Posts
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
This Doesn't Count
However to anyone who is done with everything, Summer Vacation has just started. Have a great Summer and I hope we have a class together soon. But now Im exhausted and it time to go to bed.
The End if Nigh (7/24)
Is the Bible trustworthy? This is the question that William C. Placher addresses in “Is the bible true?” The goal of his essay is to say that the Bible is true without appealing to the fundamentalist or moderate side of the debate. Placher goes about this by providing examples, from other literary works, explaining misinterpretation in translation, and reasons that people do trust in the Bible.
Placher begins by providing us with two secondary truths that must be accepted if we accept that the bible is true. The first point is; if the Bible is true then what it means is true, and what it means is shaped by the genres in which it is written. The next secondary truth is; if we trust the Bible as truth then we must accept it as a guide for our lives and for our faith. As a guide for our lives it should shape our understanding of the world and our role in the world.
To understand the Bible it must be viewed as it was intended to be. To do this we must know and understand the genre in which it was written. All books are written in a genre that is specific to them if they are viewed out of context than the meaning and therefore the truth will be lost to that book. The other issue that Placher ties in with genre is the culture barrier. Different cultures not only have different languages but also have different concepts of social conditions. The difference in language obviously is affected during the translation. The different social views provide their own problems. The example Placher provides is that of slavery. He explains that the Jewish idea of slavery was that of an indentured servant; a temporary thing. The colonial American view and therefore most Americans view is that of a permanent ownership of one person over another. This misunderstanding can greatly affect how someone reads and interprets the Bible.
Placher finishes by providing reasons for putting trust into the Bible. First it is another test of faith. Also it consistently makes sense of the world. The most important reason for trusting the Bible is that Christians put their trust in God the source of the Bible.
To truly trust in the Bible a Christian must know the Bible. Christians must fully immerse themselves in the Bible knowing its language and its world. One verse should remind the reader of another and support it, so that there is always something to reference to. The problem with most people who read the Bible today is that they don’t truly know the Bible. Very few people put out the time and effort that it takes to understand such a complex book.
I agree that Knowing and trusting the Bible is a very difficult thing. No matter how much devotion a person could have to God to fully know the Bible seems to be an insurmountable goal. I believe this is why trust is so important with the Bible. Since very few If anyone has ever truly understood everything in the Bible, faith and trust become so important. This faith is what God appreciates and desires most.
Placher provides us with many reasons why people have trouble putting their trust in the Bible. For the most part these reasons are merely misunderstandings of the reading. So to understand and put trust in the Bible the reader must read deeper into the text and find the context and genre in which it is written. Plachers examples were very clear in explaining the reasons why people find it difficult to understand and trust the Bible.
I found Plachers reasoning in social and cultural misunderstandings the most helpful. When he explains the differences of the American view of slavery and the Jewish view of slavery he provided me with a difficulty that I had never heard before. The fact that there is not only the language barrier but also a cultural barrier to create misunderstandings provides even more problems in understanding the Bible.
I felt lead to believe there was more than just the two secondary claims. I feel that there is more to the arguments than is explained in this paper and that he just left the rest out. I feel that he did not provide a counter side to his opinions so the paper is somewhat one sided. Over all I like Plachers paper. He provided well thought out and helpful examples to support his thesis over a difficult subject.
Placher begins by providing us with two secondary truths that must be accepted if we accept that the bible is true. The first point is; if the Bible is true then what it means is true, and what it means is shaped by the genres in which it is written. The next secondary truth is; if we trust the Bible as truth then we must accept it as a guide for our lives and for our faith. As a guide for our lives it should shape our understanding of the world and our role in the world.
To understand the Bible it must be viewed as it was intended to be. To do this we must know and understand the genre in which it was written. All books are written in a genre that is specific to them if they are viewed out of context than the meaning and therefore the truth will be lost to that book. The other issue that Placher ties in with genre is the culture barrier. Different cultures not only have different languages but also have different concepts of social conditions. The difference in language obviously is affected during the translation. The different social views provide their own problems. The example Placher provides is that of slavery. He explains that the Jewish idea of slavery was that of an indentured servant; a temporary thing. The colonial American view and therefore most Americans view is that of a permanent ownership of one person over another. This misunderstanding can greatly affect how someone reads and interprets the Bible.
Placher finishes by providing reasons for putting trust into the Bible. First it is another test of faith. Also it consistently makes sense of the world. The most important reason for trusting the Bible is that Christians put their trust in God the source of the Bible.
To truly trust in the Bible a Christian must know the Bible. Christians must fully immerse themselves in the Bible knowing its language and its world. One verse should remind the reader of another and support it, so that there is always something to reference to. The problem with most people who read the Bible today is that they don’t truly know the Bible. Very few people put out the time and effort that it takes to understand such a complex book.
I agree that Knowing and trusting the Bible is a very difficult thing. No matter how much devotion a person could have to God to fully know the Bible seems to be an insurmountable goal. I believe this is why trust is so important with the Bible. Since very few If anyone has ever truly understood everything in the Bible, faith and trust become so important. This faith is what God appreciates and desires most.
Placher provides us with many reasons why people have trouble putting their trust in the Bible. For the most part these reasons are merely misunderstandings of the reading. So to understand and put trust in the Bible the reader must read deeper into the text and find the context and genre in which it is written. Plachers examples were very clear in explaining the reasons why people find it difficult to understand and trust the Bible.
I found Plachers reasoning in social and cultural misunderstandings the most helpful. When he explains the differences of the American view of slavery and the Jewish view of slavery he provided me with a difficulty that I had never heard before. The fact that there is not only the language barrier but also a cultural barrier to create misunderstandings provides even more problems in understanding the Bible.
I felt lead to believe there was more than just the two secondary claims. I feel that there is more to the arguments than is explained in this paper and that he just left the rest out. I feel that he did not provide a counter side to his opinions so the paper is somewhat one sided. Over all I like Plachers paper. He provided well thought out and helpful examples to support his thesis over a difficult subject.
The Allegory of the Cave
Below is a bit of my Essay so far, if you have any addition insight I would love to hear it.
The Matrix as a whole is truly a philosophically inspired film, with influences from many Pre-Socratic philosophers, world religions and scientific tendencies. Of these influences one can clearly take a look at the philosophy of Plato in accordance to Neo’s awakening; with its greatest allusion resting with Plato’s Allegory of the Cave. In The Republic, Plato presents the possibility of the real world as an illusion. Plato calls us to imagine a cave in which individuals had been constricted within since birth. Within the cave, these individuals have been bound by the neck and they can look only straight. Possessing only a frontal focal point, these individuals peer out at the wall in front of them as the fire behind them coupled with the statues cast images of grandiose stature.
Because they have witnessed nothing more than these images since birth, the individuals perceived the shadows are their reality. As Plato continues he explains the faith of an individual who has been released from bondage a witnesses the world which we perceive for the first time. Blinded by the light and fearful of the sun this individual is met by the harsh “reality” of this new world. As he begins to live within the outside he embraces this world as “reality” and seeks to descend once more into the cave in order to share his insight with his fellow captives. The experience of this prisoner is a metaphor is definitely portrayed within the open sequence of the first Matrix film.
Awakened from a computer generated dream world, Neo becomes fully aware of the distinction between The Matrix and reality. Neo is literally pulled from the cave in the first film. Like the prisoner Neo possesses no understanding of this strange new world he has introduced to. He expresses difficulty adjusting to the new world, comprehending its existence and it is not until Morpheus explains the plight of the human race that Neo gains some insight to the situation. While this awakening was emphasized specifically in the first film of the trilogy, this theme of enlightenment becomes a reoccurrence in both Reloaded and Revolutions. The frequent visits to the Matrix within the Reloaded and Revolution mark a basic tenet of Plato’s Allegory. As insisted by Plato, once an individual is introduced to reality they are now compelled to take enlighten others. This is seen within the film as Neo take the responsible of “The One”, and the ultimate savior of humanity. Along with this sense of duty we see another parallel to the allegory as Neo and his companions are constantly faced with hostility. With each time Neo returns to the Matrix he is faced with hostility; hostility from the Smiths, Merovingian, The Twin, among others in the second film. The same experience is shared by the prisoner who has escaped from the cave.
The Matrix as a whole is truly a philosophically inspired film, with influences from many Pre-Socratic philosophers, world religions and scientific tendencies. Of these influences one can clearly take a look at the philosophy of Plato in accordance to Neo’s awakening; with its greatest allusion resting with Plato’s Allegory of the Cave. In The Republic, Plato presents the possibility of the real world as an illusion. Plato calls us to imagine a cave in which individuals had been constricted within since birth. Within the cave, these individuals have been bound by the neck and they can look only straight. Possessing only a frontal focal point, these individuals peer out at the wall in front of them as the fire behind them coupled with the statues cast images of grandiose stature.
Because they have witnessed nothing more than these images since birth, the individuals perceived the shadows are their reality. As Plato continues he explains the faith of an individual who has been released from bondage a witnesses the world which we perceive for the first time. Blinded by the light and fearful of the sun this individual is met by the harsh “reality” of this new world. As he begins to live within the outside he embraces this world as “reality” and seeks to descend once more into the cave in order to share his insight with his fellow captives. The experience of this prisoner is a metaphor is definitely portrayed within the open sequence of the first Matrix film.
Awakened from a computer generated dream world, Neo becomes fully aware of the distinction between The Matrix and reality. Neo is literally pulled from the cave in the first film. Like the prisoner Neo possesses no understanding of this strange new world he has introduced to. He expresses difficulty adjusting to the new world, comprehending its existence and it is not until Morpheus explains the plight of the human race that Neo gains some insight to the situation. While this awakening was emphasized specifically in the first film of the trilogy, this theme of enlightenment becomes a reoccurrence in both Reloaded and Revolutions. The frequent visits to the Matrix within the Reloaded and Revolution mark a basic tenet of Plato’s Allegory. As insisted by Plato, once an individual is introduced to reality they are now compelled to take enlighten others. This is seen within the film as Neo take the responsible of “The One”, and the ultimate savior of humanity. Along with this sense of duty we see another parallel to the allegory as Neo and his companions are constantly faced with hostility. With each time Neo returns to the Matrix he is faced with hostility; hostility from the Smiths, Merovingian, The Twin, among others in the second film. The same experience is shared by the prisoner who has escaped from the cave.
Some Ramblings on Love
Within The Matrix, Love is viewed as a compelling force that allows the character to prosper despite how grim the situation may be. This love as viewed in The Matrix most likely resembles Phaedrus definition of love as inspiring lovers to earn the admiration through displaying “bravery on the battlefield” (178d-179b). In the Trilogy as a whole love acts as driving force behind each characters actions. In reference to the first movie, Morpheus is inspired by love to seek out Neo, train him and even sacrifice his life in order to allow Neo to escape from the pursuing Agent. Trinity displays love for Neo as she intimately kisses him in hopes of resurrecting the fallen hero; Neo also displays love for Morpheus as he sacrifices his safety as “The One” to rescue Morpheus.
In the second and third films Trinity, Morpheus and Neo once again express a love for one another as they continually risk their lives in hopes of prosperity of the other. Example of this lay in Trinity sacrificing her life to delay the agents in order to allow Neo to meet the Architect, Trinity flying The Logos to the Machine City in order to aid Neo stop the Machine, as well as Neo selecting his love for Trinity as opposed to rebooting the Matrix. However perhaps the most profound Love seen within the series is that of Neo as he sacrifices his life to defeat Agent Smith and ensure the prosperity of the human race.
In the second and third films Trinity, Morpheus and Neo once again express a love for one another as they continually risk their lives in hopes of prosperity of the other. Example of this lay in Trinity sacrificing her life to delay the agents in order to allow Neo to meet the Architect, Trinity flying The Logos to the Machine City in order to aid Neo stop the Machine, as well as Neo selecting his love for Trinity as opposed to rebooting the Matrix. However perhaps the most profound Love seen within the series is that of Neo as he sacrifices his life to defeat Agent Smith and ensure the prosperity of the human race.
The End if Nigh (6/24)
And all things come to an end. Well the year is over, I really never thought that a semester could go by so fast but here it is and Summer is currently right outside my front door. I have read all your Blogs and by far I have to say this class really forced to approach the world in a new light and constantly ponder as opposed to simply live in the world. What did I learn this year? Well first and foremost I was definitely indoctrinated with more information than my mind could process at time, however I do feel that by learning about the historical contexts of philosophy I have a better perception on the events of the time. As said in my second entry for my philosophy is a means of bettering yourself through learning about yourself. Ancient philosophers presented ideas and methods to combat naivety and ignorance. I feel that the world we live in is at a stand still. A lack of a flow of ideas for the masses, I feel that we believe we are comfortable with our lives as they are and that the problems of the world are too great for us to overcome ourselves. But in all honesty do you think that a problem will resolve itself if no one addresses it? More than anything what I learnt from the class was that anyone can be and should be a philosopher. We should question what we do not comprehend, we should ponder on the problems we are currently facing and make an effort to solve them. To me Aristotle Is a god among men, an individual who has developed a means of living a proper life. While I am heavily influenced by my faith and possess my own means of living my life, Aristotle provided a bible for the mass in the form of the Nicomachean Ethics . These philosophers are honestly heroes as they never ceased contemplation and were never satisfied with societies view. In conclusion I am going to keep working on my Matrix Paper and sleep for an entire day tomorrow. But I have had a great time with all of you this year and I really want to get to know you all more. To those who are graduating I challenge you to become a proactive member of society and seek solutions for the troubles we face in our lives. Spread bliss to all you meet and follow Aristotle’s list of virtues in order to live a happy life. To the rest of you we now hold the key to happiness and all the copies. Though not everyone possesses the amount of information we have obtained through Roochnik haha we can educate individuals in thinking and questioning. Good luck on the essays and I’ll be updating my blog with some more posts in terms of some theological/philosophical/biological information and my personal opinions.
Happy Reading, Chris
Happy Reading, Chris
The Cracked Mirror 2 (5/24)
When I reminisce on who I was in high school and how I have developed since then it is honestly amazing. In looking for answers within before going outside, I understand that my increased involvement in sports lead to the man I am today. Why is this important? Throughout the year we have studied "dead guys". Individuals with the upmost level of mental capacity, I have looked at their history in order to create my own philosophy. However at times in order to move forward you have to look back, thus I want to share a small bit of information to aid you all understand the person I was and the person I am.
Playing sports at CCA has meant everything to me. Not just for the pleasure of playing the game but also how it has formed me into the person that I am today. It built me not only physically tough; but mentally as well.
CCA athletics has taught me many lessons. I remember first going into high school and seeing our struggling football team. Winning isn’t everything but I joined a team that frequently got demolished. We worked hard and I learned to give 100% effort and to never give up hope. I never lost hope in our team and learned to have fun no matter what the score was. I always felt that if I gave my full effort it didn’t matter what the score was because I enjoyed what I was doing.
CCA athletics has always been in my life. Ever since I was in middle school when I first ran cross country I have enjoyed participating in athletics. Athletics gave me a place to meet friends and to release a lot of energy. Next year when I come back to watch the CCA games I won’t even recognize it because I have hardly ever just watched a game. I was always participating in some way.
I have given so much sweat and blood to the school that I can’t even imagine doing anything else. I have been injured countless times from a CCA sport. My first injury was a cut in my hand that required 8 stitches. I followed that with concussions, knee injuries, broken fingers and hands, and countless other minor aches and pains. Every scar and sore joint created a memory that will stay with me forever. The only way I could have possibly survived CCA sports was god’s will, and I thank him for watching over me.
I’ve seen coaches come and go at CCA; and each one has given me something to take away from that season. Coach Henneke taught me to face my fears and to use my talents to the full extent. Coach Harper showed me that giving up only cheats myself. Coach Jackson taught me to always have fun even when things looked hopeless. Coach Stanley and soccer showed me that I don’t have to be perfect, or the star to help the team. Coach Brainard and baseball taught me to have fun, and the value of friendship. Every season, coach, and game, gave me something to improve my life. I will never forget the games I played or the people that I experienced those sports with. The memories and lessons that CCA athletics has given me will always remain close to my heart; because they have truly made me a better person.
I will always treasure my time at CCA playing the sports that I loved with the friends and coaches that shaped my life. CCA will always remain close to me with every scar and every memory.
Playing sports at CCA has meant everything to me. Not just for the pleasure of playing the game but also how it has formed me into the person that I am today. It built me not only physically tough; but mentally as well.
CCA athletics has taught me many lessons. I remember first going into high school and seeing our struggling football team. Winning isn’t everything but I joined a team that frequently got demolished. We worked hard and I learned to give 100% effort and to never give up hope. I never lost hope in our team and learned to have fun no matter what the score was. I always felt that if I gave my full effort it didn’t matter what the score was because I enjoyed what I was doing.
CCA athletics has always been in my life. Ever since I was in middle school when I first ran cross country I have enjoyed participating in athletics. Athletics gave me a place to meet friends and to release a lot of energy. Next year when I come back to watch the CCA games I won’t even recognize it because I have hardly ever just watched a game. I was always participating in some way.
I have given so much sweat and blood to the school that I can’t even imagine doing anything else. I have been injured countless times from a CCA sport. My first injury was a cut in my hand that required 8 stitches. I followed that with concussions, knee injuries, broken fingers and hands, and countless other minor aches and pains. Every scar and sore joint created a memory that will stay with me forever. The only way I could have possibly survived CCA sports was god’s will, and I thank him for watching over me.
I’ve seen coaches come and go at CCA; and each one has given me something to take away from that season. Coach Henneke taught me to face my fears and to use my talents to the full extent. Coach Harper showed me that giving up only cheats myself. Coach Jackson taught me to always have fun even when things looked hopeless. Coach Stanley and soccer showed me that I don’t have to be perfect, or the star to help the team. Coach Brainard and baseball taught me to have fun, and the value of friendship. Every season, coach, and game, gave me something to improve my life. I will never forget the games I played or the people that I experienced those sports with. The memories and lessons that CCA athletics has given me will always remain close to my heart; because they have truly made me a better person.
I will always treasure my time at CCA playing the sports that I loved with the friends and coaches that shaped my life. CCA will always remain close to me with every scar and every memory.
A Cosmological Argument?
While this is not directly associated with philosophy I have been cruising the net reading while taking a break from writing the Essay. With that said one of the greatest aspects of this class which I feel I will retain for a life time is the notion of philosophical ideals vs. religious ideal. Lets face it philosophy has been around for centuries as with religion. Christianity bears the greatest comparisons to the philosophy of Aristotle, examples can be found in Aristotle's view of Virtue and the adoption of the 7 Cardinal Virtues and Sins. Aside from this comparison one area that is extremely intriguing in retrospect would be that of the origin of the world, the cosmological argument. This class has presented us with many origins and my religious and scientific background as well has presented several origins to our existence as well. But one thing that many various arguments that aim to prove or disprove is the likelihood of there being a God of theistic nature. In my head the true instance of the Cosmological Argument was found in the words of two ancient philosophers, Aristotle and Plato. Though these two were very well known, major strides in the argument were not made until the thirteenth and eighteenth centuries. I take great emphasis in the cosmological argument as one of my favorite theologians presents the most rationalized beliefs to the argument.
Thomas Aquinas developed the “argument from contingency”, siding with Aristotle in claiming that there has to be something that serves as an explanation for the earth's existence. He queried that the earth's existence couldn't be explained by another “contingent” being; thus there had to be something that created the earth that didn't have some sort of “proceeding” agent before it. By “contingent” beings, Aquinas was referring to beings that depend on someone or something else in order to exist.
It would then be logical for there to have been some sort of beginning to the chain of contingent beings, someone that doesn't depend on another in order to exist. This is Aquinas's first part of the Cosmological Argument.
One interesting part of this argument is that it is made upon an “empirical premise” (evidence that is based upon observational data). In this sense, since the argument was made on an observation about the world, it can be referred to as an “a posteriori” argument. This argument differs from a similar argument; “a priori”, which is begun with a concept. In Aquinas's second part of the argument, he states that many things in the world were obviously created by other things; therefore there must be some being out there that wasn't created by something else, by logic.
Finally, Aquinas's third part entailed that throughout the world, there are things that seem to have no purpose, and could easily not exist at all. Aquinas reasons that because of this, there has to be something that doesn't fail to exist and has always been. Many claim that even if these points made hold true, they do not serve to prove the existence of the “theistic God” of Christian theology. This can be defended by the fact that there two parts of the Cosmological Argument; one, that there exists a being that does not depend on anything to exist, and two, that this being has the features that the theistic God exhibits.
Thomas Aquinas developed the “argument from contingency”, siding with Aristotle in claiming that there has to be something that serves as an explanation for the earth's existence. He queried that the earth's existence couldn't be explained by another “contingent” being; thus there had to be something that created the earth that didn't have some sort of “proceeding” agent before it. By “contingent” beings, Aquinas was referring to beings that depend on someone or something else in order to exist.
It would then be logical for there to have been some sort of beginning to the chain of contingent beings, someone that doesn't depend on another in order to exist. This is Aquinas's first part of the Cosmological Argument.
One interesting part of this argument is that it is made upon an “empirical premise” (evidence that is based upon observational data). In this sense, since the argument was made on an observation about the world, it can be referred to as an “a posteriori” argument. This argument differs from a similar argument; “a priori”, which is begun with a concept. In Aquinas's second part of the argument, he states that many things in the world were obviously created by other things; therefore there must be some being out there that wasn't created by something else, by logic.
Finally, Aquinas's third part entailed that throughout the world, there are things that seem to have no purpose, and could easily not exist at all. Aquinas reasons that because of this, there has to be something that doesn't fail to exist and has always been. Many claim that even if these points made hold true, they do not serve to prove the existence of the “theistic God” of Christian theology. This can be defended by the fact that there two parts of the Cosmological Argument; one, that there exists a being that does not depend on anything to exist, and two, that this being has the features that the theistic God exhibits.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
