–adjective
1. not endowed with sensation; inanimate: insensate stone.
2. without human feeling or sensitivity; cold; cruel; brutal.
3. without sense, understanding, or judgment; foolish.
~~~~~~~
3.
I have been working on a blog post for over a week now, and it is about time I started posting it--as each section feels completed I'll throw it up here. All of them follow one thought, I'll number them.
~~~~~~~
Freud was a brilliant man, and he hit the subconscious on the nose. Pinpointing our vigorous natural inclinations and tracking them retrograde; and patiently pursuing misunderstood actions back to these referents opens up not only a world of sympathy and understanding for each individual, but a path to better self-control and happiness. It is a pity he was unwilling to accept the contradictions of his peers and apprentices, who noticed his unusual and unnecessary emphasis on sexual origin, as until sex became a pervasive element of his theory, his findings were genius.
And they are genius—even though he miscalculated the line of reason where sex is concerned, I do not personally doubt that sex, lust and the emotional context it maintains is among the chief determinants of natural behavior. What I believe sits atop the pyramid, and what I mentioned as one of Freud’s mistakes, however, is the ideal of security.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Cavil
–verb (used without object)
1. to raise irritating and trivial objections; find fault with unnecessarily (usually fol. by at or about): He finds something to cavil at in everything I say.
–verb (used with object)
2. to oppose by inconsequential, frivolous, or sham objections: to cavil each item of a proposed agenda.
–noun
3. a trivial and annoying objection.
4. the raising of such objections.
~~~~~~~
2.
Procreation propels a species, not an individual (as a necessity—though plenty can be said about the benefits of having children). Our conscious definition of sex is muddled, though, very quickly bleeding into erstwhile seas: emotional security, affection, attrition, lust and, of course, childbearing itself.
While the first two (hunger, safety) are tended to with deliberation—satiated quickly, and only occasionally crossing into other experience—the third, for a sapient individual, is a mountain of implication.
In the above paragraphs I have noted, but left, one of what I believe to be Freud’s mistakes, and I’ll elaborate on it later.
I think Freud, having found this nucleus of human experience, sought to discover how prolific the sexual branch was in behavior. It took brilliance to hash out things that are now common sense—defining emotions differently from how their bearers understand them, finding root causes hidden even from the self—he discovered a place derived from our animalistic selves, a place not only in limited communication with the conscious mind, but further still serving as its Atlas. His ideas were occasionally fantastical (the stages of sexual development, the distinct trinity of the mind), but his discovery of the subconscious, and the lightning rod of sexual inclination (a rod which later psychologists replaced with other natural inclinations) were vital discoveries.
1. to raise irritating and trivial objections; find fault with unnecessarily (usually fol. by at or about): He finds something to cavil at in everything I say.
–verb (used with object)
2. to oppose by inconsequential, frivolous, or sham objections: to cavil each item of a proposed agenda.
–noun
3. a trivial and annoying objection.
4. the raising of such objections.
~~~~~~~
2.
Procreation propels a species, not an individual (as a necessity—though plenty can be said about the benefits of having children). Our conscious definition of sex is muddled, though, very quickly bleeding into erstwhile seas: emotional security, affection, attrition, lust and, of course, childbearing itself.
While the first two (hunger, safety) are tended to with deliberation—satiated quickly, and only occasionally crossing into other experience—the third, for a sapient individual, is a mountain of implication.
In the above paragraphs I have noted, but left, one of what I believe to be Freud’s mistakes, and I’ll elaborate on it later.
I think Freud, having found this nucleus of human experience, sought to discover how prolific the sexual branch was in behavior. It took brilliance to hash out things that are now common sense—defining emotions differently from how their bearers understand them, finding root causes hidden even from the self—he discovered a place derived from our animalistic selves, a place not only in limited communication with the conscious mind, but further still serving as its Atlas. His ideas were occasionally fantastical (the stages of sexual development, the distinct trinity of the mind), but his discovery of the subconscious, and the lightning rod of sexual inclination (a rod which later psychologists replaced with other natural inclinations) were vital discoveries.
Temerarious
–adjective
reckless; rash.
~~~~~~~
1.
I wonder what Sigmund Freud’s thought process entailed, uncovering and gradually coming to know the unconscious. I imagine it not far departed from our classroom discussions, where we allotted credence, at least in part, to the notion that humans have natural, genetic programming that affects behavior. As history has mostly subscribed to the mentioned “blank slate” theory, this theory must have been more cumbersome to maintain for Freud than our 21st century classroom, already dramatically influenced by his theories.
However, it is only a natural step, I think, to first believe in predisposition, and then determine its scientific roots. Freud was a realist—he wasn’t prepared to accept anything but what reason and experience would show him (although his extrapolated conclusions step outside the bounds of logic, I think). Without any social encouragement, there are only a small number of facets natural to humans that could be reasonably derived: safety, nourishment, and procreation (there are probably others, I’m being general).
Immediately the last stands out to me, as perhaps it did to Freud—the first two are natural prerogatives, necessary to sustain the individual and impossible to overcome—constant danger or malnourishment ends the individual. The third, however, is peculiar—as it serves the same preservative function, but is the only one not designated for the good of the self.
reckless; rash.
~~~~~~~
1.
I wonder what Sigmund Freud’s thought process entailed, uncovering and gradually coming to know the unconscious. I imagine it not far departed from our classroom discussions, where we allotted credence, at least in part, to the notion that humans have natural, genetic programming that affects behavior. As history has mostly subscribed to the mentioned “blank slate” theory, this theory must have been more cumbersome to maintain for Freud than our 21st century classroom, already dramatically influenced by his theories.
However, it is only a natural step, I think, to first believe in predisposition, and then determine its scientific roots. Freud was a realist—he wasn’t prepared to accept anything but what reason and experience would show him (although his extrapolated conclusions step outside the bounds of logic, I think). Without any social encouragement, there are only a small number of facets natural to humans that could be reasonably derived: safety, nourishment, and procreation (there are probably others, I’m being general).
Immediately the last stands out to me, as perhaps it did to Freud—the first two are natural prerogatives, necessary to sustain the individual and impossible to overcome—constant danger or malnourishment ends the individual. The third, however, is peculiar—as it serves the same preservative function, but is the only one not designated for the good of the self.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Lucubration
\loo-kyoo-BRAY-shun; loo-kuh-\, noun:
1. The act of studying by candlelight; nocturnal study; meditation.
2. That which is composed by night; that which is produced by meditation in retirement; hence (loosely) any literary composition.
~~~~~~~
Liberal policies have the stigma of higher taxes—but, if properly managed, this can be a good thing. I certainly feel distaste every time I receive my income check and notice a portion of it missing, but this is only a gut reaction, one deserving of more investigation. That money goes to ensuring my house will be put out if caught on fire, I’ll be protected and aided if there is a break-in, I will be able to attend my current state school because of lower prices. These things do not strike me as immediately when I see I am missing 60 dollars, but the thought incumbent makes it feel a lot more reasonable.
The problem here is government hate, where each person, fearful of our assuredly corrupt government, seeks to lessen the amount of government intervention, and of accompanying government budget, in every aspect of their lives. Less taxes=less abuse of personal funds for needless social services.
And yet if these social programs were handled correctly, in a manner that agrees with the community, no one would complain. The problem here is partly a corruption of government, and partly of social lethargy. It is our own lethargy that keeps government out of our hands: our action would establish a communication between government and the people that would make paying our taxes less of a burden and more of a payment toward things that we both want and need.
But of course this is not the entire problem, as the vast diversity of opinion lends to this frustration—we’ve all felt the familiar sigh accompanying being unable to please everybody. But at least on the most important issues, a little more thought could produce some great social services--especially in education and health. Our inaction is fueled by frustration, but ultimately our frustration will fuel change. Maybe it wouldn’t hurt to stay ahead of the game and start instituting beneficial changes in social services before the angry populous need rise up and demand it.
1. The act of studying by candlelight; nocturnal study; meditation.
2. That which is composed by night; that which is produced by meditation in retirement; hence (loosely) any literary composition.
~~~~~~~
Liberal policies have the stigma of higher taxes—but, if properly managed, this can be a good thing. I certainly feel distaste every time I receive my income check and notice a portion of it missing, but this is only a gut reaction, one deserving of more investigation. That money goes to ensuring my house will be put out if caught on fire, I’ll be protected and aided if there is a break-in, I will be able to attend my current state school because of lower prices. These things do not strike me as immediately when I see I am missing 60 dollars, but the thought incumbent makes it feel a lot more reasonable.
The problem here is government hate, where each person, fearful of our assuredly corrupt government, seeks to lessen the amount of government intervention, and of accompanying government budget, in every aspect of their lives. Less taxes=less abuse of personal funds for needless social services.
And yet if these social programs were handled correctly, in a manner that agrees with the community, no one would complain. The problem here is partly a corruption of government, and partly of social lethargy. It is our own lethargy that keeps government out of our hands: our action would establish a communication between government and the people that would make paying our taxes less of a burden and more of a payment toward things that we both want and need.
But of course this is not the entire problem, as the vast diversity of opinion lends to this frustration—we’ve all felt the familiar sigh accompanying being unable to please everybody. But at least on the most important issues, a little more thought could produce some great social services--especially in education and health. Our inaction is fueled by frustration, but ultimately our frustration will fuel change. Maybe it wouldn’t hurt to stay ahead of the game and start instituting beneficial changes in social services before the angry populous need rise up and demand it.
Bivouac
\BIV-wak, BIV-uh-wak\, noun:
1. An encampment for the night, usually under little or no shelter.
~~~~~~~
Perhaps the bailout is a sign of things to come—hopefully not in this form, as the plan itself is foolish and rushed—but the nationalization of both the benefits and the risks of multinational and incredibly powerful corporations. This seeming social parachute for greed need be both an act of rescue (as certainly we would all pay for these companies’ failures), and a reflection on current laws—the companies should not have been allowed to get this big and endanger us all. As we allowed them to get in this situation, we must re-evaluate the circumstances that led to it, and llow it never to happen again.
Perhaps in the future we will see more of these sorts of socializations, and I’m not sure if it is for better or worse. Including these usual opponents of the middle class into its budget seems grossly unfair, as the budget of the middle class almost never benefits from this salvation and foundation. We deserve an even return—and to do that, I think, the free market needs more of a watchful eye, not less. Capitalism demands, inevitably, a marginalization of wealth, but that wealth is also definitively linked to the economic well being of the classes it stands upon. Thus, if they fail, we fail, but if we struggle, they win. This is not a good model, and it confuses me that so many Americans still prescribe to a naïve notion of “fairness” in a free market economy, as it inevitably shortchanges them.
1. An encampment for the night, usually under little or no shelter.
~~~~~~~
Perhaps the bailout is a sign of things to come—hopefully not in this form, as the plan itself is foolish and rushed—but the nationalization of both the benefits and the risks of multinational and incredibly powerful corporations. This seeming social parachute for greed need be both an act of rescue (as certainly we would all pay for these companies’ failures), and a reflection on current laws—the companies should not have been allowed to get this big and endanger us all. As we allowed them to get in this situation, we must re-evaluate the circumstances that led to it, and llow it never to happen again.
Perhaps in the future we will see more of these sorts of socializations, and I’m not sure if it is for better or worse. Including these usual opponents of the middle class into its budget seems grossly unfair, as the budget of the middle class almost never benefits from this salvation and foundation. We deserve an even return—and to do that, I think, the free market needs more of a watchful eye, not less. Capitalism demands, inevitably, a marginalization of wealth, but that wealth is also definitively linked to the economic well being of the classes it stands upon. Thus, if they fail, we fail, but if we struggle, they win. This is not a good model, and it confuses me that so many Americans still prescribe to a naïve notion of “fairness” in a free market economy, as it inevitably shortchanges them.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Execrable
\EK-sih-kruh-buhl\, adjective:
1. Deserving to be execrated; detestable; abominable.
2. Extremely bad; of very poor quality; very inferior.
~~~~~~~
Written during our last class:
I see progress--however, minimal, it seems to me that history can be tracked as a social and realist evolution. Progressing in stages with Cambrian Explosions here and there, we cannot ignore the difference between our compassion-idealizing, fairness (at least in spirit)-emphasizing ideologies, nor our current predilection for democratic representation and social structure. Compared to the state of things thousands of years ago—were there was almost no emphasis or concern for the individual, a string of monarchies that appeased or controlled rather than respected its people, and a rampant misunderstanding of the universe and common superstition, it seems to me clear that even minimally, maturity of the mind, compassion and community has occurred. Not only that, but we might extrapolate for its past direction a future one.
This movement proves how stubborn we are to change, but in my opinion inspires nothing but hope—as, while lethargic, entire communities can move toward mutually beneficial structures, and billions of minds can, in mean consideration, average out to more mature and correct understandings, even if those understandings depend on a more vigorous few.
It is not merely an increase of people causing this evolution—I think that with enough time and juxtaposition to other humans, the maturity is inevitable. In diversity we find collective betterment of social, emotional and intellectual needs, just as diversity aids in evolution. Evolution does not work the same in both fields, but corollaries can be found. I need look into more evidence for this seeming progress—its cause especially, so that I’m not overlooking negative progress to undermine or contradict the positive—but it seems to me, for all our equally disturbing vices, the changes in society, realism and which virtues receive emphasis that we have, across history, been moving in broadly the right direction. But maybe I’m just appreciating the world since modern science, and how it differs from almost everything before it.
1. Deserving to be execrated; detestable; abominable.
2. Extremely bad; of very poor quality; very inferior.
~~~~~~~
Written during our last class:
I see progress--however, minimal, it seems to me that history can be tracked as a social and realist evolution. Progressing in stages with Cambrian Explosions here and there, we cannot ignore the difference between our compassion-idealizing, fairness (at least in spirit)-emphasizing ideologies, nor our current predilection for democratic representation and social structure. Compared to the state of things thousands of years ago—were there was almost no emphasis or concern for the individual, a string of monarchies that appeased or controlled rather than respected its people, and a rampant misunderstanding of the universe and common superstition, it seems to me clear that even minimally, maturity of the mind, compassion and community has occurred. Not only that, but we might extrapolate for its past direction a future one.
This movement proves how stubborn we are to change, but in my opinion inspires nothing but hope—as, while lethargic, entire communities can move toward mutually beneficial structures, and billions of minds can, in mean consideration, average out to more mature and correct understandings, even if those understandings depend on a more vigorous few.
It is not merely an increase of people causing this evolution—I think that with enough time and juxtaposition to other humans, the maturity is inevitable. In diversity we find collective betterment of social, emotional and intellectual needs, just as diversity aids in evolution. Evolution does not work the same in both fields, but corollaries can be found. I need look into more evidence for this seeming progress—its cause especially, so that I’m not overlooking negative progress to undermine or contradict the positive—but it seems to me, for all our equally disturbing vices, the changes in society, realism and which virtues receive emphasis that we have, across history, been moving in broadly the right direction. But maybe I’m just appreciating the world since modern science, and how it differs from almost everything before it.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Malfeasance
\mal-FEE-zuhn(t)s\, noun:
Wrongdoing, misconduct, or misbehavior, especially by a public official.
~~~~~~~
Most of our most grand and correct ideas about the meaning of life are not eventuating or thousands of years away, but among our entire history, relatively unchanging. Love, curiosity and creation (there may and probably are others, but these stick out). They form the foundation of everything, and always have. The road to truth or great creation is not graduating toward some singular end, but rather, a road where every step is, itself, a destination. So too is the meaning of life—not some vast and incredible truth hiding beneath a massive shroud and being chipped away at by the great minds across centuries, but relatively simplistic ideas, some of which are so commonsensical that they are cliché.
To answer truth in terms of a singular thesis describing everything is to mistake the human question. Our pursuits in love, truth and creation are not ones of eventual destinations, but of roads. Should we ever reach the end of those roads, we will find ourselves displaced, bored, and without meaning. Instead, meaning is, so often, the search for it—the search for love and improvement and knowledge. It is intuitive, but incorrect, to think of knowledge as the light at the end of a tunnel. There is no grand thesis, and if there were, we wouldn’t be very much motivated to learn anything ever again.
It is the mild anxiety of not knowing (the class-mentioned cognitive dissonance) that motivates us to know—and I suspect the wisest people in history have turned that feeling away from anxiety, and indulged it, instead, as curiosity. Humans are not naturally disposed, I think, toward this sort of step-by-step acceptance, instead preferring a comfortable tier on which to rest. Continually climbing the stairs, however (I’m just insatiable with these metaphors today, I guess), I find to be a much more rewarding endeavor.
Wrongdoing, misconduct, or misbehavior, especially by a public official.
~~~~~~~
Most of our most grand and correct ideas about the meaning of life are not eventuating or thousands of years away, but among our entire history, relatively unchanging. Love, curiosity and creation (there may and probably are others, but these stick out). They form the foundation of everything, and always have. The road to truth or great creation is not graduating toward some singular end, but rather, a road where every step is, itself, a destination. So too is the meaning of life—not some vast and incredible truth hiding beneath a massive shroud and being chipped away at by the great minds across centuries, but relatively simplistic ideas, some of which are so commonsensical that they are cliché.
To answer truth in terms of a singular thesis describing everything is to mistake the human question. Our pursuits in love, truth and creation are not ones of eventual destinations, but of roads. Should we ever reach the end of those roads, we will find ourselves displaced, bored, and without meaning. Instead, meaning is, so often, the search for it—the search for love and improvement and knowledge. It is intuitive, but incorrect, to think of knowledge as the light at the end of a tunnel. There is no grand thesis, and if there were, we wouldn’t be very much motivated to learn anything ever again.
It is the mild anxiety of not knowing (the class-mentioned cognitive dissonance) that motivates us to know—and I suspect the wisest people in history have turned that feeling away from anxiety, and indulged it, instead, as curiosity. Humans are not naturally disposed, I think, toward this sort of step-by-step acceptance, instead preferring a comfortable tier on which to rest. Continually climbing the stairs, however (I’m just insatiable with these metaphors today, I guess), I find to be a much more rewarding endeavor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
