So who is Meursault? Is he really a Stranger...
Is anyone really a stranger on this earth?
Is a stranger a person who just lurks around corners and feels they are in a world all on their own?
This blog post is just well, me thinking out loud, it is not very organized, I asked a few too many questions but it’s supposed to be honest…
When I read the book, I don't know how to feel, should I be excited to keep reading on, bored because his tone is unenthusiastic?
He seems very hard to get, he is very blah, and does not really seem to care about much. In the beginning of the book he talks about his mother’s death, he seems extremely dis attached and ok with the whole situation, but is he really trying to hide emotions that are much deeper, is his attitude his security blanket. I think he feels a tremendous amount of guilt because he was not able to financially support the care needed for his mother. He handed over complete care of his mother to other people; all he received in return was a call from the home with dreaded news that his mother had passed. I get the sense that he may wish that he could have changed many of the decisions he made.
His mood through out the book seems to change here and there ever so slightly, when it comes to his emotions he hides them, but when he talks about experiences with other people he is always able to explain very well what is going on with them. He does not seem to have the best sense of self. When he talks about his neighbor’s dog it is hard to tell if he feels bad for the abuse the dog takes of if he just sees it as part of life and just their “daily routine”. Why is he the way he is, I wish that we would have had some more insight and information on his life before the book started.
From reading the back of the book and reading a few more chapters I sense that a murder will happen, I am very curious to see how a personality like Mersault will handle that. Does he have anything to do with it?
Just a few thoughts!
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Response to part III
Are we able to turn any situation into a happy one? Banach talks about Sisyphus a young man sentenced to a life time punishment of rolling a huge rock up and down a hill forever, till the say he dies, he makes the point that would most people really be able to see any good out of that.
Albert Camus brought up the idea that because we can give our own lives value we can achieve happiness at almost any time in any situation. How true is that? Most people i know are not that selfless that they would give up the life they live now to roll a rock up the hill and make the best out of that. Personally i would not accept that as a fair punishment, i would do anything in my power to change the nature of my situation and rebel. "our life is a series of meaningless actions culminating in death, with no possibility of external justification." why he he comparing life with death?
I have so many thoughts reading this part if the lecture that my writing may seem a little all over the place, the questions he poses just keep me thinking and make me ask more. "what are we rebelling against? There must be more to the extistialist conception of happiness that this..." What sense does it really make to rebel against something that is non existent? I'm convinced there is more to it! In order to find ultimate happiness we must search for values within one self! Once you find your value no one take it away from you no matter what!
This part of the lecture leaves me to ponder and wonder what the point of everything he said was! all he really did at the end was argue and contradict it. "to say one must act authentically is to say that one must act in a way that ignores the differences between oneself and other people." At first he was trying to say that we must get rid of everything external to be happy but now he states that we must think of others before ourself! For one person to be free all must be free!
If our freedom is restricted are we really free?
:/
Albert Camus brought up the idea that because we can give our own lives value we can achieve happiness at almost any time in any situation. How true is that? Most people i know are not that selfless that they would give up the life they live now to roll a rock up the hill and make the best out of that. Personally i would not accept that as a fair punishment, i would do anything in my power to change the nature of my situation and rebel. "our life is a series of meaningless actions culminating in death, with no possibility of external justification." why he he comparing life with death?
I have so many thoughts reading this part if the lecture that my writing may seem a little all over the place, the questions he poses just keep me thinking and make me ask more. "what are we rebelling against? There must be more to the extistialist conception of happiness that this..." What sense does it really make to rebel against something that is non existent? I'm convinced there is more to it! In order to find ultimate happiness we must search for values within one self! Once you find your value no one take it away from you no matter what!
This part of the lecture leaves me to ponder and wonder what the point of everything he said was! all he really did at the end was argue and contradict it. "to say one must act authentically is to say that one must act in a way that ignores the differences between oneself and other people." At first he was trying to say that we must get rid of everything external to be happy but now he states that we must think of others before ourself! For one person to be free all must be free!
If our freedom is restricted are we really free?
:/
Monday, September 28, 2009
COMMENT TO IMANI:
Hey Imani,
first off i really enjoyed reading your blog on part two of Banach's lecture, you brought up very interesting points and i liked how you supported them with direct quotes from the reading. In your first paragraph i thought your interpretation on the quote was spot on, no one will ever be able to help us as well as we can help our self, sure, other people can teach us but we are the only ones who can keep hold on to the knowledge.
You fight back in your blog which i have not seen much, it is a nice change in pace. I agree with your point as well and it is probably something i would have never thought of on my own. We do take after the people who are closest to us, many of us take after out moms and dads. If you are brought up a certain way that is what you known best. Using an example was a great idea to see how your idea and theory directly affects you.
People do tend to keep there guards up when there emotional well being is at stake. But do you think that peoples emotions and convictions blind them completely or does it depend on the person?
Just a question to keep you thinking!
Really good job :)
first off i really enjoyed reading your blog on part two of Banach's lecture, you brought up very interesting points and i liked how you supported them with direct quotes from the reading. In your first paragraph i thought your interpretation on the quote was spot on, no one will ever be able to help us as well as we can help our self, sure, other people can teach us but we are the only ones who can keep hold on to the knowledge.
You fight back in your blog which i have not seen much, it is a nice change in pace. I agree with your point as well and it is probably something i would have never thought of on my own. We do take after the people who are closest to us, many of us take after out moms and dads. If you are brought up a certain way that is what you known best. Using an example was a great idea to see how your idea and theory directly affects you.
People do tend to keep there guards up when there emotional well being is at stake. But do you think that peoples emotions and convictions blind them completely or does it depend on the person?
Just a question to keep you thinking!
Really good job :)
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
HW 3: BLOG POST #2 Response to part 2 of Banch's lecture
I often think about what my purpose is on the world...
Was everyone born with certain things they excel at and other things they fall behind in?
In part 2 of Banch's lecture he brings up a new idea that "existence precedes essence" First off lets take a minute to define the two, in class we defined our existence as the live we lived, playing a significant role in life, ultimately all things physical in the universe, just the privilege of being ALIVE! Essence seemed to be thought of as more of a spiritual or emotional plane, the idea that your essence is your spirit, the overall vibe you give off to the people you surround your self with.
I found it fascinating how Banch broke down how he felt our sense of self was developed "we exist and then we create our nature, our essence, who we are. Nobody had as idea about who we are or what we're supposed to be like before we were created." In other words we are born into our bodies, then it is up to us to decide what we do with that. The only person that will ever truly know you is you, we are responsible for creating ourselves. Every human on this earth is an individual, we are all different and you will never truly know someone as well as you know your self. People always use the expression "great minds think alike" but they never say "great minds think the same".
We set ourselves up for what we want to believe, but ultimately we can do anything we want with our lives, which if you think about it is a very scary thought. Someone can make a decision within seconds that could change there life forever, good or bad. Most of us have a hard time with the concept of accepting responsibility, we are constantly coming up with excuses for our actions. Can the mind really take over the body? We have no way of knowing what's to come in life we can only anticipate it.
Why are we never able to see ourselves the way other do? "we feel a tension looking in the mirror wondering how the person in the glass can be ME of I am standing out here looking at it; so the self feels a tension between identifying itself with mind's eye behind the screen" Over time we can develope internal beauty but its not up to us to design out physical apperance.
These are just a few of my thoughts.....
Im sure there will be more, lots more to come! :)
Was everyone born with certain things they excel at and other things they fall behind in?
In part 2 of Banch's lecture he brings up a new idea that "existence precedes essence" First off lets take a minute to define the two, in class we defined our existence as the live we lived, playing a significant role in life, ultimately all things physical in the universe, just the privilege of being ALIVE! Essence seemed to be thought of as more of a spiritual or emotional plane, the idea that your essence is your spirit, the overall vibe you give off to the people you surround your self with.
I found it fascinating how Banch broke down how he felt our sense of self was developed "we exist and then we create our nature, our essence, who we are. Nobody had as idea about who we are or what we're supposed to be like before we were created." In other words we are born into our bodies, then it is up to us to decide what we do with that. The only person that will ever truly know you is you, we are responsible for creating ourselves. Every human on this earth is an individual, we are all different and you will never truly know someone as well as you know your self. People always use the expression "great minds think alike" but they never say "great minds think the same".
We set ourselves up for what we want to believe, but ultimately we can do anything we want with our lives, which if you think about it is a very scary thought. Someone can make a decision within seconds that could change there life forever, good or bad. Most of us have a hard time with the concept of accepting responsibility, we are constantly coming up with excuses for our actions. Can the mind really take over the body? We have no way of knowing what's to come in life we can only anticipate it.
Why are we never able to see ourselves the way other do? "we feel a tension looking in the mirror wondering how the person in the glass can be ME of I am standing out here looking at it; so the self feels a tension between identifying itself with mind's eye behind the screen" Over time we can develope internal beauty but its not up to us to design out physical apperance.
These are just a few of my thoughts.....
Im sure there will be more, lots more to come! :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
