LISTEN... Descartes, Montaigne, Pascal , and spiritual faith (U@d)
1. Spiritual freedom, unlike natural freedom, requires what? 175
2. What is the first natural feature of life that we can deduce from the formal characteristic of self-maintenance? 183
3. Without what risk would there be nothing at stake in leading our lives? 194
4. Just as a walker must project a spatial horizon, what must anyone leading their life project? 204
DQ
They do not make me sick discussing their duty to God,
I'm pretty sure there must be interesting connections to be noted between Hagglund's secular faith and George Santayana's "animal faith"...
Scepticism and Animal Faith
by
George Santayana
Santayana derives this practical philosophy from a wide and fascinating variety of sources. He considers critically the positions of such philosophers as Descartes, Euclid, Hume, Kant, Parmenides, Plato, Pythagoras, Schopenhauer, and the Buddhist school as well as the assumptions made by the ordinary man in everyday situations. Such matters as the nature of belief, the rejection of classical idealism, the nature of intuition and memory, symbols and myth, mathematical reality, literary psychology, the discovery of essence, sublimation of animal faith, the implied being of truth, and many others are given detailed analyses in individual chapters. g'r
*Th 2 - TL 5-The Value of Our Finite Time
Uad: LISTEN
1. What is the foundation of Marx's critique of capitalism and religion? 212
2. When does walking migrate from the realm of necessity to the realm of freedom? 221
3. What fatal philosophical mistake reinforces egoism and subverts our social nature? 230
4. What new perspective did Marx bring to the portrayal of capitalists? 245
DQ
2. What is the first natural feature of life that we can deduce from the formal characteristic of self-maintenance? 183
3. Without what risk would there be nothing at stake in leading our lives? 194
4. Just as a walker must project a spatial horizon, what must anyone leading their life project? 204
DQ
- This is not a question about This Life but I'd like everyone's input: we tabled the mid-term exam. Under present circumstances, an objective-format exam doesn't work. Is it your preference that we (a) substitute an essay-format final exam that tries to comprehend (or at least acknowledge) all the texts we will have read this semester, from Baggini to Ruse? Or (b) drop the exams altogether and have your grade ride entirely on reports and participation?
- Is Hagglund's seagull really an "agent" like you and me? 174
- If the decisive difference between humans and other animals is that we're spiritually (as well as naturally) free, are all humans equal in their spiritual freedom? 175
- "The question of who we ought to be is [always] alive for us... This is our spiritual freedom." 176 Again, is this question equally alive for everyone?
- COMMENT: "...we can also engage in forms of cruelty that go far beyond anything observed in other species." 178 Is that part of what Walt Whitman had in mind when he said “I think I could turn and live with animals, they are so placid and self-contain'd?" etc.**
- Do you like the Neurath's Boat analogy as an explication of our spiritual freedom? 179
- "The integrity of my life... is inherently fragile," bearing the risk of breaking apart and sinking. 181 What, if anything, could make it less so? Or must we just accept that "shipwreck" is always a constant possibility in life?
- Do you agree that without the prospect of death, all our purposes are rendered irrelevant? 181
- "Life requires some form of material body..." 184 Does that mean we cannot possibly be living virtual, simulated lives (as some cosmologists speculate)?
- Beings who possess natural but not spiritual freedom "cannot call into question "the purpose of procreation" 185... so, they cannot entertain anti-natalism. Are they to be envied, or pitied?
- "To avoid any form of supernaturalism, an account of the traits of spiritual freedom must render intelligible how they can have evolved from the traits of natural freedom..."187 Do you agree with Daniel Dennett that "freedom evolves"? Is it still evolving?
- Can you summarize your own "existential identity"? 188
- "What I do with my time is what I do with my life." 191 Is this an affirming or a depressing thought, for you?
- Complete the statement: "My life is too short to..."
- Can a "true materialism" account for our subjective first-person form of awareness? 195
** I think I could turn and live with animals, they are so placid and self-contain'd,
I stand and look at them long and long.
They do not sweat and whine about their condition,
They do not lie awake in the dark and weep for their sins,
They do not make me sick discussing their duty to God,
Not one is dissatisfied, not one is demented with the mania of owning things,
Not one kneels to another, nor to his kind that lived thousands of years ago,
Not one is respectable or unhappy over the whole earth... Song of Myself
Scepticism and Animal Faith
by
George Santayana
“I stand in philosophy exactly where I stand in daily life; I should not be honest otherwise.”In this work, Santayana analyzes the nature of the knowing process and demonstrates by means of clear, powerful arguments how we know and what validates our knowledge. The central concept of his philosophy is found in a careful discrimination between the awareness of objects independent of our perception and the awareness of essences attributed to objects by our mind, or between what Santayana calls the realm of existents and the realm of subsistents. Since we can never be certain that these attributes actually inhere in a substratum of existents, skepticism is established as a form of belief, but animal faith is shown to be a necessary quality of the human mind. Without this faith there could be no rational approach to the necessary problem of understanding and surviving in this world.
Santayana derives this practical philosophy from a wide and fascinating variety of sources. He considers critically the positions of such philosophers as Descartes, Euclid, Hume, Kant, Parmenides, Plato, Pythagoras, Schopenhauer, and the Buddhist school as well as the assumptions made by the ordinary man in everyday situations. Such matters as the nature of belief, the rejection of classical idealism, the nature of intuition and memory, symbols and myth, mathematical reality, literary psychology, the discovery of essence, sublimation of animal faith, the implied being of truth, and many others are given detailed analyses in individual chapters. g'r
*Th 2 - TL 5-The Value of Our Finite Time
Uad: LISTEN
1. What is the foundation of Marx's critique of capitalism and religion? 212
2. When does walking migrate from the realm of necessity to the realm of freedom? 221
3. What fatal philosophical mistake reinforces egoism and subverts our social nature? 230
4. What new perspective did Marx bring to the portrayal of capitalists? 245
DQ
- Marx wrote his dissertation on Epicurus,whose philosophy involved small-scale communal living and a generally apolitical, civically disengaged orientation to life. Is this surprising, in light of the way Marxist ideas have fueled totalitarian ideology in our time? Was/Is Marx misunderstood?
- What kinds of things do you habitually do freely and for their own sake, that others might consider merely necessary and instrumental to the attainment of some other desired end?
- Is it possible to achieve harmonious balance between individualism and social solidarity? Why do you think our society has such a hard time with that?
- Is it a mistake to focus on the greed of individual capitalists, as opposed to the impersonal institutional structures that enable it?
I would prefer to ride on reports and participation, I don't know about the others in the class but I'm finding it hard to work from my room and I don't seem to be getting as much done.
ReplyDeleteBut Im also fine with another report
My preference would be to be to base the final grade on participation, with the option for individuals to submit to you (not necessarily post) a final essay (say 1,000 words) on the texts covered; kind of a “what I got out of the course” memo. Two points: players should not have their stats erased just because the ball park is closed to spectators. This is a participation class, and the real loss for us is the time talking together. I would do away with quiz questions for a not-to-be-taken quiz, and just focus on discussing things. There may be some who are not comfortable relying on their participation for their grade, and for them, submitting an extra credit essay is a good option.
ReplyDeleteI heartily second Crystal and Ed's remarks regarding the shift to participation and discussion. As for reports, I wonder if they could be made easier by returning to and expanding our original subjects. That way, we're relieved of the stress of doing sometime totally from scratch, while also having a "second look" helpfully informed by the other material we've since covered as a class.
DeleteDQ
ReplyDeleteCan you summarize your own "existential identity"?
What comes to mind when I think about the "principle of unity . . . that makes it possible for [me] to have several practical identities and adjudicate conflicts between them" (Hagglund 188)? Well, my practical identities are certainly numerous: father, son, brother, romantic partner, teacher, student, tenant, etc. The principle(s) that seems to hold those various identities together involves trying to be an honest and simple person, which means that I am both sincere and responsible in my various relations; that my desires, tangible and intangible, remain moderate. This is a difficult thing to summarize, let alone truthfully identify, and I'm sure there's more to my process of prioritization than this. Still, when I think about how I negotiate the many hats I wear and projects I pursue, honesty and simplicity strike me as two very decisive aspects of my fundamental orientation toward life. Hopefully, I'm not being too aspirational here. Self-reflection is a breeding ground for all manner of wishful thinking.
That's exactly what an identity is, though, right? It's the habitual aspiration (and the actions that support it) to close the gap between what we are and what we would be. So wishful thinking has its place in self-creation. Problems ensue for the philosopher who only THINKS aspirationally, but the person who marries thought to action has a reasonable shot at success in (what Nietzsche called) self-overcoming and self-realization.
DeleteHonesty and simplicity are two terrific virtues. Diogenes's search for an honest man is as urgent as ever! And voluntary simplicity is equally hard to find, especially in this culture. (But it's being imposed, isn't it? When the toilet paper all runs out we'll begin to really know who we are and what we're made of!)
DQ: Can you summarize your own "existential identity"?
ReplyDeleteIf I were a practicing positive psychologist this would be an exercise for my clients. Thinking through, identifying, and expressing one’s practical identities, and prioritizing them to arrive at one’s existential identity, seems like a great way to understand one’s self better. And if one sees that their existential identity has some issues, then one can focus on exercising their spiritual freedom to resolve those issues, and have a more meaningful life.
The "spiritual freedom" angle is a monkey wrench, isn't it, for those of us who want to be on the right side of science but don't want to succumb to full-blown determinism? Neuro-existentialists have to chart a narrow course, if they want to contend that they can truly and effectively challenge and sometimes transform their own previous commitments.
Delete...and if they want to lead meaningful lives.
DeleteBut we can always fall back, we Happiness Philosophers, on the Hitchhikers Guide strategy:
“Perhaps I'm old and tired, but I think that the chances of finding out what's actually going on are so absurdly remote that the only thing to do is to say, "Hang the sense of it," and keep yourself busy. I'd much rather be happy than right any day.”
What about this: exercising spiritual freedom is engaging in “mental processes involving making [a] choice – imagining the options, evaluating them, making [a] decision….” (Neuroexistentialism, 252) The idea that these mental processes are “just realized in a complex set of neural processes which causally interact in accord with the laws of nature,” i.e., neuronaturalism, does not, apparently for many, take away from our sense that we can control our lives through the choices we make. Neuroscience hasn’t got this stuff figured out yet, so the Hitchhiker’s Guide strategy seems like a good one. Perhaps it is the idea of being happy that gets those neural processes started exercising spiritual freedom.
DeleteI like the idea that being happy is a prerequisite of freedom, but of course that only works on condition that we're free to pursue happiness in the first place (and not fated to melancholy, as some people SEEM to be). So yeah, "hang the sense of it"...
DeleteDQs: If the decisive difference between humans and other animals is that we're spiritually (as well as naturally) free, are all humans equal in their spiritual freedom? "The question of who we ought to be is [always] alive for us... This is our spiritual freedom." Again, is this question equally alive for everyone?
ReplyDeleteI would conclude that, unfortunately, while all humans have the capacity for spiritual freedom, they are not equal in their exercise of it; spiritual freedom is not equally alive for everyone. His basic point is that spiritual freedom is the capacity for reflecting on and making normative choices that define who a person is. Hagglund notes that when people ask the question, “what should I do?” they are (implicitly) engaging the question “who should I be.” It is my experience that more people than not do not ask such questions of themselves, and not just about moral choices, but other life-defining choices as well. I’m sure I’ve told this story before, but it is to me illustrative. A veteran police detective working for me seemed dissatisfied with his job. I told him he did not appear to be happy, and asked why he didn’t consider doing something that made him happy. A few days later he quit the force, and found a job that was more satisfying to him. He made the point to me that it had never occurred to him that he could make such a choice. I think I could say that he never realized he had the spiritual freedom to define how he lived his life.
In other words he -- and we, if we're being brutally honest -- defaulted to bad faith for most of his life, and just did what he thought he HAD to do. Even those of us who think too much probably dont own and act from our spiritual freedom, for much of our lives.
DeleteI like very much the idea that he did what he thought he HAD to do. Too many people are trapped by that type of thinking; they are not FREE. Years ago I attended a training session on managing work conflicts. There were 5 police officers (from Lavergne, I believe) there. One kept whining about how bad is work environment was. The exasperated facilitator said ‘if you are so unhappy there why don’t you get another job.’ I will never forget his reply: ‘I can’t do that! I’ve got 7 years in toward retirement!’ There was a man that had not found his spiritual freedom.
DeleteI agree that this is heavily a participation course overall. I believe one of the best assets we gain from this course is a better access to free thoughts(both yours and ours). With that being said, I believe allowing us to post and comment would be the best course of action as it allows for the continuation of our conversations we could have potentially had in class.
ReplyDeleteI also really enjoyed making my video on the book I read. I would love to do more of those reports
DeleteOkay, reports and participation will be the ballgame. No final exam. Let's heat up the discussion board and post some really great final reports.
ReplyDeleteI'll probably continue to draft quiz questions because I find that a useful way of framing my sense of what's important in the text; but the discussion questions are too, and I encourage you all -- including all of you who've been scarce, since we went remote -- to come up with those too.
Happy April. Hoping we don't get fooled again!
THE VALUE OF OUR FINITE TIME
ReplyDeleteThe idea of a realm of necessity and a realm of freedom explored in Chapter 5 is a powerful foundation for critical evaluation of our social and economic institutions. I look forward to taking the class on Marx. In today’s world, our responses to income inequality and other types of social injustice suggest that those who hold the keys to power really don’t value the quality of the lives of others. I would place much responsibility on the American flavor of the concept of individualism. “I am in competition with everyone else for success. You don’t have time to explore the realm of freedom? Not my problem.” I believe Epictetus would tell us that we have a duty to others to ensure to all the possibility of Eudaimonia. That would mean we capitalists don’t “exploit” the time of labor. As I sit here sequestered I think about all the people who – out of necessity – are being exposed to the plague. No job, no money for rent or food. But hey, in 3 weeks a one-time check for $1,200. Is the pandemic exposing a huge, fundamental problem with our system, and is there a chance that it will bring reform?
For 3/31:
DeleteOn 3/28, posted comment on class exam grading
On 3/30, posted comment on discussion question on equality of spiritual freedom in humans
On 3/30, posted comment on spiritual identity
On 3/30, posted reply to The Road to Coronavirus Hell
On 3/30, posted (through Philosopher) The Most Fun Way to Make Your Life Awesome (Pandemic Edition)
For 4/2:
On 4/1, posted reply to Michael Shermer with Bart Ehrman — Heaven and Hell: A History of the Afterlife
On 4/1, posted reply to Phil’s reply to my 3/30 comment on existential identity
On 4/1, posted reply to Phil’s reply to my 3/30 comment on spiritual freedom
On 4/1, posted comment on Chapter 5
On 4/1, posted invitation to Zoom meeting for class
"Is the pandemic exposing a huge, fundamental problem with our system, and is there a chance that it will bring reform?" I think so, but I also think the exposure is largely offset by another problem with our system: civic disengagement, public apathy, and politician/parties all too willing to exploit it. Plus, partisan dishonesty as the main tool of exploitation. So, is there a chance of reform? In the long run, surely. In the short run it's hard to be optimistic. Things seem likely to worsen before they get better, unless a younger generation of activists can light a fire under their peers. Hope I'm wrong.
Delete"What I do with my time is what I do with my life." 191 Is this an affirming or a depressing thought, for you?
ReplyDeleteI agree with that statement. It isn't depressing to me at all. It is just a matter of fact to me, I guess. We only have so much time to live our lives, and how we use that time directly relates to what we have done with our lives. This encourages me to use my time a bit more wisely, and to focus on what really matters. Time is a limited resource for us mortal beings!
COMMENT LOG
1. March 31: Comment on “This Is The Most Fun Way To Make Your Life Awesome (Pandemic Edition)”
2. March 31: Comment on “Bart Ehrman on heaven & hell”
3. March 31: Comment on “An Outdoor Church Service Backfired…”
4. March 31: Comment on “Can Creationism and Science Coexist?”
5. April 2: Comment on “A Trip Back to Freshman Year”
6. April 2: Comment on “Pragmatism or Perversity?”
7. April 2: Comment on “Nietzsche”
8. April 2: Comment on “Quizzes Mar 31, Apr2"
8 Bases/2 Runs!
"The question of who we ought to be is [always] alive for us... This is our spiritual freedom." (pg. 176) Again, is this question equally alive for everyone?
ReplyDeleteAs Hagglund mentions in the same paragraph, “the ability to lead our lives can be impaired or lost by damages to our physical and psychological constitution.” This means that the question isn’t alive for “everyone” but I do feel that most other people do ask themselves the question “what should I do?” or “what I ought to do?” because it is intuitive.
Do you agree that without the prospect of death, all our purposes are rendered irrelevant? (pg.181)
ReplyDeleteMany who do believe in the infinite or some form of life after death do still take into account the actions or life lived before death to decide what happens after death, but the actions before death only have purpose because of the infinite and without the eternal, life before death would be meaningless. Depending on my religious affiliation or beliefs, if I had any, I would say that even without the prospect of death our life actions still have consequences in the eternal, however because I don’t believe in the eternal or infinite or any afterlife I do think without the prospect of death our purposes would be rendered irrelevant.
What I do with my time is what I do with my life.” (pg. 191) Is this an affirming or a depressing thought, for you?
ReplyDeleteIt’s a little bit of both for me, I don’t do what all of what I think I should do with all of my time in order to truly maximize the life I was given but I don’t know of another person who has used every minute or hour or day of their time on earth to maximize their positive impact. I like to look at people like Peter Singer and Will MacAskill who make doing good part of their daily habit without having to think about it as ideals in a way while still being human of course. The statement “What I do with my time is what I do with my life.” is more motivating than depressing to me.
Is Hagglund's seagull really an "agent" like you and me? (pg. 174)
ReplyDeleteI believe it has agency in it's world and environment just as we do in relation to our world and environment because both the seagull and myself have self relation.
"Life requires some form of material body..." 184 Does that mean we cannot possibly be living virtual, simulated lives (as some cosmologists speculate)?
ReplyDeleteI think "life" requires self awareness/self relation or being able to like Hagglund writes, relate to anything as anything,this requirement doesn't necessarily require a material body.