THE SHIVER OF BEAUTY

I think that if something is beautiful, it is beautiful. If you read this you would say that it is dumb to say that, because it is obvious that if someting is beautiful, it is beautiful. I will explain the sense of this.
I don't agree at all with Plato. Savater wrote that Plato thinks that artists find ways to produce pleasure, and that the people that control pleasure have power over the eductacion of the people, that is to say that artists guide a bad education for the people because they teach what should not be taught, or in a wrong way.
I think Plato is crazy. An artist is not a person who is trying to teach other people the way reality should or should not be, the artist is that, an artist. I think Plato should think more about the relation of the piece of art with the person who sees it, and not in the artist. I think people is free to think what they want, and also people is free to show what they want, it is our decision to accept it or not.
I think that something beautiful is something that produces a pleasure in people, that could have more purposes besides of pleasing. I think something beautiful is that which you like to see, hear or touch and that thing you find unique.

FREEDOM IN ACTION

I think freedom is misunderstood with libertinism. My friends say they want to do whatever they want in the place and moment they want. When my friends do not have a permission from their parents to go out a saturday night or something like that, is when they say that their parents give them no freedom, they say that if they were free they would do many more things they can not do right now.
I think that is not freedom, I think that is libertinism because if a person wants to do whatever he wants but his parents are the people who give him shelter clothes money and many more things, then they have this kind of control over your possibilities in economy, permissions and other things.

In here I thik they do have freedom. Opposite to what they say, they have the freedom to think what they want to think, they have the freedom to do whatever they want but if they want to come back to their houses or do not get their parents angry at them, then they should see that there are consequences or responsibilities.

Freedom is something you have, is not something that a person can totally take away from you. People can keep you in a locked room, but you are free to think what you want, you can be a person but be free to wish to be a better person and you can be mentally abused but you are free to run away, just that there will be consequences, you decide what you think is better.

------THE WORLD AND ITS OUTSKIRTS------

Think it like this:
You live in the city, you go to work every day at that business building. You wake up in the morning, you see your watch you take a shower you buy burritos in the street on your way to work, you do paper work, you finish the day tired, you go home sleep and wake up the next day to continue the rutine. On saturdays you go to the bar with your friends, you drink a beer and on sunday you rest and call your relatives by phone.
That is an example of the world that many people live in this moment. They do not go farther than what they live, they stay the same and one day they die like everybody else. They did not look beyond the city, they did not adventure themselves into the forest that was 10 km from the city, they did not wake up every morning and see the sky and the sun.

I try to say that people live their lives in a small world and they are good with it. I think people find it tiring to go out and see what is out there, because they feel good with what they have, they feel they do not need anything more and because of that like to stay in the middle of walls contructed by them. Anyways, one day a tsunami is going to hit those walls, and when that happens, they will start to see what else is out there, when everything falls down people have to find a way to survive.

THE SYMBOLIC ANIMAL

Every day I see disasters on the TV, every day I see images of people in the world who is having difficulties to survive, every day many people die of hunger, sicknesses and others by violence.
There is something wrong with this world that people are dying. But I also see people that help, people that travel long distances to give water to those who need it, or people that make protests to stop violence, or people who discover new medications for sick people.

I don't believe a man can change to whatever he wants, dude we are not Mystic of x-men or Superman. I think it is wrong interpreted when people say they can do whatever, or they can control nature because that is what a man does. I think it is more than speaking of a man, I think tha Sophocles or Savater wanted to tell us that when people are unified they can do whatever they want because maybe an ability that one has, the other does not have and what this man needs the other one has, that is the way man can change and adapt himself, only when we live together, when we share our abilities with others and when we search for the good of everyone and not of ourselves. We can be superhumanity but we can not be a one superman, I think that is the best way the world would work, when people forget that they live for themselves and start to see that they live with other people.

I INSIDE I OUTSIDE

In this book I found many beliefs I do not agree at all. One idea is that we are solipsists, that the only self that exists in the world is yourself. I think it is very selfish to think that you are the only real thing in this world, it is easy to conclude that everything is false except you. Another idea is that we are brains in containers and that we are controlled by marcians that are playing with us. I do not think that I am the only self in the world full of humans and I do not think I am an experiment, what I think is that we are who we are and nothing else, but every time people is finding out these rare ideas because they have nothing to do in their lives.

I is what I am, all those things that complement one with another and that together complete my own I. I think the word I is everything that I have in three aspects: in my physical body, in my mental world and in my spiritual beliefs. It is all together, I believe everything is part o the other, I am not a body without my mental world for example. I think people can fid it difficult to say what they really are but I think all of us know what we are, and sometimes we know more than what we can tell or than what we are permitted to tell.

THE TRUTHS OF REASON

I don't know the way that most of the people evaluate if something is truer than other thing or if something is false because all the people has the right to choose what they want to believe and the reason they have to do that, but I know the way I evaluate. I hear or see the things given to me, then I analyze the whole point of it and I deduct if something is credible or not.

After reading this chapter I came to think that it can be that I am wrong or not wrong but using only a few ways to know if something is true.The chapter made me think that all what I thought was real is not real at all. Now I think everything is conventional because in the book Savater wrote something that is very logic, he wrote hat for example information changes because people discover new things.
I agree with Savater because he wrote that there is not an absolute true and I also think that, but I also think that there are three types of truths: truths that are not absolut but really big and strong enough to battle illusions, truths that help people to move on on their lives and truths about yourself that you are the only person who know them. Maybe it is not right to let yourself us only one of those truths but when you mix them up then you have a really good combination of truths that help your reasoning in addition to the information or experiences you have.

LET US BEGIN WITH DEATH T-H-E-A-D DEATH

Death is not negotiable. Everyone in this world is going to die, our ancestors died and their ancestors died too. We ourselves are not that far away from death since the moment we were born.

In my personal life I don't think about death a lot, I care more about living all what I can and I try not to spend a huge amount of time thinking of the end of things in general. I think people should live like this because it is not worthy to let yourself think too much about death and lose the time you have to live. We do not know anything about death, we only know that when we stop living that is when we are death. I don't know if I agree with the religions that are always giving this story of life after death because is not something you can really trust. And I also think you should not spend your entire life in a kind of dedication for the next life, I think it is ridiculous.

I agree with Epicurus because he is very right. People should not be afraid of death because it is ridiculous that you fear something that you can't experience in your life. Come on people be real, there is no point to be afraid because you do not know if it hurts, if it doesnt, if it is good, if it is bad. Live your life while you still have it becaus one day in the moment you less expect it you will stop living and be death like all the people before you and like all the people will be.

WHY PHILOSOPHY?

I am in a place where people think that philosophy can't be used in many ways. Friends of mine told me that they believe that philosophy is good for people that have nothing to do in the day or that have no occupations or jobs. First I thought like them because I also believed that nthing could be done with philosophy. But then I read the introduction to philosophy of Fernando Savater and I changed my opinion.
I go by the world living all my days thinking tat everything has been the same and will be the same and I say things that now I ask myself what they mean. Because you do things and say things but don't complain about the meaning or anything because we are satisfied with our knowledge about the thing.
All that knowledge we have came from a source and I reconsidered and now I think philosophy is good because it makes us think, go deeper into the real meanings of everything and no one is going to philosophize but yourself, it is not like a lesson you learn from a teacher but that you discover yourself.
I think many of the things we see now, like a television or ipod or iphone or internet, all of them are the result of people who asked themselves how things worked and found or create a new use or something that could use what they discovered. I now think you can understand more the world if you open your mind to philosophy.

What is time?

As we read in chapter 10, time is difficult to define, and even though it is an important factor in our everyday life, I think almost everyone would like to have control of this symbolic, but independent measurement.

When I establish a conversation about time, many people usually say: “ It flows like water”, which means that it leaves your hands with ease, making you want more and more. But, have you ever thought about why was time invented?

Savater tried to explain that time was established, so that humans could have a point of reference, to meet, and/or make different activities in a day, which really makes sense. It also explains that it is just a measurement, for knowing in which stage of the day we are at.

Time is independent from anything, which means that it is in constant movement, and he tries to explain that living and non-living things depend on it, for suffering transformations, such as age transformations.

Savater also showed Hegel’s opinion about showing a specific moment in time, such as “now”. When we call something “this”, it is subjective if we do not see it, but if we show “this” (ex. a lamp), it is not subjective anymore. But, when we say “now”, it will always be subjective, because the moment we just called “now” is gone, and I cannot pick it up again.

Time will always be a part of our daily life, but we know that it will be always impossible to hold it, that’s why we need to take advantage of it, before it is to late.

Time and Movement?

What is time? That is a pretty tough question. It sounds so simple and the answer can't stand every argument that people have about it. We live every day of our lives with notion of time, we classify our movements with time, we plan our activities with time and we say we are living in the "present". Somebody once said past is history, future is a mystery but present is a gift, that is why it is called present. Well I think this sentence is talking metaphorically as if we couldn't go back or forward in time, assuming that the only thing we can control completely is what we do every new second that passes. I don't agree with is completely. Though I understand that what I am in the present is the product of what I was, what I have experienced and what I have or haven't learned from it, I still doubt whether I change because time passes or time passes because I change? For this question I took a look to Albert Einstein's Relativity Theory. He states that each object has its own time, we use a time that is connected to other's and so on and so forth, yet when the speed of a movement gets closer to the speed of light, time seems to be wrong or doesn't match with ours as it can move between our time at a speed we can't even imagine. That makes me think if I am really seeing what is in reality or whatever IS. My whole view of reality is being modified completely as I don't believe in impossibilities anymore, I just wanted to figure out the How? I believe now that the light that passes in front of our eyes is the same that was since the beginning of the human race and before and is the same that is existing in this moment(IRONIC) whether we stopped existing in a future or we transformed or we went to live to another planet! I am trying to figure out why, but everything looks like is losing the perspective, like we live with such paradigms that punish these thoughts and the world is just not the world and everything is not what it was explained to be omg. Now there are many things we need to consider before making conclusions and the fact is that we would need some extra-special glasses to see bodies with a high speed that are passing through us, or something similar. I don't think that what seems to be death or inanimate is what people describe, but bodies moving at a very slow speed or at a very high speed, now it looks like movement in relation with time creates realities and we are sensing what moves at a speed similar to ours.

Last!!! Chpt 10

As soon as I started reading this chapter I realized it was going to be interesting. It is very interesting because it talks about the time and how does it happens. It is very weird that in our class with twenty something students, we couldn’t come up with a definition for time. The nearest we got to the definition is that time means a measure of moments. It is true but at the same time is not a complete definition for this easy and very common word. The book gives us an example of the turtle and Achilles. I don’t know where did Zeno got this idea from but it is true. It explains that if the turtle starts first Achilles would never be able to catch up with the turtle. For example, I am Alejandro and I born in May 20th, 1991, Mario who was born in May 22nd 1991 will never be able to catch up those two days. As long as we both live, I will be older than him two days. Even though he is better or he is faster or whatever there is no way that he can reach me. There is also a very important statement that it was very weird for me. The book tells us that there is no past or future there is only one tense and it is the present. It might be three tenses but instead of being past present future they would be present of the past things, present of the present things, and present of the future things. This is very weird but if you think a little bit about it, it can be considered to be true. These are just because we can only live in the present and have memories and see what’s coming but we can only habit in the present.

Lost in Time

I think this chapter was interesting; it brought up the theme of time, something that we all know and are aware of, but we cannot explain it exactly. The book mention that Aristotle linked the time with movement, meaning also for the change of state; time passes because things happen. I think I can agree in a way with this statement because every second that passes, there is something in the world that happens.
As an example, even before we had the mechanical devices that measured the time, the people had other ways to measure the time, and it relates to things that happen. When the flowers appeared on the field, or when the migrant birds came back, and even say to express winter, when it is cold; all these that people used to measure the time were represented by something happening. So, this means that the world is in constant movement, or change, because the time keeps going.
In class it was told that when one sleeps, time seems to stop, but then it was said what about the dreams? There is something happening. And also, by a friend, what about inside the body? Everything keeps changing. I think that this theme can be confusing, like the question which one came first? I would be on the side of time come first, because in order for something to happen, there has to be a change in time, or a change of moment, which is basically the same.

Is it beautiful, or you just like it?

Something is not beautiful, just because you like it. That’s weird, don’t you think so?

In chapter 9, Savater gave us the example of the Egyptian pyramids, which maybe I like them and we can say that they are impressive. Later he said, how could you consider them beautiful, if many people suffered for its creation? Now, I was more confused and if he says so, how am I going to be sure of what is beautiful then?

Well, it may seem difficult to understand, but after time reasoning, I got the point. Once I went to Guanajuato, I went to see one of the many churches of the “Época de la Conquista” in Mexico, which are impressive and they are said to be beautiful, because they show the mix of the Spanish and Mexican architectures. When I was in there, I got amazed and yes, they are very beautiful, but many people said the church had quite exaggerated details, which made it not to like them so much, and I totally agree with them. So, I noticed that for something to be beautiful it needs to follow certain patterns, meanwhile what you like could be whatever, even though it is the worst thing on Earth. And finally, I’ve got to the conclusion that I shouldn’t call something beautiful, just because I like it.

Beautiful

Beauty, what a word that encompasses so many concepts, sensations, symbols, ideals, giving the pleasure to perceive it or pulling away whatever it takes to try to make it real. Beauty... millions of people desire it, unable to see how beautiful they really are, how beautiful is everything around them, how misunderstood is beauty. But how to say if something is beautiful or not? Is it a sensation, is it an emotion, is it a purpose, what human law can tell if something is beautiful or not? Philosophers, theologians, humanity in general can't agree in a single definition... because it may be that there isn't. Why we try to give everything a meaning if we haven't even identified the essence of what we have, or think we have... Beauty, represented and perceived in countless expressions or projections. Purpose or without a purpose, beauty is true, is that which comes without being planned, is that which grows out of nothing and becomes more valuable, is that which pleases us without having to please us, is that which exists and waits to be sensed, perceived and maybe appreciated, is that which drugs us with its unexplainable sources, is that which stimulates what had to be stimulated, is that which converts us in a touched human being, touched with the grace of life, with something bigger than humanity, something inconsistently abstract that has the ability to traspass barriers of realities and cause an unpredictable reaction in every person, in every animal that has the capacity to appreciate, perceive, accept and live that misterious abstraction called beauty.

Beauty

I really liked this chapter because of so many things. First of all, some people can’t realize what something beautiful is in reality. If you ask an artist what is beautiful for him, he will say that maybe a painting. If you ask a party guy what’s beauty for him, he might answer that hot girls. If you ask a mother what’s beautiful for her, she would say that her kids. This is not incorrect but people have different perceptions of what’s beauty.

What it is true is that the most beautiful and originally beautiful things are the things created by nature. You can feel it when you are in front of a beautiful thing created by nature. For example, Niagara Falls, the sensation I received when I saw those falls was incredible. It is a unique sensation that I have only felt once.

I will criticize the people who believe that the only beauty and the most important one is the aesthetic. I think that is ridicule. For example, you can see an actress which is physically beautiful but in her inside she is the worst girl. Some of them feel like if they were made by God or something like that. That is NOT beauty. I rather stay with a pretty girl who is nice with me and nice to my people. A girl that cares about me and will always be at my side when I need her. I don’t need nice hot chick with a nice and voluminous body. This is what people have been lately misunderstanding.

This is why I think some people do not know the reality of what beauty means at these days.

The Shiver of Beauty

In this chapter I read an interesting quote by Immanuel Kant, “Beauty does not correspond to a concept”. This means that there are no rules for something to be determined as beautiful. I agree with this because there are many things that influence our opinion about if something is beautiful or not, and they are different for everybody, it is not following any set of rules. One thing that influences us to think that something is beautiful is the taste, that is, your personal points of view and what you like.
Even if everybody has different taste and ideas, there will be always people that agree that something is beautiful while others would argue the contrary. Savater said it is wrong to imply that something is beautiful only for you. If I understand what he means, I agree, because I think there are always people that will agree with you.
An example can be Jackson Pollock, that we saw little in class, many argue that it was not that beautiful, and it was not very difficult. Well an argument can be, as he was the first one, he caught the attention with the lines and the colors; so, it is why there are people that find it beautiful.
The book mentions that beauty can cause a kind a pleasure, a good feeling. Therefore, as beauty is subjective, the good feeling caused by it is also subjective. This good sensation caused by beauty will change from person to person, as we have all different taste and ideas.

Acting with freedom

When I say freedom, many things come to my mind, such as doing whatever I want, and chose my life path. But, are we really free? Can we make whatever we want? I don’t think so.

During this chapter, I learned many things that are real, and happen in our daily lives. Many people consider freedom, as having or making whatever they want. They are WRONG, because freedom is just the right to choose between different, but specified paths. But, what does that mean? For example, I say that I want one million dollars; I can choose the way I want to get them. I can work hard, or either rob a bank. I am free to choose, but this freedom is limited, because if I take the easy way, the country rules will arrest me, take my money away, and reduce my freedom. Newton said: “For every action there’s a reaction”, and that is true. I need to take the responsibility of my actions, and obey rules.

Another argument Savater said is that there are different kinds of freedoms, because one thing is what I want and another thing is to obtain it. I totally agree with him, because in Earth many people want many things, but they are limited to their possibilities. For example, many people want to have a Bugatti in their garage, but they can’t get it. They have the freedom to want, and to have. But, when we talk about possibilities, they can’t get what they want.

Condemned Freedom

In this chapter, there are several points of view belonging to the concept of freedom. I strongly agree with the Sartrean formulation of us being unable to choose whether we are free or not, he points out that we are condemned to freedom. This thought made me question about the essence of freedom itself. I don't think freedom itself is true as we cannot choose if we want to have it or not (Of course talking about freedom not as a noun). We are born with the capability of choosing among options and taking decisions, though we can't yet choose if that is what we want for our lives or not, it comes with the whole package, it comes with us. I refuse to say freedom is pure, I believe it is just an illusion although I consider choices as real, because they determine each reality we Choose to live in. I perceive my reality as I choose to perceive it, there is no one who will ever possess me and take away that freedom from me, yet I wonder what happens when people kills other people? For me thats stealing, not only life but the freedom other people had to choose whether they wanted to still live or commit suicide, their time is fastened and their lives end because of the freedom of an individual. So what I think is that Freedom may not be totally true but it is both collective and individual. Individual in the sense that you have your own freedom and can choose to do, think, or want to not be(or be), but collective in the sense that you should respect others' freedom to maintain everybody's freedom free?

I really liked this chapter for many different reasons. The main reason is that it talks about freedom. Freedom is something we must learn how to use. We are all born with freedom. We acquire it as soon as we live but the main point is that there are some people that don’t know how to use it.
Every single person in the world has rights and responsibilities. But in order to get our own rights we must first have done our responsibilities. Some people argue that people they don’t have rights but most of the times they don’t have it because they don’t do what they are supposed to.
Some people also don’t know how to use freedom. Some people just think that freedom is just doing whatever they want but that is incorrect. I think you can think whatever you want, you can believe whatever you want but you can’t do whatever you want. You can do it but you must respect the laws of the place you’re living in. If you don’t respect it, you might start losing your freedom. In every place of the world it is prohibited to assault a bank. If you do it, you go to jail. In this case you’re doing what you want but without respecting the laws, so you start losing your own freedom.
There are also countries that had fight for freedom in the past and sometimes still in the present. But most of them, are fighting for being independent and being free of doing what they want and ruling themselves.
To conclude, people must not confuse the meaning of freedom, otherwise if they don’t respect the rules or laws. They will start losing their own freedom.

Freedom in Action

I think we all have thought about the consequences our actions can have, and we are conscious that even if we are free to decide things and actions, we are responsible for them. I know I am responsible for my all actions and the consequences, good or bad that come with it. Even that we are free to decide, want things, and even don’t want; we need to be conscious about our actions, because we are fully responsible of them. Like Savater said “to accept that we are free implies accepting responsibility for what we do.”
I think an important thing we should ask ourselves before deciding to act is to think about the consequences that this action can lead to; this can help us sometimes to avoid some consequences. I am conscious that even if we think about it, we can always do mistakes, we are humans; but we can save troubles.
A great quote that clearly exemplifies the responsibility that we all have for the actions we do is this one said by the character Ben Parker in the first movie of Spider-Man "With great power comes great responsibility." I know it can be referring to Peter Parker’s new power, but what can relate is that Peter have the responsibility on how he choose to use this power, for good or for bad.
As a conclusion, it can be said that when we are faced with a decision, we are free to do it or not; we are free to act or not, and we are responsible for this decision and its later consequences.

Your order could be my chaos

During this week we talked about chapter 5, and I found many interesting issues, that we can argue about. One of them was the one about order, which is a theme very subjective, but as Savater said: “Your order could be my chaos”. That means that the majority of the people are used to have certain type of order with their things, that for many others, it could be chaotic.

In my life, for example, I always have problems with my brother because of my house organization. He always leaves the things wherever he finishes using them. Like the wireless phone, he always leaves it in the sofa, or in the bed, and when I am looking for it, I never find it. That’s the reason I always return the phone to the base, so I can find it easily.

Another interesting issue we talked about in class was the one about the finite or infinite Universe. When you ask people what they think about it, they just simply answer according to their religion, culture, or maybe by guessing. But, when I reasoned it, I came to the conclusion that the Universe is infinite and continuous expansion, because if it wasn’t, there would be something else outside it, and I could have reached the end.

The world and its outskirts.

What is the origin of the Universe? Savater tries to explain what the universe is in different ways; he uses quotes from philosophers, deductions, etc. I thought one explanation was really interesting; "But as Bertrand Russell remarked, although every human being has a mother, this does not allow us to suppose that humanity as a whole must also have a mother." That is an extremely radical answer to any person. Today I read in a book an alien telling to a person: "Oh you think like such a human". That is really true! We think in a human way; we saw in the last chapter that humanity had it hard to accept we are not the center of everything. So I would say that the(a?) Universe is a result of our need of belongingess. I'll explain: We have a mother, we have friends, we have family = We belong to our family, we belong to our friends, because they share things with us, so we belong to the universe instead of the universe belonging to us! that's human reasoning, but what about the soooo manyyyyyyyy other things that the universe "has", not all of them have a mother (though some of them do), and we try and try to find a mother for those who appear to lack of her. In conclusion, the Universe COULD not have an origin as the universe is not a human, and we could stop thinking humanly, stop being so selfish-thinking and begin to ACCEPT other kind of relations, which maybe are completely different from ours, and not because of that meaning to be wrong. (like a song: not because you're it does mean I'm wrong)

The world

I really liked this chapter but I also found very interesting stuff like the creation of the world. It is what it impressed me the most. This topic is very interesting for me and I have done some research before of what happened because it’s true we don’t find things just like they. Something or someone has to create everything. I have never seen that something appears just from nowhere. That’s one of the most important questions of the world. Nobody can know exactly what happened because nobody was there to see it. At the beginning of the world there was no life. But I have seen some discovery channel programs that scientist have discovered that I don’t really understood how but billions of years ago, some lightening hit the Earth and created the first living organism it was not composed of even of cells. Then after millions and millions of years that little organism has evolved to a little fish and then it started to evolve in different species and different ones again. Then I don’t know how they got outside the water and started to be able to live outside water. Then that organism evolved into dinosaurs and on and on till we got to this complex human body capable of thinking and able to do whatever his mind lets them. In conclusion, I definitely think that one of the most important ability of the world in order to get what it is today is the ability to evolve.

According to Savater’s Book, our world can be divided, theoretically, into some smaller worlds; starting with our small world where we live the common life including the places and friends, then, the community of the city where you are; continuing with the national and international part, then going on to the planet Earth and the Solar system. Then comes all the others things like the galaxies, systems, stars, black holes, etc. everything included in this immense place whose limits are unknown, and that we call Universe; which is very controversial, because there are many things we don’t know about it, like if it is finite or infinite? I think right now it is quite impossible to know this.
I think it is a very interesting form of dividing the World, and that it is indeed true; because we are conscious of the world closer to us, and not about all the things that have happened, happen, and will happen in other countries; only some of the things because we saw or heard them. It is like the expression “He lives in his own world”, that means he is not conscious of what is happening around him, only what he is thinking.
This was just theoretically, because when we are traveling or moved to live at another place, our small world moves with us, and everything in the scale changes. It would be difficult to move a world don’t you think? So, it is just theoretically.

The World without Humans

In this chapter Savater tried to show us some of the important points about the human being, how it is different to other species, how we interact, and how we live.

Many people argued that we are a special being that create needs. Is to say that the other species try to survive and reproduce only. Mean while humans try to find and create new needs for living better.

To survive in the modern human civilization, humans need to take a part of our childhood in school. That means that humans need to be “trained“to incorporate to our modern human civilization. It is to say, that we need to learn a language, a culture, etc.

One philosopher I found interesting was Picco della Mirandola. He said that we are a “version” of God, which means that we are able to create things and manipulate the nature. I think this is a very good point of view, which goes together with religion, because God said that human were created similarly as him.

Yesterday, I saw a TV show called “The World without Humans”, it shows the people how it would be if for some reason the humans disappear. They said that there would be many viruses, that would kill many animals, and after 1000 years without humans, there would be very little clues of the existence of the human civilization.

We are a special race, and even though we make mistakes that other animals do not, we will always be the leading race in the world, even if we are called animals.

Symbolic Animal

This chapter says we are symbolic animals, conventional and representative. This chapter says that we learn those symbols, so it is like we since the very first time that come to this world, start adquiring the representation of all those symbols that are present in our daily lives and also those which aren't. It says that we don't come to the world "knowing" symbols. I think it doesn't apply for everyone, but I recognize it can be generalized. But thats not my point, my point is, why each symbol has it's meaning? or how does each symbol got its own representation? at what time we started giving meanings and associations to symbols? were we animals or humans when this occurred? Maybe is not easy to answer this, but I believe deeply in our minds we have those basis which are fundamental in creating and recognizing symbols, and thats why I think people yes learn symbolism but also we could have a perception that helps us "guess" the meaning of a symbol, like something that comes with the whole package, not just by using it. From ancient times, we have been creating these symbols, people often mind: what does it represent? and they spend years trying to figure out, but what if we concentrate on why were they created? maybe we would understand that we could have made them to help us in the transition of Life, on adaption, and most of all, to preserve our achievements and our race maybe?

The symbolic animal

I really want to talk about this chapter for many different reasons. The most interesting thing while reading this chapter was the three humiliations we have received. These humiliations are about what people believe and then someone proves it the other way. I mean, everyone in the planet believes in something and then one guy comes up with a proven fact which makes the belief incorrect.
The first one is the discovery of Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler. They said that Earth was not the center of the universe as everybody thought. It is not as majestic and privileged as the people believed in the ancient times. The Earth orbits around the sun as 8 other planets. Then the second one is said by Darwin. He demonstrated that humans are not by God in his own image but stem. He proved that humans are evolved like that because of mutations in our genes and by his theory of "Survival for the fittest" he proved that we evolved from primates. And then the last one was Sigmund Freud, and he transformed our soul or consciousness in something far from transparent influenced by unconscious impulses. For me it is very interesting because it definitely believe in these “Theories” more than what people think. I rather trust in science than anything else because most of the facts are proven. So why should we keep trusting people?
Also I want to say that as science proves it, I believe we’re just animals but in difference to them, we have a complex brain which let us think more than using the instinct as animals.

"The Symbolic Animal"

All of us, which belong to the human species, can also be considered animals. Why not? It is not something offensive; we are only another different species, which have different qualities and capacities. One of the most important, that I agree, is the use of our verbal language, including all the different ones that exist; taught to us by our parents from generation to generation, and that we ameliorate in school.
Even the German modern thinker Ernst Cassirer called us a “Symbolic Animal”, because of this use of language, that he called symbols. Symbols are signs that represent something; the most used are the words and numbers. I agree with his statement, because we are a species of animal, and we do communicate by symbols, that constitute the different languages.
One thing that has not yet a clear answer, only hypotheses, is the origin of these languages. I suppose that it started with the first humans, that made some sounds or drawings to represent things, and with time it was ameliorated, and then evolved into different ancient language. After this, I think it continued to evolve and expand, until these languages that we, humans, use nowadays. There are many doubts surroundings the origin of the languages, and the only thing we can give are hypotheses, nothing more because nobody is sure. Everyone have their own hypothesis on this.

"The Human Machine"

What do you think when you see a person driving like a jerk on the streets? You may say: “What the hell is going on with this guy?” Or “He is surely drunk”, but what do you think when you see a person that could cause a lot of damages. “He is crazy let’s get away from him”, you may say, or “He surely has psychological problems”.

But, have you really thought that human body could be just as a machine, like a car, and what it controls it, is a kind of spirit or should I call it “soul”? It is kind of confusing, right? Because the religion says that the soul separates from the body when we die, so if somebody dies, can another soul use that body? Or the Mexican runner Ana Guevara has the one of the fastest “human machine” on earth?

Many people on earth believe that human body can be possessed by another force, it could be positive or negative force, but if that is true, what happens with the original soul? Maybe he decided to take a vacation, because he was very tired, or what?

I think that you should take care of what you have, material or “human” things, and it does not matter what “machine” you have, what really matters is what it has inside.

I

This chapter talks a lot about the different possibilities of our existence. I think it became a mental need to establish who we are, why are here, why do we exist, etc.

Many theories were pictured, and some of them are quite unusual. For example, the theory that says that we are being controlled by some martians or by a superpower and that all of what we see, live everyday and consider as "Life" is nothing but an illusion, makes me think we are just like lab rats, or if we were in a perpetual dream. I prefer not to believe in such ideas, I slightly believe another supposition: There are powerful "People" or "Powers" that somehow influence our DECISIONS in Life, like designing more or less a type of Life, but not yet controlling it fully, I mean, I consider that we are not machines. I believe that there is no perfection, I don't even believe that God is perfect, I think that there are always options. Like we choose things because something/someone motivates us to do it, but at least it is ourselves who decide. I just don't agree that we are controlled by a superpower(maybe ego can't let me accept it), maybe some of my choices are, but what I think, what I feel, what I perceive, I think its just mine, and nobody else's(or at least the sensation of it). I believe in my indivuality, but I don't reject fully the superpower theory as I assume that sometimes several events could be pre-meditated and designed in order to influence decisions(in order to be designed or controlled, there has to be another I that is the responsible of it right? so in that case She/He/It is alone? same as us? how many there are?), order and impact in Life itself.

The meaning of " I "

I really liked this chapter because of so many things. First of all, it explains truths that we will maybe never ask ourselves and which are very interesting to know about. What I really liked the most and what it impressed me the most is the beginning of the chapter when they explain Descartes ideas about humanity. He had two theories, the first one talked about how we might be watching and listening illusions. Maybe we are just dreaming and everything that happens in our lives is just a dream. This can be true because when we dream at night we don’t even know we are dreaming. We feel like we are there. Also, in modern philosophy, this theory has evolved and now it says that we don’t need to be dreaming, we might be just some brains that have our own lives in it. The second theory of Descartes was that we might be just some experiment of a superpower. Maybe just like he said we are just an experiment and controlled by a malignant spirit which only laughs about us and don’t even care of what’s going on. These theories are funny and sometimes sound crazy but they might be correct. We don’t know anything. I really don’t believe in any of these theories but I can’t be sure about anything. Even though they exist or not, like the book said, at least I know one truth. The truth that I EXIST.

I inside, I outside

I read an interesting quote said by the French mathematician and philosopher René Descartes “I think, therefore I am”. I agree somehow with this quote, but I think it is missing some important parts like “I perceive”, “I reason”, and “I feel”, because as humans we don’t just think, but we also perceived the things that surround us and natural phenomena that happen, and then we analyze them; and we feel things.
Maybe this is what Descartes was thinking when he said that quote, the “think” include the perception, reason, and feel part. But we will never know for sure, he was in another époque, where life and thoughts were different.
This quote has been criticized by various philosophers, like the English David Hume, because of the use of “I”. “It thinks” exist, because animals also think, of course not like humans, but they do. Therefore, Descartes quote using “I” was ambiguous, it let us think about it and analyze it. I think that, somehow, this is good because there are many different conclusions and thoughts concerning the quote, and you can see many perspectives, and may agree or not, you learn something.
An hypothesis, an ironic one that surely not everybody will agree, thinking about the époque, is that intelligent and reasonable people that use their brain are really persons, somebody, while dumb people of the time are just there, not meaning a lot. This hypothesis sounds a lot racist, I don’t think it is really true, but one never knows…
Another one, maybe he thought that people that use their brain, an essential part of the body, for thinking can be aware of themselves, others, and things around, so they are kind of sure of their existence, of them in the world.

Reasoning

Reasoning

Did you know every single human has the ability of reasoning? But, do you know many people use it very little? Yes this is the reality, we are in a world that day with day everything is easier for us, but what does it have to do all this with reason, simply that many answers to the questions of life, can be found by the use of reason.

Since I am in philosophy class, I have encountered many things that I did not care before, but now I am interested in many things, and for me one of the most interesting themes, is reason. From the chapter “The truths of reason”, although I found it kind of confusing, I also found it very interesting and what can I say of it, is that those groups that think that human is not a reliable source of information are extremely in the wrong side, since as we saw in the introduction of the book, wisdom is one of the strong points, which helps us to find the truth, so if humans are not reliable, and the knowledge is only given to one person, then we are deep in the hole, because it is supposed that all humans have the same abilities, the only difference is that not everybody applies it.

“Reason is the glory of human nature, and one of the chief eminences whereby we are raised above the beasts, in this lower world.”

Isaac Watts