Please read the text and then post an insightful question and an intriguing comment. Be specific in respect to what you are referring to. Then, I'd like you to respond to what someone else has posted on the blog. If nobody has posted yet, log back on later and do so.
Due: Wednesday, 12.12 (before class)
Due: Wednesday, 12.12 (before class)
(I don't this this is insightful but....)
ReplyDelete“Our housekeeping is mendicant, our arts, our occupations, our marriages, our religion we have not chosen, but society has chosen for us. We are parlor soldiers. We shun the rugged battle of fate, where strength is born” (12). Do you agree that society is really restricting our abilities to live as individuals? Why or why not?
(AND I don't think this is intriguing but....)
The idea of transcendentalism really reminds me of Buddhism. Although Buddhism does not stress individuality as much, both Buddism and transcendentalism put a lot of stress on valuing nature. Also, in order to obtain enlightenment, Buddhism states that a human being must leave all connections to the world, and become segregated. Transcendentalists also believe that it is important for a person to separate from other human beings in order to become independent. Though both beliefs come from totally different places around the world, I think that it's very interesting how much they are similar.
Where are the other comments?! (shiku... shiku...)
I don't necessary agree that the society is restricting our abilities to live as an individual. But if we think realistically, I think that the society is restricting life for some people. For example in Japan, college students are having a hard time in job hunting because some companies don't offer for new workers, because the company have financial issues. It means that the company's issues are falling upon innocent people. So I agree that society is restring people's life, in an indirect way.
DeleteHey Zen~
DeleteI don't think that society is restricting our abilities to live as individuals, because I think with out society we wouldn't have structure
and without structure we lack guidance to live healthy lives.
Iphones are the trend in many countries, and they are developing all the time.
ReplyDeleteDo you believe that iphones are the "inventions of each period and only its costume and do not invigorate men?"
I think that iphones can be viewed as only a 'costume', since the function changes all the time. But since the functions changes all the time, it could be viewed as an invention which holds the society for a long period of time. And I also think it invigorates people because it was a whole new technology thing when it first came out. It gave the world a surprise how we were able to use the internet, applications, etc. with a touch function. These inventions can lead to a higher technology product in the future, which can lead to a change of society.
I think that Iphones are awesome (boohoo that I don't have one), but sometimes I think that it was not a necessary invention. It makes everything easier, but a human being can survive without an iphone (an example being myself). They become more high tech every year, but I think most of it is just design. Therefore, I think I do agree that Iphones are pretty much only costume.
Delete(by the way, were we supposed to connect our intriguing comments with our question?? Because I didn't...)
Isabel's blog post:
ReplyDeleteIdea:
According to Emerson, people’s muses or ideas that come with being in solitude “grow faint and inaudible as we enter the world”. He even suggests that the ideas that come with solitude will scare society if they are shown. I interpreted that Emerson is saying that people are afraid of what they don’t understand.
Question:
Is society the measure of all things, or is the individual? It’s obvious what Emerson argues, but what do you think? Are even the most individual of people swayed or influenced by society?
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
ReplyDeleteIf no one conformed to society to an extent, then wouldn't all structure crumble?
As important as having an opinion and living by it is, many fall into extreme thought and radical change, if we all were to only live by our own thought, wouldn't we become narrow minded, selfish, chaotic?
I agree with your question, I was thinking the same thing. If someone was solely reliant on him/her self, that person would have a very narrow view of the world. When faced with a problem, they would not have others experiences and outside knowledge to pull from and this could inhibit society more that it may help it.
DeleteIdea:
ReplyDeleteThere's a part on page 10-11 that says: "But we are a mob.. We must go alone. I like the silent church before the service begins, better than any preaching" (Emerson).
I thought that this metaphor was very intriguing, since I had thought that transcendentalists prefer to stay away from things such as the idea of religion. But I think that his distaste is shown through the part where he says that a silent church is better than one with a sermon taking place.
Question:
There's another quote on page 14 that says: "He who travels to be amused, or to get somewhat which he does not carry, travels away from himself, and grows old even in youth among old things. In Thebes, in Palmyra, his will and mind have become old and dilapidated as they. He carries ruins to ruins" (Emerson).
Even if the ruins were to be isolated and away from modern society, would it not be enough for a transcendentalist to be at peace, if a piece of ancient society is amidst them? How secluded to they need to be?
Response:
I thought that Teal's thought was interesting. Even though we tend to be annoyed when others disagree with us, it would be even more chaotic if we were all only focused on what each of us thought was right. A little balance goes a long way, even though many seek to change the minds of others, or continuously preach their ways on extreme levels.
Ah, yes to your idea part. He also talks about church and preachers at the bottom of page 4. He uses the preacher as an example of conformity. Because the preacher is predictable. He says "Do i not know beforehand that not possibly can he say a new and spontaneous word?". So with the quote you mentioned and this one, we could connect them with the idea that mundanity and predictability is his idea of conformity.
Delete(I forgot to post my intriguing comment!)
ReplyDeleteI thought the idea of fear in self-reliance was something that I could sympathize. It mentioned how each individual must be their selves, and how they can't be disturbed by temptation. But many people are afraid of other people's eyes, so we wait for somebody to change the society. And I thought this is like expressing an idea in class. I am really bad at expressing my own thoughts in class. I understand that we must say our own feelings, but I am afraid of stating my thought, so I state an idea that is similar to other people's. I really thought self-reliance is an important key to life, because if we lose the opportunity to express our ideas, the society will never be the way we want.
Observation:
ReplyDeleteThe author desires self-reliance and trusting ourselves with insight/intuition whenever making decisions. He thinks “society never advances” (15) and that we shouldn’t conform with the norms of society. Though I think that is important to a degree, his teachings and advice could aggravate political conflicts at the same time. For example, racial and sexual discrimination. Because many people’s insights were that “men are superior”, women didn’t even have right to vote or own property. Because of white men’s intuition of “blacks are inferior”, slavery and segregation occurred. It’s what made me think after I read this text, hope it was insightful.
Question: I feel like this piece of text has a distinct writing style, having frequent repetitions, laconic diction and syntax, and allusions to historically famous figures. What I find the most interesting is the first paragraph on page one, because it consists of three different point of views: first, second, and then third. What effect might this shift in point of view have on the readers? Does it make the writing stronger or weaker?
Idea:
ReplyDeleteSince Emerson says that society does not define a person, they define them-self individually, it reminds me of the way that social Media and awareness groups have blamed reliance on society for people's self image and that they need to focus on themselves because that is what truly defines them.
Question:
If people only rely on themselves, couldn't they have a very small view of the world because they can only live one life? Wouldn't things like reading or absorbing from others benefit, such as the reading announcement at assembly today?
Like Jonathan Edwards, I felt that this piece of writing was quite repetitive, although I felt I could somewhat tolerate it, since I find the topic interesting; I agree that one shouldn't give into conformity.
ReplyDeleteOne quote that I saw as "Travelling is a fool's paradise"(14). Doesn't this contradict a part of transcendentalism? I thought travelling away was a part of transcendentalism...
Doesn't putting a label to this philosophy as "transcendentalism" contradict transcendentalism itself? Being a transcendentalist means that you are leaning in on the crowd of the transcendentalists, therefore not being original, right?
nice point claudio...
DeleteIdea: "Society never advances... For every thing that is given something is take. Society acquires new arts and loses old instincts" (15). Emerson expresses strongly that society does not define who you are as a person since, "every body in society reminds us of somewhat else, or of some other person". Society and self-reliance are two main themes in this text, but they are contradicting one another.
ReplyDeleteQuestion: How does one know where to place yourself in society based on Emerson's text, and what exactly is society to him?
Response: Since Isabel's question was quite similar to mine, I could argue that society shapes on another, but doesn't necessarily make them who they are. "Every great man is a unique". Being influenced by society would be common, but not being influenced by society would make a man unique, however I think it's hard not to be swayed by society when you're a part of the society yourself. I suppose if you're living in the woods by yourself, that will make you an ultimate great unique man. But I'm not quite sure how this whole notion of society works based on Emerson.
response: I thought Sarah’s idea was intriguing. Society’s norms could often be judgmental and labels people into groups. I thought self esteem is highly dependent on this too, like physical appearance. As an example, recent social media considers “skinny” as beautiful, where if you were to isolate yourself from civilization, your perceptions would probably change.
ReplyDeleteIdea:
ReplyDeleteThis reading hints on how the growth in age is related to one's growth of fear and shame. All men traps himself in his own consciousness for they are too afraid of mistakes and innovations (2). That is one of the genuine causes of the society without amelioration (15). As everyone grow up, they start to learn to adapt to society which, I guess, could be called self-reliance since you are learning how to live in a society that might not welcome you in anyway. However, that social education limits one's conscious in being one's selves due to one's desperate need and want to be accepted and to fit in the surroundings. They start to follow the others when the answers aren't anywhere else but within them.
Question:
In terms of self-reliance, would it be better to adapt to the society one lives in or, as explains the text, one should live by one's own morals and values?
Response:
I was really interested in Claudio's response, though it still confuses me a little.. But, I do understand there is a paradox in the idea that this text is trying to convey. Why emphasizing so much on being independent when that is also one's choice and it is not something that can be directed in such ways by a set of rules? Or, if you are talking about self-reliance and unbiased originality, why make the reader read 18 pages of text which obviously is going to create many text-relied opinions.
My paper is demolished with excited scribbles. Really enjoyed this piece.
ReplyDeleteI would really like to draw attention to a couple of paragraphs in particular. The first on i on page 9. It starts with "man is timid and apologetic...he dares not say "i Think" "i am" but quotes some saint or sage". He then goes on to craft an analogy with roses, expressing, on the surface, a common idea of living in the present. But the quote that i felt really made this stick out was "It's nature is satisfied and it satisfies nature in all moments alike". This idea is further revealed on page 10 by mentioning "the self sufficing and therefore self-relying soul". I found this idea very appealing and insightful. As in, resisting the pressures of the moment and resisting getting caught up in that moment. Because, it is due to that pressure that we lose the simple satisfaction of existing. I'm not sure if any of that made sense. but whatever.
Side note: second paragraph on page 11 is incredible.
really glad you enjoyed this scott. i don't think we had the time to do the piece justice. it would be great if you chose to use this piece for your final assessment for this unit.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIdea:
ReplyDeleteSince we were talking about transcendentalism, I found a quote related to what Emerson had stated, "envy is ignorance."(1) In other words, you have to be yourself rather than listening to one's societies. A transcendentalists like Emerson believes that trusting yourself and being an individual are true geniuses or real successful people. He is saying that the idea of envying someone indicates a desire to be in that situation of being "envied," which basically states that the situation you want to be in is ignorance.
Q:
Individualism is very important and I think we should all promote one's own unique qualities but sometimes "envying" someone or something should play a minor role because some people might not get the motivation of becoming successful yet reaching happiness. This is my opinion but what do you think?
Re to Sarah:
This one is really hard to argue with because being either independent or dependent both have cons and pros. For example, when it comes to individual sports, creating your own self is really important because uniqueness is one of the aspects of overcoming yourself. However, sometimes relying on other players and coaches are also beneficial. I know Emerson is very passionate talking about individuality and I agree with his thoughts but like...really? I thought it was just too much.
Observation:
ReplyDeleteI think this reading fits perfectly to the image of "teenagers". We are all too afraid to make mistakes, even with don't want to admit it, and too absorbed in society and what people think that our own perception from deep inside are always pushed out. There's a quote " Society everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its member" ( 3). Which i feel is quite true, as we enter the world our real thoughts becomes inaudible, and all that's left to hear is what society has to say about us, we lose ourselves as we grow up.
Another quote that I really like , " I appeal from your customs. I must be myself. I cannot break myself and longer for you, or you. If you can love me for what I am, we shall be the happier. If you snot , I will still seek to deserve you should. I will not hide my taste or aversions" . If only I can think like this one day. (sigh)
Response:
I would agree with Milan, that the test brings up two main themes that are contradicting to each other. In the beginning Emerson repeats over and over how a person is too afraid to show the true self. We lack self-reliance. He teaches how to step out how to be independent , but then late on explains that society has nothing to do with who we are as a person which contradicts what he previously says about how society affects and shapes people.
This piece reminded me a lot of the novel Anthem by Ayn Rand. It has certain parts to it that are distinctly Libertarian and I was pleasantly surprised to see the connection.
ReplyDeleteOne interesting quote I found was on page 4 1st paragraph, "I cannot consent to pay for a privilege where I have intrinsic right." Yes! So true. And it's funny too because this was written god knows when and society today is still struggling with that concept.
I also found another one on page 5 3rd paragraph, "The other terror that scares us from self trust is our consistency". I would have to concur because the only thing stopping humanity from progressing forwards is tradition. We fail to realize certain benefits in an unorthodox method because our past attempts have either failed or we are too scared of failure.
I agree with Scott's mentioning to page 9 about men being timid and apologetic. This is where I started to pick up the Ayn Rand banners waving all around. In Anthem the protagonist begins his narrative saying only "we" instead of "I". But towards the end he sees the light and begins to recognize his identity as a singular individual, instead of a component in a group.