chelsea. A lot of criticism is put on our culture for our relationships and friendships lacking intimacy and being left to technology, and usually those arguments annoy me. But, I am starting to connect the dots and see that there must be a connection divorce rates and our culture.

You also brought up names, and how we address our most intimate friends by their names. Out of curiosity I decided to test this theory and go through my text messages and see how many people I actually addressed by name. Other than my family, and closest friends, I never referred to anyone else by name. Great insights Chel!

Best of Week: Importance of Voice

The best idea discussed in class this week was the importance of voice in writing. We got into the discussion, while trying to figure out why Raymond Carter ends his profound short story, Cathedral with mundane and nondescript words. Then Darrell brought up that the narrator speaks that way through the entire story. If all of a sudden the narrator began to use vivid and descriptive language, it would ruin the voice.

Keeping consistent voice is extremely important in preserving the authenticity of your writing. If you switch up voice, you are not only changing your writing style, but you are changing the character. Each character needs their own distinct voice; that voice is what makes them stand out as an individual, and it gives them human qualities. A breaking of voice is uncomfortable for the reader as well. It would be like if one of your close friends suddenly began speaking to you in a very philosophical manner, while all their life they had only talked to you about football. Its awkward and out of character.

I can see myself using this advice in my own writing, especially when we begin to write our short stories. I will try and make certain that each of my characters has a unique voice, and that I do not change and or shift their voice in a way that alters their established personality.

An Inconvienient Truth: We are within memory; memory is not within us

The post modern view that we are within memory and memory is not within us, makes me extremely uncomforable. I don't know where to start with it. The idea completely distorts and twists my basic understanding of existence. I believe that my memories exist inside of me; they are my recollections of things that happened, contained with in my brain. It is my own neurons, in my own brain, that synthesize them and store them. I am very possessive of my memories because they also describe my life and my expiriences.

Post modern view agrues that the system made my memories, and that I do not exist outisde the system. In fact I am really existing in a memory itself. It is hard for me to grasp that I could very well be in a memory because I have my own memories. This struggle is very similar to what the charcters Sophie and Alberto go through in the novel Sophie's World. They have a difficult time coming to terms with the fact that they dont not exist outside of the author's mind; they only exist in the story that he has created. In essence they only exist in his 'memories'. Could I only exist in memory as well? This seems absurb because I have memories and can struggle with the question. If I can ask the questions does that mean that I am not a memory? Another tenant of post modern thought is that no one person can comprehend the entire truth. That being said, is it even worth it to ponder my existence?

The implications of this truth are serious. If this statement is true, then my exisistence is limited. The basis of my religion, my understanding of the world, and my understading of myself would be shattered. It would destroy all the claims of Christianity about life and my purppose here. I don't know how I could find meaning with my life either. If this were true it would mean that I am not much more than a dream, or nightmare.

I don't even know where I would beign to come to terms with, and or accept this idea. It is an idea that I immeadiately reject, knowing very well that the implications of this truth would destory the existence I do have. If this becomes widely accpeted, I guess I would have to accept it to and try to find my niche in the system.

Connection: Heart Of Darkness and The Dark Night

At the end of Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, the main character Marlow goes to visit the legendary ivory trader Kurtz's widow. The widow is paralzed by grief even a year after Kurtz's passing. She is desperate for someone to validate her love and devotion to Kurtz. When Marlow comes to return some of Kurtz's perosnal items the widow wants to know every sinlge detail about Kurtz's final moments, especially his finals words. Marlow tells her his final word was her name, when he really muttered, "The horror. The horror." Marlow chooses to protect her innocence realizing that she can only handle so much grief; he takes the burden of knowledge on himself in a chivilarous way.

A similar thing occurs in the movie, The Dark Night. Bruce Wayne's love interest Rachel gives his bulter Alfred a letter shortly before her death. She tells Alfred to give it to Bruce when he feels it is the right time. The letter basically states that although she still loves him they can never be together, and she would rather be with Harvey Dent. Alfred was about the give the letter to Bruce and reveal the truth when Bruce expresses his grief over Rachel's death because she was going to wait for him and still loved him. Alfred then throws the letter in the fire realizing that Bruce just can't handle the truth.

In both cases the lines between honesty and lies are blurred. Generally we think that being honest is always the best and right thing to do, but both of these examples provide us with examples where the little white lie is a kind of salvation for these distraught people. That little glimmer of hope from the lie gives them just enough to hold on to.

The connection between these two events also shed some slight on the burden of knowledge. As a society we are under the impression that having all the answers will make us happier or more comfortable, but as these examples show that isn't always the case. Sometimes it is much easier to live in blissful ignorance; you don't always want to know.

This relationship matters to me because it challenges my traditional moral upbringing. Its almost like someone went through and added footnotes to the Ten Commandments. Don't lie, unless the person can't handle the truth. It makes me think about that gray area of morality.

Metacognition: First Semester

Throughout English this semester my thought process has taken an interesting path. Two challenges illustrate this effectively.

The first challenges I ran into was how I viewed words. At the beginning of the semester, I thought of words as combinations of symbols that express ideas, objects, etc. But, by the end of the semester I have begun to realize that there are so many more levels to words. Words have their own rhythm, beauty, and music. Before this class I never really bothered much with word choice; I focused only on getting my ideas across, but now I've realized that word choice can be an effective tool in communicating my ideas. Word choice has also helped me to make my writing concise.

The second challenge to my thought process came when we were reading King Lear. Having no experience and or real interest in theater, other than being a spectator, made this unit especially difficult. It took all of my will power focus on artistic creativity. I really don't have any thought processes that could help me with theater other than a good memory, so I found myself exploring a part of my brain that doesn't get much use. Dealing with the fine arts can be overwhelming, especially in Academy where almost all the kids are involved in them. I wish that my thought process had something to help me through the arts, but it doesn't. This unit required me to break out of my comfort zone completely and try out some new ideas and perspectives.

Overall this semester in Academy has once again changes the way I think and how I see the world.

Blogging Around

Conner discusses the two sides of the healthcare debate; he focuses on the "public option".

I agree with you Conner. I believe that a public option would not ultimately be the best solution. Aside from the fact that its unsettling to me to have the government involved in my personal health*, I feel like we don't have the money right now to initiate such a program.

The main agruement behind the public option is that it would drive down costs because of competition. States hold a virtual monopoly on healthcare, and currently you cannot insure people across state lines, but what if we changed that? If we had national competition for healthcare wouldn't that drive down the costs too? If we simply allowed insurance companies to sell health insurance across state lines like they do auto insurance, we could drive down costs and insure low income Americans without involving the government. Conservatives are happy because of more capitialism and less government, and liberals should be happy because we provide the public with low cost healthcare.

*I realize it is an option I don't have to choose, but it has the potential to drive private insurers out of business and then I could be forced to take on a government option.

Chelsea wrote and intriguing post on a favorite song of hers, and in that post she discusses the importance of cliches.

Great post Chel! I agree, I think that as corny as cliches are, they hold some meaning. Before they were thrown in the washing machine we like to call "society" they held value. At some point they were someone's clever joke. Over time, their reputations tarnish, and they become the punch lines of bad sitcoms, but most of them are true life lessons. For example, "money doesn't grow on trees". A classic cliche but it gets at the importance of understanding the value of money. "An apple a day keeps the doctor away," tells us that healthy habits keep us out of the doctors.
Although many people associate cliches with stupidity, I enjoy them. The have a sense of nostalgic value. How else do you teach children basic life lessons without ruining their innocence?