Rationalists vs. Empiricists Essay 7

 The world is composed of infinate binary opposites. Rationalists and Empiricists could be considered one of the multiple bianary opposites. They are very different philosophies that rose during the enlightenment period but it's influences can be traced back to ancient Greece. These two very different ways to se the world were thought of by Descartes and Spinoza (Rationalists) and Locke, Hume and Berkely (Empiricists). A simple way of finding which you incline to ask yourself this, which motivates you more a universal principle or emotions/ thoughts/ senses? If you chose a universal principle you are most likely a rationalist and if you chose emothios you are most likely and Empiricist. Rationalists only belive in reason and do not trust their senses at all. Empiricists on the other hand believe that nothing in the mind does not come from the senses. Personally, I believe that it is the world around us that determines who we are. I am motivated by my emotions because understanding one's emotions is what gets a person trhough life. Living on a principle is not personal or individualistic.
          The only thing that we can be sure of is that we think, according to rationalists. We think, therefore we exists. This is the concept though of by Descartes. His core belief was that if we can think of something, it must be real. This is how he justified the existance of God. Since ideas are always there and we do not pick up ideas from our senses, if we can imagine a perfect being, it must exist. Descartes also separated mind and body, making him a dualist. Spinoza was another rationalist but he was quite different from Descartes. He was a monist, first or all, that combined the two substances of the universe into one.
          According to empiricists, our mind is influenced by the world around us. Locke said that we are born as a "blank slate" and that our senses and the nature aound us define who we are. Empericists trusted their senses unlike rationalists and said that we cannot pick up ideas without our senses. Hume was an agnostic who said that we can think of God because we can think of the components that make up God such as justice and benvolance. He also introduced the induction fallacy which stated that no matter how much it happens, it is not a law. Empiricists did not believe in jumping to conclusions. Berkely, another empiricist, said that the only thing that we percieve is God and that we don't experience the material world.
          These two philosophies contrasted each other even at the most basic levels. Where do we get our ideas? According to rationalists they are always there and we cannot trust our senses becuase they are decieving. The there are empericists that say no, we can trust our senses and we cannot think of anything that we cannot sense. Rationalists thought that mathematics were more important because they didn't necesarily apply to the physical world. Empiricists said that experiments are more important because they deal woth the physical world. A rationlaits would most likely live by a principle while an Empiricist would most like live by his/her emotions/senses/thoughts.
          Rationalists and Empericists are polar opposites. One believes on reason and the other in senses. On says that we can justify anything brcause we can think of it and the other says that abstract ideas come from copying and pasting concrete ideas together. The only thing that Rationalism and Empiricism have in common is that they have both been very influential to the modern world and philosophy.

Rationalists: Descartes and Spinoza. Essay 6

          At its most basic definition, rationalism is all about reason. Rationalists regard reason as the main source of knowlege. To some degree they are correct, even if one does not agree with rationalism, it is thanks to reason that we have knowledge about anything. Both Descartes and Spinoza were considered rationalists but for different reasons. Descartes, for example, believed that the only thing we can be sure of is that we think. his entire philosophy was completely based on reason and nothing else. Spinoza on the other hand was quite different to Descartes. He was considered a rationalist because of the way he answered questions on ethics. He had a very mechanincal way of answering questions. They were both rationalists but their philosophies were very different and like many philosophers in ancient Greece, they called on each other on their dissagreements.
          Descartes believed in doubting everything and that the only thing that we can be sure of is that we think. We think, therefore we exist. He does not believe in the senses at all and this results in a philosophy built mostly on reason. Unlike many past philosophers, Descartes and other philosophers of his time built their views from scratch instead of building them off of someone else's. He is also the first one to separate mind and body claiming that one is completely opposite to the other. He also separated the world into two substances which reinforced his idea of dualism.

Descartes

          Spinoza was another rationalist though his opinions were completely different to that of Descartes. He regected the idea of dualism saying that the two different substances were within the same universe. He believes that both mind and body are not separate but simply a single entity. In his book Ethics he answers many ethical questions in a very geometrical manner. Spinoza also regarded good and evil as relative concepts and not opposote entities.

Spinoza

          Many would think that to belong to the same philosophical movement one would have to have similar opinions. Yet Spinoza and Descartes were both rationalists with polar opinions. If one thinks about it they are bith rationalists in their special way. We can see that Descartes focuses soley on his reason and nothing more. He did not believe in his senses and the only thing he was truly sure of is that he could think. If we think, we exist. Spinoza on the other hand used reason to explain everything. For every question posed in his book there is a mechanical and well thought of response. He trusted his senses because without them he couldn't reason.
         Rationalism has influenced our culture for a long time. Thanks to it there is a great separation of mind and body in today's day and age. Both Descartes and Spinoza used reason in different ways and regarded it in different ways to solve the questions of the univesre. They also built their philosophy from scratch. The only thing these two had in common is their use of reason to back up their philosophies.

The Two Cultures, The Middle Ages, The Renaissance and the Baroque

          The two cultures, the middle ages, the renaissance and the baroque all seem very different. most of them had very opposote views of the world and different philosophies. yet they all influenced each other in one way or anotherand it is their influences which have helepd us create the modern world. Even though they are opposite, they all have one thing in common. They all give their idea on how humans should live to fullfill themselves. The base of each of their beliefs lies on the philosophy of the indoeuropeans and the semites.
          The two cultures reffer to the indoeurpeans and the semites who had very polar philosophies. Indoeuropean culture was very visual which is why they made various paintings and statues of their gods. They were all ploytheistic since they were composed of the societies of europe before christianity and in the eastern religions. Because of this they had a cyclical view of the world. Ther believed in reincarnation and that the world goes in cycles. All of this influences their view on how someone should live. Same goes for the semites. The semites were monotheistic and were composed of the three wester religions (Judeism, Christianity and Islam). They had a linear view of the world, meaning that the world had a begining and an end. Finally they focused on hearing rather than seeing.
           In the Middle Ages we can see elements from both cultures. It is mostly the semite aspects of culture which influenced how people were supposed to live in that period. People thought that life on earth didn't mean anything and one had to be preparing to go to heaven. They didnt pay much attention to art or sculpture either. We see some indoeuropean culture through Aristotle, the church's favorite philosopher
           Then in the Renaissance there is a change. We see more indoeuropean culture affecting how people live their lives. The focus more on what is happening on earth and because of this there is an entire revolution of art and writing. Yet the semite aspects of culture do not dissapear there is still a linear point of view which affects people's philosophy. There is also something new in the Renaissance which is the printing press. With the printing press more people became literate which is a massive cultural change. Being literate changes greatly a person's pont of view in philosophy and in life itself.
          The Baroque was an interesting period because people's views were very split. On one hand we had people who just wanted the pleasure of life and did not think about the future in any way. The others just wanted to contemplate life and the many pesimistic happenings that come with it. death being a major thought provoker. Like the people's views, the Baroque was very irregular (the name itself says it). Another thing was that the culture was very mechanic. Not only because of the technological advances but also because we don't see any poetry in this period but we do see great artistic advances in architechture and painting. People's viewpoints in the Baroque were split and somewhat irregular.
       All of these cultures and time periods have either brought the base to modern day philosophy and way of life or have been evolutionary point that lead to today's views. Even though they are all very different, they all have convincing philosophies that have lasted throughout the years.

Four Questions

What do we know and what do we believe?
Examples of things things that we know are that the sky is blue, that we breathe air and that someday we are going to die. Examples of things we can only believe are the existance of God, life on other planets and the existance of multiple universes.
The factors that may influence a person's philosophy of life are environment, upbringing and time period. Environment and upbringning are considered nature vs nurture. The environment a person is born in will affect their philosophy yet if you teach them since they are young you are upbringing them with said philosophy. Time period is also influential, people do not think the same way they did two hundred years ago.
We are born with a conscience but we don't really know how to use it. As we gain experience and we are taught right from wrong our conscience develops and grows.
The importance of values depends completely on the situation that one is in. We are taught since we are young to be honest but if lying could save a person's life we would value that persons life more than honesty. This also brings the fact that some values ar more important than others by nature.

Essay 3 Plato and Aristotle

      Plato and Aristotle's views are one of the first binary opposites known to us. Their views on mankind and the world were completely different. Plato was more focused on the spiritual world and Aristotle was more focused on real world. Their thoughts and beliefs appeal to different people and even different time periods. Without these two great philosophers the world wouldn’t be the same as it is today.

       Plato did not trust his senses. He believed that this world was nothing but an illusion. According to the allegory of the cave, we are all chained to the wall of the cave forced to stare at mere shadows. When we manage to emerge from the cave we are blinded, then we’re in awe and wonder. Our world is the world of shadows. Our senses don’t perceive much so in order to see the real world we must venture from the world of shadows and illusion out to reality. He also believed in the world of ideas. Plato said that the soul lived in the world of ideas and then picked a body to go in. This means that we already know everything we just don’t remember it and once we recognize it again, we remember the knowledge. An example can be a horse. We have seen countless horses and they are all different but there is something that makes a horse a horse no matter what. Plato’s explanation was that we already know what a horse is so no matter how different the horses we see are we will always recognize it’s a horse. Finally Plato’s thoughts on women were that they should have the opportunity to be educated equally to men.

       Aristotle on the other hand was the complete opposite. He focused on the real world and in nature. He trusted his senses and even did fieldwork to make observations about the different purposes of nature. He observed and experimented mare than he reasoned or wondered. He founded the science of logic which was based on the natural laws of the world. An example is, “All humans are mortal, I am a human, therefore I am mortal.” He also said that everything in nature had a purpose and a category. According to him there is nothing in the world without a category. Instead of believing in the world of ideas, he believed that humans learned from experience. If person sees a horse, and then another and then another, then the person will understand that that is what a horse looks like. Aristotle also believed in the golden mean which was pretty much about having a balanced life. An excess of something or a lack of something leads to unhappiness. His views on women were also opposite to Plato’s. He saw women as incomplete men and as lesser human beings.

       Both Plato and Aristotle have made valid points that make you think of your view on the world. There are some consequences to their belief systems though. Beginning with Plato, believing that this world isn’t more than an illusion could lead some people to become indifferent about life. Why would life on earth matter if there is a better world full of wonderful things that we may or may not go to when we leave earth? There are also some consequences to Aristotle’s point of view. If we live for ourselves then do we have a purpose other than finding the golden mean?  Is nature the only thing that can give us answers and a purpose?

       Even though these two minds were different, they were both hugely influential. Even today there are debates about the viewpoints that they started. It is hard to choose for it requires a lot of critical thinking and knowledge of oneself. Also one cannot agree with everything they say but we can get an idea of our own beliefs. 

Plato, Allegory of the Cave, Hero's Journey, The Matrix

       In the film that we attempted to prepare we compared various aspects of The Matrix to the hero’s journey, the allegory of the cave and to Plato and his world of ideas. In the introduction we would have The Matrix numbers in the background with a voice over explaining the comparisons.

       The first section of the film would have been a “draw my life” style clip explaining the various steps of Joseph Campbell’s “The Adventure of the Hero”. This consisted of several sped up clips of me drawing the hero going through the stages of the hero’s journey.  Having explained the hero’s journey we would go on to compare it to two clips. The one in The Matrix by the Wachowski brothers where Neo goes to sacrifice himself for Morpheus, gets killed by agent Smith, is revived by Trinity’s words and realizes that he is the one thus obtaining great power. The next clip is from Thor by Kenneth Branagh where Thor goes to sacrifice himself for the town, is wounded by The Destroyer/Loki, has Jane Foster reassuring him and becoming worthy, thus getting Mjolnir and his power back. These both reflect similar steps of the hero’s journey.

      Then we had the cave clips that we filmed. Those featured us being chained to the wall looking at the shadows and suddenly Kat being free and looking in wonder at the world around her. We then showed a clip of The Matrix when Neo goes sees the real world for the first time after taking the red pill. We also had a clip from the Dark Knight Rises by Christopher Nolan of Bruce Wayne being in the prison, not seeing the reality of his situation. He has to climb out of the prison emerging enlightened and ready to save Gotham as Batman. We also linked this to parts of the hero’s journey.

       Finally we linked all this to Plato by filming a clip with Kat as Plato as he is writing about Socrates. We had a clip from the British show Horrible Histories that did a comedy sketch on Socrates. We connected it to the hero by explaining how some parts of Socrates’ life fit into the steps. Finally we filmed a clip of me as Plato drawing the Allegory of the Cave and explaining it. 

The Purposes of Mythology Essay 1

       Humans have always wondered how we got here, what our purpose is, is there something beyond? For years we have performed rituals to try and disconnect ourselves from the physical world. Yet one of the most important things we have done is to pass information and morals orally through myths. By looking at myths from various different cultures we can see various similarities of the human mind, the reflection of human stages and the moral example of how someone should act. Mythology has a great impact on human history because we wouldn’t have evolved mentally and morally without them. Myths also have a great connection to religion but are not necessarily the same. Myths are stories that show people how to act in society, they also show the transitions that humans go through in their lives and finally, they show us how we think in a similar matter. Religion on the other hand can be used as a tool to interpret and spread these myths. Mythology is a fascinating part of human history and of the human mind that has been crucial in leading us to ask the greatest philosophical questions.

       Myths tend to have a specific chronological order. According to Joseph Campbell’s concept known as the monomyth we can see a repetitive pattern in the way myths are performed. For example, a hero’s journey can be told step by step in various myths from different cultures. The hero lives his everyday life, something disrupts it and that forces him to go on a journey where he has to overcome some kind of task. We can also see various similarities in creation myths. Creation myths like India’s “There was Nothing”, “The thoughts of Brahma” and Greek’s “Geia and Uranus” we see many similar aspects. We see the concepts of emptiness and chaos. Here it is suggested multiple times that before the world as we know it there was “nothing” though it is more than nothing. We label it as nothing because we have no words to describe it. There is also the concept of chaos and the universe going in cycles. All this leads to the question, how can different cultures think of such similar concepts? The answer is actually quite simple, humans think in a similar manner. Through art and rituals like those shown in the documentary “The Cave of Forgotten Dreams” humans connect to this spiritual side of themselves which leads them to create myths to pass these senses down to the next generation.

       People I who lived before modern era didn’t necessarily believe the myths literally. According to the book A Case for God, fundamentalism is actually a fairly new concept. This is why people didn’t want a translated version of the bible, because by having these stories told to them in another language they would be able to interpret them how they wanted. The creation myths are a very good example of interpretation. People interpret creation in many different ways. One of the most interesting and maybe even accurate interpretations is one pointed out in The Case for God which states that the Genesis story from the bible, rather than just a creation myth is also a transition from child to maturity. Adam and Eve are in a state of purity (children) until the snake (rebel) tempts them to eat the fruit and when they do they are kicked out of the Garden of Eden or entering maturity. This suggests that myths are more than just stories, they reflect the experiences that humans transition throughout their lives.

       One of the most obvious purposes of myths is sending some type of message or moral. But myths are not like fables, myths are a lot more personal in the sense that in the case of a hero, for example, people would envision themselves as the hero. The hero is has visible human flaws but is a type of moral role model that people are suggested to follow. This is similar to the concept mentioned in The Sacred and Profane in which people build temples or cathedrals to be closer to God in an environment that is not soiled by man. These ideas have all been brought by myths. The way we want to identify with the morality of a mythological character can be compared to the want to have God close to you in a place that has not been corrupted by man.

       Myths have been crucial for human development and history. Without myths we wouldn’t have developed a sense of wonder. Like it is mentioned in the book Sophie’s World, philosophy is based on the ability to wonder. We wonder what we are doing here and how we got here and myths gave us a little push in encouraging us to continue asking them.