Character Clarification

To all my oh so loyal followers out there, I apologize for the last post in which I expressed the idea that Doris did not support situationism. I had misread the email sent about the issue and it makes much more sense now. Doris agrees with the idea that situations can heavily influence one's character, if not fully. Due to all of the studies that were presented, it was shown that this is true (Milgram, Standford Prison, phonebooth, etc.) It is not so ambiguous to me anymore, and the chapters now seem to correlate better with the argument. Sorry to the hundreds of you that must have been confused after reading :)

Character Counts

After reading the email sent by JMc, I became slightly more confused. I understand situationism to be interpreting one's character by certain circumstances and situations that he or she may be involved in. What I did not understand is if he is supporting this claim or not. Throughout the chapters, he quite frequently mentions several psychological experiments which alter a person's behavior. From the email, it said he did not support situationism, however the studies clearly show that a person can change due to a situation. Although, perhaps he is stating that situationism can be deceptive for everyone is likely to deviate from natural habits in extreme situations. We can discuss my concerns in class.

Getting into the "nitty gritty" of the piece, I personally enjoy researching the Milgram experiment. I distinctly remember studying this experiment in high school and it really sparked my interest. However, my first inclination from the lecture given in my high school psych class was that this had to do with obeying those who serve as authority to you. Although this may be a factor, the author made it clear that this was not the issue being portrayed; it dealt more with situationism. I can agree with this as well, but it still intrigues me how so many people would be obedient under such drastic measures. It is difficult to place my self in their situation because knowing the circumstances, I would plead disobedient, but there is no way of knowing for sure. Does this mean that situations do affect my behavior/character? I would take that as a yes, for I know that I do not display the same traits in every situation. Perhaps, this is what he is trying to express.

Just a thought...

I have realized that I can use this blog in ways other than what would would be discussed in class. Acknowledging the fact that a very minimal amount of people even encounter my blog, I can speak of any true concern I have perhaps for a venting process.

It is Saturday night at about 11:30 and in the past 3 hours, I have watched half a football game, read a chapter for Tuesday's FYS assignment on character, did laundry, had some dinner, and talked to some friends over the internet. To me, it has been what should be a relaxing night, which is what I intended it to be. However, about every 20 minutes the idea that I am a lonely college student runs through my head. I can't help but think that I am being patronized by the vast amount of my peers at the local bars, house parties, and arbitrary adventures. Why is it that college seems to revolve around social factors? I dont think my tuition pays for that. I find no problem with staying in for a few weekends to catch up on homework and some alone time. But who is right to deem this lifestyle as lonesome? I know a few people that swear by going out every weekend and somehow find just reasons to patronize those who don't. Patronization is one of the very few things that really light my fire. I can only write so much about how I feel, so I suppose this is it for my venting session. Until next time!

Accepting you, me, her, him, and it.

I am glad to say that I understand the concepts that Mill was describing. It still upsets me that I cannot comprehend them on my own, but I am working on it. In terms of the actual content, it not only scares me but intrigues me as well. It scares me because it was written about 150 years ago, yet is still just as prevalent today. It intrigues me because he wrote this during times that were probably much different that they are today and probably caused much controversy. He speaks about not necessarily deviating from the norm, but that its okay if you do. One aspect of class today that really sparked my interest was something that I had never thought of before. Several times I have said something along the lines of "they're just like you and me" regarding people of different genders, sexualities, races, cultures, etc. I realized today that this may be true, but the more appropriate way to accept others would be to simply (although, maybe not so simple) accept their differences rather than trying to acknowledge them as just the same. It is how I have accepted people from the moment I realized that others were different. I really do feel that I changed from hearing that today. This can also influence my presence in my anthropology class this year. We learn about numerous different cultures and practices that strongly differ from our own. It is hard to compare with some for the extreme differences they acquire, but it is important to note that we don't need to compare and just need to accept their existence and appreciate it. I may not have made a complete revelation in my life, but it is refreshening to know.

Forever frustrated.

Lying is a sin, thus I cannot say I read the entire portion of John Stuart's piece on liberty and indivdualism. I found it difficult to understand and hard to apply to our modern day lifestyles. At the beggining, I felt as if he was developing a perspective related to feminism. However, when he speaks of "man", I suppose that could mean all human kind. He also talks about individualism, and that we must individualize ourselves to comply with societal needs. Maybe. I'm still not sure. As I reflect upon this piece, I do not intend to criticize Stuart for his writing style or views, but am just more curious. Most of the work that I have not understood in this class has inevitably become of great value and appreciation to me. I suppose this piece is no different, although I recognize this is no excuse for not comprehending.

I certainly doubt it...

In Shanley's "Doubt: a parable", I have only encountered more difficulty on evaluating and analyzing my lifestyle. Although I try to be as unselfish as possible (which I greatly want to work on!), I still find myself attributing the messages and theories of all the pieces our class has read to my own habits rather than the nature of others. Consciously averting that habit of mine, I found "Doubt" to be relatable to many. It was said in the dialogue, by Father Flynn I believe (could be mistaken), that it takes much more courage to be doubtful than to be certain, for certainty is definite, while doubt is infinite.

Throughout the play, Sister Aloysius seems to be certain of Flynn's intentions. Although provided with no evidence, she remains confident in her convictions. However, in the final scene, she makes a remark to Sister James that she has doubts. I was able to relate this final scene, as well as my whole analysis of the play, to our class. Often times, one of us is certain we know the answer or have a valid response to an inquiry. We are almost always asked to show evidence. Without any evidence of our proclamations, they are only certain to us on an intermediate level, yet doubtful to others.

The questions of who I sympathize with most and who I admire most intrigue me. I sympathize with Sister James most, for she seems to be most like me, yet is criticized. If I were to uphold a teaching position, I would want my students to enjoy the class and be able to come to me with any concerns. I also want to please others to whom I work for and with. However, I admire Sister Aloysius most, for she is strong and intelligent. She sticks to her convictions without true evidence because it is what she believes and what she thinks to be right. If I could have the courage to model her behavior I would. However, all the others (Sister James, Mrs. Muller, Father Flynn) seem to either despise her or be frightened of her. So the question I ask myself is would I rather be able to have confident convictions and beliefs that can aid in pivotal situations, or would I rather be innocent in a cruel world to avoid all difficulties and wicked looks? Oh, I have doubts, I have such doubts.

Lon Larson

After just an hour with Lon Larson, a cancer patient survivor, I realized that maybe blogging everyday and a few homework assignments don't exactly lead up to a very stressful lifestyle that I thought I had. What I thought would be a typical speech about living life to the fullest turned into an emotional story about how one man with circumstances far worse than those that I seem to suffer forms every minute of his life with the best possible attitude he can create. One note that he mentioned was that he was "the luckiest man alive". I second guessed myself when I heard him speak about this. How could a man given 3-6 months to live consider himself to be so lucky? As Lon gave me chills with his story and attitude and optimistic lifestyle, I realized that I can wake up every day and not only be thankful for those whom I grace and grace me. It is imperative to realize that someone can make a meaningful impression on your life, as well as you on them. It is difficult to put into words what Lon Larson's story did for me, for it is mostly emotionally inspiring. Although he said that he does not consider himself a motivational speaker, I feel that he is nothing short of one. I wish the best for Lon Larson, and hope he continues to live the greatest lifestyle for however long it may be for him.

The long awaited one...

Considering my blog postings have gathered a month's long dust, I presume it to be necessary that I reflect upon the past month, as succinct as possible.

As half of the class adventured on the concept/meaning of "The Sparrow" with me, we decided to conclude upon the idea of faith. However, this only led us to a struggle in grasping the concept of faith. In broad terms, faith is to believe or to have trust in an uncertain entity. Some would say that faith can dictate a sufficient and meaningful life because you can give all your trust and hope into it, which is fufilling in itself. In "The Sparrow", Emilio had faith in the crew that was sent to space with him. He also had a faith in God that would aid his trip. After coming home with his faith shattered at the death of his friends, Emilio was forced to reconstruct his beliefs again to same strength they were at pre-trip. This idea of losing trust due to unfortunate events is evident in modern day among all christians, catholics, jews, muslims, athiests, agnostics, etc. Everyone has moments that tests their true beliefs. It seems to be, however, it is about how you can put things in perspective after a moment of betrayl even if the situation does not change.

In the "Grand Inquisitor", I found the ideas between Ivan and Zossima to not be completely similar but radically different. Ivan spoke of the Grand Inquistor's ideas on freedom and happiness; the two do not come together. Zossima then contrasts freedom and isolation. These men speak in terms of religion, but a perspective beyond religion can be formed. Human nature is described in the book. It is human nature to desire and cherish the freedom we are given, but in its simplest terms, it is not what we want. To be free, we are independent from others, we are independent from forced decisions, and independent from happiness. Although we may search and plead for freedom, we would rather want decisions to be made for us and someone to follow. However, when Ivan approaches the prisoner, Jesus, he condemns him for manipulating the people into thinking they were free, when really they were following him only because it is what their natural needs inclined for. However, I feel that if people are truly content with following another and feel free, then why detest it? Sometimes I want someone to follow, it shows me there is a path for me. Although there are also times of indepence that strike in me and I want to be a nonconformist. To really evaluate the way I have lived in this sense in the past 18 years is difficult, even frustrating. I do not want to be happy yet be known as a follower at the same time. I want to be a leader, is this what Ivan is suggesting? Hard to tell.

"Doubt: A parable" is very thought provoking and leads to uncertainty, hence the "doubt". First, 'a parable' means a short story or an analogy. The play is concise, thus leads to a vast amount of uncertainty and questions. I like that the play brings several characters into the scenes, yet all of them seem to have doubt in some way. My evidence for this is Father Flynn temporarily has doubt in Sister James. Sister James doubts Father Flynn. Sister Aloysius doubts Father Flynn as well as Sister James. Mrs. Muller doubts the situation Sister Aloysius is presenting to her. Yet with this entity of doubt, no one seems to inevitably change. Although Father Flynn moves to another parish, he never confesses anything, leaving us and the rest to further doubt. I certainly have uncertainties in my life, but always seem to overlook them, as I find them a waste of time. I consider doubt to be a confusing topic for it is inevitable, yet never ending!

I feel as if I am becoming flustered and irritated by the fact that I have just embarked on more than my share of confusing intellectual topics for one hour. Perhaps I will start to blog more frequently to avoid this circumstance again.