CRG180MARCH 14, 2019 AT 12:10 AMYOUR COMMENT IS AWAITING MODERATION.
“If both of these statements are true, cursory reflection seems to demand the presence of a paradox…”
The paradox that you have found is humanity seeking meaning in a meaningless world. You then determine that Camus’ purpose in the writing is to fix such a paradox but I have not found this to be the case. This paradox is where Camus’ absurdity lies, ” For Camus, on the other hand, absurdity is not a property of existence as such,
but is an essential feature of our relationship with the world,” (SE). I interpreted the purpose of the project to be how one should live because of such a paradox, not an attempt to resolve it. Word Count: 115
crg180March 13, 2019 at 11:38 pmYour comment is awaiting moderation.
“I am fond of the idea that one thing can both torture you and free you.”
I am quite fond of the power Camus ascribes to consciousness as well, though I would interpret the consciousness as the freedom itself. Sisyphus’ awareness of his state grants him to choose whichever path he deems most worthy-that is the freedom. He may despair over his punishment, laugh at it, curse it, or embrace it. His conclusion “makes of fate a human matter, which must be settled among men,” (Myth of Sisyphus). It is through consciousness that Sisyphus may win, lose, or decide not to play the game anymore. Word Count: 105
crg180May 28, 2019 at 6:20 pmYour comment is awaiting moderation.
I appreciate your recognition that not all thoughts of shame will deter actions. Perhaps in those cases, the continuance of shameful actions is promoted by the gaze of the other through a form of submission. Enough others have viewed the person and shamed them to the point that they believe they must uphold those actions to maintain the others’ opinions and prolong their identity. Now the person is convinced that they must be thought of as shameful or lose part of their self. I do not know if this can account for all shameful acts being continued but is certainly a potential power of shame that may have been over looked by Sartre (within the small excerpt we read).
I may be wrong, but I do not recall him discussing the internalized gaze of the Other, another power I think should be mentioned. You mentioned abstaining from vulgar behavior when someone was nearby but would have engaged had no one been around. I think the power of shame can go further where one begins to cease engaging in certain behaviors despite there being no viewer. I know of times when I was alone but did not perform certain actions because I thought there was the possibility of being watched or even just thought of what a hypothetical person’s reaction would be if they had seen. Word Count: 225
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
As a philosopher, I stand by my right to ask why! Camus asserts after some arguing that Sisyphus is happy but we should not accept this as fact. Our job is determine whether his conclusion can really be derived from the premises. It is better to test him: if he is wrong, then we can know where work is needed to be done, if he is right, then we have greater confidence after the test.
“The Rock itself is Sisyphus’ mind.” I was wondering if you could expand on this. It’s an interesting thought and I would like to hear more. Word Count: 101
First, the statement, “While these sentimental contradictions are not, strictly speaking, logical contradictions, they are frequently regarded that way by us or presented in that way to us, and so, for the purpose of this investigation, I will consider them as having equivalent meaning,” is problematic. I do not find it right to consider two things the same when they are not for the sake of argument and because people mistake them for being the same. If the goal was to support Nietzsche through proving an example of an actualized logical contradiction, then I have doubts about the success of the project. I think three errors are being committed: reification, generalization, and use of inadequate tools.
The statement, “The United States is a force of evil,” implies that the United States exists as a singular entity/directive/force. In your writing, you have previously stated you were referring to the government so the statement should be changed to “The United States government is a force of evil,” reducing what would normally be thought of as the United States to a small though admittedly important aspect. If we are only examining the government, then there is still a considerable amount of reduction taking place. As of 2019, the federal government employs about 2 million full-time employees, (Governing, 2019). This count does not include postal-workers, contractors, grant employees, civilian employees in the army and navy, nor active-duty military. The count would also not provide an accurate representation because it treats the government as an organization independent of outside influence, not including lobbyists, partisan organizations, interest groups, civilian engagement, corporate entities to name a few. As of 2012, there were 89, 004 local governments across the United States, the level of government that arguably has more impact on a person’s daily life (Census, 2012). I doubt each of these governments will employ the same kind of people across the board, producing a great deal of variety in available programs, hindrances, benefits, and policy priorities depending on where you live. Besides what currently exists, this government being referred to sits on top of a couple hundred years of legislation, court rulings, executive orders, lawmakers, judges, presidents, and all the people and decisions in between that made those actions possible. That’s a significant history and number of people to (unfairly) personify into a singular being.
If this was not the intent and that you meant by examining the events, people, and effects of the United States government, there was a calculation of an overall net negative, then proving a logical contradiction still seems unsuccessful. Under this assumption, a calculation of that scale would be an impressive feat and if performed, would make finding a logical contradiction impossible. A person could not look upon a series of numbers, add them together, and determine the sum to be negative then go back and perform the calculation in the same way with the same numbers and find it to be positive; this is what Aristotle meant by a logical contradiction. If you were to examine the United States using set criteria and set amount of information, I do not think you would agree that you could run the same test twice and come up with opposite results. Should it be considered a logical contradiction that some people benefit in some ways in particular circumstances and be hindered in other ways? Waking up late allowed me to sleep longer which was nice but made me late for school. There is no contradiction present. You benefited and lived a decent life based on the existing institutions in your particular circumstances but found barriers to different (not the same) opportunities. One does not preclude the other. A logical contradiction would have been that a particular entity at the same point in time and space gave you food and prevented you from acquiring the same food that was given.
I do no think the law of non-contradiction has been successfully disproved.
As another note, I would dissuade the use of propositional logic for this kind of project. It is incredibly limited in its use and cannot accurately account for the complexity of circumstances and language. There is a reason we developed predicate logic and various modal logics. Propositional logic is not capable of showing subject-predicate relationships, variable descriptors, necessity versus sufficiency, or differences in time, all of which are necessary for this task. Word Count: 729
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
“The angry German” Despite these being words on a page, I cannot help imagining as extremely animated.
You feel stuck having learned that you cannot attain truth. The lesson Nietzsche is trying to teach is not to be so insistent on acquiring truth. Language shapes our thinking but all language is a metaphor, making it fiction rather than fact. I can’t think of a person who does not enjoy fiction so embrace it! With life as fiction, you are a storyteller. Once you realize that you can only tell fiction, then you gain unrestrained creative potential. Word Count: 96
crg180says:May 28, 2019 at 2:09 am
I’m not sure I’m finding much disagreement. I fully agree that vengeance can be found pleasurable. When Sisyphus says, “Woe is me” that is not scorn but sorrow. Scorn is when he looks upon the gods and his punishment with contempt and laughs, looking down upon them and not find the punishment to be worthy of himself. The gods are beneath him. That feeling is where pleasure can be derived. I think the disagreement is found in our conceptions of happiness because I do not equate happiness with pleasure. When I am happy, it feels like a state very distinct from pleasure derived from malicious thoughts towards another. This distinction is why I brought up intoxicants. I have had my fair share of scorn (and intoxicants!) and there is pleasure to be found but prolonged scorn begins to wear on person and makes one sick, in a manner of speaking. Camus finds Sisyphus’ victory through scorn but I do not believe it leads immediately to happiness. Word Count 166
crg180says:May 28, 2019 at 2:00 am
Harm will come to the traveler but that is to be expected. Living as a traveler is intended to grant them an exploration the full range of human experience. Harm should come and the traveler should embrace it like the rest of their journey. The unpleasantness of the trip comes from wanting something to be different than it is. However, I do not encourage living as a traveler for the duration of one’s life. If someone finds something they really enjoy, settle down for awhile. It would be a disappointment travel for a long time and find nothing that makes you want to stick around. I think everyone at some point wants to belong and make something their’s. The traveler that never stops will never have an end to their story (except dying of course). Word Count: 135
The Unmoved Movie 