Blogging Around

"Anna,
When you make your insight about theory and actuality, although I generally agree, I would argue it doesn't necessarily apply to this situation. In my opinion, it's more of a question of definition. If peace is the opposite of war, then war is not balance, and any sort of major dispute. For example; two girls who spin debilitating rumors against each other, as well as harmful/offensive pranks, would be engaged in war. However, war is usually thought of as nations using weapons of destructions against each other, and claiming thousands of lives. In this case, war is synonymous with destruction, where creation WOULD be the obvious opposite.

As for your 'third option', that is a great idea, but it seems to me, a 'war' of who can create better would only be effective if all parties were creating. What I mean is, if all the countries are competing by trying to create the better institution, wouldn't that one selfish country that chooses destruction as its weapon undermine the efforts of all the others? There may be a way to make it work, but unfortunately, I doubt that something like this could happen in our society. I don't have enough faith in humanity. "

This was a dialectic between war and creation done by Anna. She provided explanation why it was war and creation, and not war and peace, because of their relative practical and theoretical values (respectively). She also presented a synthesis of the two, eliminating the horrors of war, by having war more of a competition of builders, of which nation had the best social/economic/political (etc) structure.

Nirali, Alot of the questions asked are very culturally important only to America; you wouldn't expect an immigrant to know who the founding fathers were, the saying 'rivalry is everywhere', etc. Each culture/nation has its own 'important' facts. Knowledge of these facts doesn't pose a direct link to intelligence, or wisdom, as knowing some arbitrary facts doesn't necessarily imply that. However, I agree with you that not knowing these things exemplifies ineffectiveness of the American public school system. Part of the problem is people don't want to make an effort just to be smarter. Stuff to buy you saw in a commercial and watching stupid TV shows is much less work intensive than actually doing work. If our society emphasized the importance of hard-work and intelligence, instead of telling us to buy the latest iPod and designer shoes, we might be in a better off intellectually.

Nirali posted a blog post showing a clip of Jay Leno interviewing pedestrians about random facts that the average American should know, but, unfortunately, doesn't. She commented on it that it shows that the American school system is to blame partially, and it should be everyone's incentive to better themselves if the schools can't.

iMedia: let yourself feel

let yourself feel. from Esteban Diácono on Vimeo.

This is a computer generated video made by Diácono to accompany the song ‘Ljósið’ by Ólafur Arnalds. It is now the song's official music video. On how the video was created; “I first imported the audio and set up 2 sounkeys layers, one for the piano and one for the strings. Then I worked the particles and the particle subsystem and linked things like the emission, the turbulence, the velocity, the spin amplitude and the strenght of the fields to the soundkeys outputs. Then I set up the colors with 2 different palettes, and well, after that there was a lot of trial and error in order to achieve what I was looking for. There’s a lot of randomness involved in here, so there was also a lot of luck, of course.” He used programs "Adobe After Effects, particular v2, soundkeys and a little starglow".

This is a wonderful merging of sound and image. Diácono created the video, in essence by setting up rules for the gaseous substances to make them respond to the music. Although he used complex rules already existent in the programs available, those too are governed by probably pages and pages of computer code. In the physical world all reactions and happenings are governed by natural laws, thus making this work of art follow a trend much art seems to follow; imitating nature. That is, the rules/laws that govern the visualization for Ljósið were created by humans; they are artificial. One could make it a point to argue that all things regarded as art mimic the 'real world'. For example: Bosch's The Garden of Earthly Delights. It being a painting follows rules (principles and elements of design), It also mimics the world as Bosch saw it (changing from paradise to hell).

Music also, follows this idea of rules. However, music, although the rules are created by humans and for the human ear, but they are a standard set of rules found within music theory. These rules do nothing to affect the natural world, but they serve as a guide to the 'real' physics-related rules of vibration and resonance.

This music video exemplifies two things; mimicry of the natural world by being established upon artificial laws, and also, ideas of symbiosis. There are three examples of symbiosis going on: the video + the music, the piano + the violin, and the red + the blue precipitates/gases. Each one of these is like Yin and Yang. They compliment each other, although being significantly different and behaving in different ways.(i.e, the piano provides a sort of rhythmic support while the violin has more of a melody, the red gas orbits and winds in and out while the blue bobbles in the center). Taking on a much larger scale, perhaps it reflects on if religions and nations were to

then perhaps something calm and beautiful there would be.

Connection: King Lear~Adolescence

Shakespeare's Lear acts much like the way parents of teenagers sometimes do. His three daughters being the teenagers, although their exact ages are not clear.

Lear wants his daughters to follow his agenda, involving all of them loving each him, and pretty much doing what he tells them to do. However, they have their own plans (they being Goneril and Regan). These include

Dialectics: Education and Freedom

Education is meant, well, educate children. And people (because children aren't people). Yet, at the same time, public education (and private for that matter) tends to work like a prison, with lunch periods, and other periods determined by an orderly bell, every student has a number, etc etc. Freedom, synonymous with liberty, is by most students a preferred choice, yet it is relatively polar to education. However, being free (defined by being able to do what one wants, when one wants to) doesn't inhibit learning. One can be free, and still learn, study, read, whatever, the only difference is, that it is no longer imposed upon to have to learn. One of Einstein's quotes (probably paraphrased) "Imagination is better than education". This means, quite frankly, that creativity and 'smartness', problem-solving skills, etc, and all pertaining synonyms trump the prison-like system for educating youth.

The reciprocal is also true, that education doesn't necessarily imply the imprisonment of students. As long as the students want to be a part of the system, and perhaps even to learn, then they are actually free. So it is in fact possible to enjoy the fruits of freedom, and at the same time have the structure of eduction present to increase one's intelligence. If it is one's choice to be part of something they would have to be part of anyways, technically, they are acting by their own will, even though they couldn't act otherwise.

Blogging Around

roma said... in response to anna's "carry it forward: Kite runner"

I agree that living in fear of all 0f your problems will likely sap from the joys of life, living completely without fear will do the same. Fear causes the body to produce adrenaline, which stimulates body and mind in an excited state. Without any form of fear (mild or severe) life would seem uninteresting and unexciting. Fear is the foundation for the 'fight or flight' response. Even with fear, you can still face your problems (fight) it just takes more effort and courage to do so.

In summary: Amir is afraid of his own fate, and living life in fear causes all sorts of problems, so fear is a necessary difficulty to overcome.

Roma says...in response to darrell's "It matters; Facebook and our Identity Crisis"

Although I agree with what you say about facebook and other social networking sites destroying 'physical' relationships, one could say social networking is replacing physical relationships. However why is social networking NOT real? The people you communicate are real, so are the emotions displayed, as are your's when you read or hear something. Sure, some senses are missing, like smell, taste, etc. However, this only makes the 'facebook' reality somewhat less real, but as technology improves someday perhaps they will be equal realities, with the exception that in the internet reality you could be ANYTHING you want, and would be able to converse with ANYONE with the same benefits, emotions, and even chemistry as in the physical world.

In summary: Facebook and other social networking sites are depleting the values of conversation and are sapping true "socialness" from society

IT MATTERS: Juxtapostion-Roman Polanski

I will not summarize my namesake's life, as tragic as it is, and will simply assume that you, the reader, already knows it. If not, a short version of it and recent occurences are found in the link below.

Polanski Update

In English class last week, we learned about

juxtaposition.

It is the idea of placing to things/ideas adjacent to one another for a desired effect.

Roman Polanski. His life. A juxtaposition of unimaginable tragedy yet also that of a critically acclaimed (and well deserved) artist. In most cases, the accomplished artist with a troubled life is almost archetypal. It seems as though there is some sort of poetic resonance in response to tragedy which results in beauty. The sheer abhorrence of Polanski's tragedies however are what separate him from this archetype. I digress.

Roman Polanski. His case. A juxtaposition of unimaginable tragedy and an abhorrent lack of common sense. I cannot fathom horrors more grotesque than my dear family being brutally murdered in Hitler's gas chambers, or my pregnant wife being brutally murdered by unmerciful, and un-regretful individuals. At the same time, it seems as though there is a total and utter lack of common sense and even more importantly empathy in the dealing with this man. We live in a world where our judicial system works by hard facts. And, maybe not often, but far too often than it should, without common sense. If every case were dealt with philosophically, maybe these problems wouldn't arise. And I think we try to, but as is evident, it doesn't help. Perhaps the one thing missing from said system of justice, is in fact, empathy. On a micro-social scale, within a family for example, values are taught (in many cultures) to forgive people for their actions. Sometimes to understand that what they are going through could be difficult, and its not worth to hurt them more. If only this could be applied to the system as well. Then the "man" would seem a much kinder man, and issues would be less controversial, if society, and more importantly the victims, were empathetic with those they condemn.

This combination of tragedy and lack of empathy sums up only to the torturing of an already tortured soul. What kind of justice is it that we are imposing onto this poor man if nobody (the 'victim' asking repeatedly for charges to be dropped) was in any way was hurt.

Its like we don't have anything better to do right?

Best Of Week

s0 lst week i think da best 0bsrvtn was prolly made by Anna fri. she sed dat amirs childhd memrys 0f afganstn r almst p0lar t0 th0se 0f his adulthd. whn he was a kid afgnstn was c0ntrld by rusia in war but l8r wld b 0f da taliban c0ntrl. both r times 0f 0pprssn but r diff kinds 0f opprssn. dis is leik da pckt dat mr allen gave us about memry. da pckt says dat memrys of da past r wr0ng usally n da real past culd b way diff. but amirs memrys r all taken as tru b/c it is a mem0ir. s0 da diff fer him is realy da past n da present n0t diff verzns of da past. but just leik da chess playr in da pckt who was sh0ckd when he f0und 0ut his treasrd memry 0f bears h0ldng a chess board realy was li0ns hldng sw0rds amir will face sh0ck frustratn n c0nfusn when da new reality 0f talibn afgnst c0nflcts w/ his memrys 0f pre rusia and rusia c0ntrld afgnstn. dis was a very imprtnt 0bsrvtn dat was made b/v it als0 put emfasis 0n da craft 0f da riting. leik mr allen sed b4 real gewd riting puts da karectr in c0nflct w/ demselvs 0n a macr0/micr0 scale. da happenngs 0f da macr0 wrld affect amir 0n a micr0 levl. housseni puts amir in c0nflct w/ a reality amir cnt change. wethr 0r n0t da macr0 change 0f rusia 2 taliban it wuld [assuming amir DUZ in fact feel c0nflct] be hard fer him 0n in a micr0 sense. pers0nally i think amir will b affcted by da change b/c it is difficult for ne1 0r @ least wuld b for me. m0st peopl tend t0 b disc0ncrtd when they realize dat imprtnt memrys r inc0rrct n i think dis is b/c 0f an adult unwillingnes 2 micr0 change. in my life i have n0ticed a trend 0f very young childrn being xtrmely flexible but adults being much more affectd by change [i.e. moving]. as a small child [0-10 yrs] i m0ved @ ar0und 3x ar0und chicag0land n i dnt recall being negatively affected @ all. my parnts m0ved fr0m rusia 2 chicag0 @ 20 ish but it was difficult for dem. my grandma who is alm0st 70 refuses 2 m0ve 2 da US even tho der wuld b a sig increas in her quality 0f life. mayb a partial reas0n f0r dis trend is w/ age xp is gaind n has its own sentimental/n0stalgic value b/c 0f which 0lder pe0ple may resist change. mayb its b/c changing a lifestyle @ such an 0ld age is alm0st leik thrwing away 1s wh0le life for a new 1 when it is near 2 its end. amir is @ ar0und 40 when he g0es back 2 da middle east which wuld make the change all the harder fer him.

SHORTHAND:

leik = like

xp = experience

b/c = because

w/ = with

1s = one's

dus = does

da = the

dat = that

r = are

n = and

+ many more words lacking vowels and correct punctuation.

Change of Mind: Kite Runner

A prevalent idea I have noticed so far in the Kite Runner is Amir's desire to be good; of which the methods of achieving are unfortunately terribly skewed and distorted. Much of the distortion comes from the gap between himself and his father, Baba. Amir (at least in his childhood years) feels as though his father secretly hates him. One of the reasons for this, he believes, is because his mother died during childbirth. Therefore, he logically reasons, his father hates him because he killed his mother. Murder (although according to Baba is a variation of stealing) is a great sin. Naturally, Amir wants forgiveness from Baba, which he won't get until the gap between them is gone (if there is no gap anymore, that means Baba must have forgiven Amir). This drive trumps all of Amir's other moral obligations due to the intensity of the sin of murder. Therefore, I believe it is because of this that Amir feels jealousy, and is willing to be unfair towards Hassan if it means getting closer to his Baba.

Due to this understanding of Amir's logical reasoning, I have changed my mind on the nature of people, "evil" people in particular. People who we typically regard as "bad people" are often seen as wanting to simply do harm onto others. However, I have long ago established that from his/her point of view, they are trying to do the best as well. I also remember hearing somewhere (unfortunately I cannot remember where exactly) that all people have a desire to be good. So I reasoned that they must have faulty logic, that their reasoning was skewed. Hitler, being a famous example, wanted to purify the world by creating a u niversal race of Aryans. He wanted to do a "good thing" but the logic is strange. He would have to have been a smart man however, to be in the position he was in, but how could he been such a smart man if his logical reasoning was so distorted? This is where Kite Runner comes in.

Thanks to Amir, I realize that it isn't the LOGIC that is flawed, Amir's logic is sound. But the conclusion is twisted because his logic is based on a fundamentally wrong assumptions: that his father hates him because he killed his mother. Although to Amir it seems natural and obvious that this should be so because his mother DID die during HIS childbirth, there is not enough proof to be 100% sure. This in turn strengthens my belief in that major arguments could be solved by sitting down and having a philosophical debate (much like Aristotle's Philosopher Kings would do).