Natasia’s Blog

Final Self Assessment

Link: https://kinasiarodriguez.family.blog

Total Word Count: 5630

Checklist: I included quotes, original examples,  and personal application in all my blogs.

I made revisions since our midterm meeting, I gave one presentation this semester.

This semester my participation was pretty good, I think I engaged in class by answering questions, asking questions, being attentive, and adding my personal opinion. My attendance was about 80%, I didn’t miss class too much throughout the semester. I submitted about 12 blogs prior to the class. 

Comments: 15

Glossary Words: 39

Given the course requirements I think I deserve an A  grade, I have managed to reach the word count while also having over 30 glossary words and 15 comments. My participation and attentiveness over this course has been pretty good. I will remember most about this class how open and inclusive the environment has been for me. You have had a way of making each student feel comfortable while learning philosophy no matter their background.

Descartes is on a search for knowledge and in order for him to attain this knowledge he believes he needs to forget everything he thinks to be right and true. “It is now some years since I detected how many were the false beliefs that I had from my earliest youth admitted as true, and how doubtful was everything I had since constructed on this basis; and from that time I was convinced that I must once for all seriously undertake to rid myself of all the opinions which I had formerly accepted, and commence to build anew from the foundation, if I wanted to establish any firm and permanent structure in the sciences. (Descartes)” He has to almost go through a rebirth in order to objectively observe. He is very skeptical about the truth and explores this idea by looking at how people dream. “But in thinking over this I remind myself that on many occasions I have in sleep been deceived by similar illusions, and in dwelling carefully on this reflection I see so manifestly that there are no certain indications by which we may clearly distinguish wakefulness from sleep that I am lost in astonishment. (Descartes)”When having a dream you are experiencing things that are in fact real but because it is a dream, you are able to understand how that dream is fictional. However these dreams are no different from a person who hallucinates and this finding stopped Descartes in his tracks because he now has a hard time making the distinction between what is actually true. To that person their hallucinations are very much a reality which is why to them they hold power. Descartes argues that our senses can not always be trusted and this increases his skepticism towards what is reality and what isn’t. He continues to doubt his beliefs in search of finding out what is the truth but in this search he becomes further pushed away from what he once believed to be reality. By the end of the reading Descartes has pretty much thrown out everything he has once believed and concludes that he cannot gain any knowledge. An all knowing God is seen as a deceptive being in his eyes because He creates deceiving thoughts. Descartes feels like the best thing that can be done is to object to the fact that he has a head, hands, arms ,legs, senses, and etc because this is the “false reality” he has been fed since he was young. “I shall consider myself as having no hands, no eyes, no flesh, no blood, nor any senses, yet falsely believing myself to possess all these things; I shall remain obstinately attached to this idea, and if by this means it is not in my power to arrive at the knowledge of any truth, I may at least do what is in my power [i.e. suspend my judgment], and with firm purpose avoid giving credence to any false thing, or being imposed upon by this arch deceiver, however powerful and deceptive he may be. (Descartes)” It is interesting that he went on this search for knowledge and recanted everything he knew to be true. Overall I do disagree with his view towards God and reality but in some way I understand why he feels the way he does. 

I chose the song ‘strange fruit’ by Nina Simone to represent what art is to me.This song is very powerful as it talks about the lynchings happening in the United States during the early 1900s. Although the subject matter in the song is powerful enough to move someone on its own, the power in her voice makes this song infectious. Her voice alone tells a story of resiliency and pain. The first time I listened to this song I could feel my eyes getting teary eyed because in that moment I could feel the pain that she poured into that song as if I had experienced the pain myself. I think my example matches what Tolstoy would consider to be art because the song brings out emotions through Nina Simone’s voice. Her voice is her instrument that she uses to create art, her music is her art and I think it wasn’t until I heard this song that I felt how a voice could be so moving. Tolstoy said, “Art is a human activity consisting in this, that one man consciously, by means of certain external signs, hands on to others feelings he has lived through, and that other people are infected by these feelings and also experience them.” I agree that art should move people and become infectious to a certain degree but I also believe that if your art doesn’t move someone that doesn’t make it completely bad. To me art is essentially just a form of expression and because every person is complex and unique this creates room for almost every possibility. Tolstoy makes a very good point when he says art is supposed to solely be infectious and this is how you can measure the greatness of it however this can be problematic. The three conditions on whether your art is infectious consist of the individuality of the emotion being transmitted, clarity of the emotion, and the sincerity of the artist. To me it is hard to measure the greatness of someone’s work just because how can I tell someone else if their art is good or not. I think my character plays into this a lot because I am someone who is very inclusive and I like to understand all spectrums, so when it comes to art I feel the same way. The song ‘Strange Fruit’ however passes Tolstoy’s test of what makes something art according to his three conditions. So in fact this test is a great way of proving the validity of someone’s art but for me it still has to remain objective. Tolstoy’s test can seem subjective and that would be the only reason for it not being very effective. The song by Nina Simone is just one of those songs that touch the heart because it’s real. I think this is a subtle point that is very big because if you’re just real and true to yourself I think the art will speak for itself. No matter what it is, people will be able to recognize the beauty in it and I think that is the real take away when it comes to the greatness of someone’s art. The beauty in art is that the scale is so broad, meaning that you can see just about everything when it comes to art so that naturally creates an inclusive atmosphere. Overall I think Tolstoy made great points in his argument but I still feel like art needs to have a broad scale and therefore does not fit into a box. 

“If only the spectators or auditors are infected by the feelings which the author has felt, it is art (What is art).” Leo Toltsey argues that art can only truly be good art if the viewer or reader is able to feel the same emotion or feeling that the artist was feeling when writing or painting their work. Essentially saying that if you read a poem that the poet intended to be sad and you weren’t drawn to feelings of sadness then the poet didn’t do their job correctly. Tolstoy later explains how he feels that art brings us together, which is an idea that I 100% agree with. Art on the most broad level is the unity between people through expression and feeling. This is how I always perceived art to be, people connecting or bonding over shared emotions that someone has once felt before. With all of the disconnect in the world I feel like art is so powerful because it can bring people together no matter what that person may believe or look like. In a world where people are stuck in ‘in groups’ and cliques, I think art has done a great job at breaking down all of those exteriors and causing people to feel more connected. If people couldn’t feel connected on an artistic level then we would indeed be more ‘savage’ like. Tolstoy touches on this idea as he said, “And if men lacked this other capacity of being infected by art, people might be almost more savage still, and, above all, more separated from, and more hostile to, one another (What is Art).” I do believe that art can be measured in the way that Tolstoy has measured it but I also believe that just because someone may not have the same reaction to your art that you intended doesn’t necessarily make it bad art. If I were to come up with a great way to measure art I would say that there is no actual way you could do that because of how unique art is. I have seen paintings that were sold for a lot of money that I didn’t really see the value in, essentially it is up to the viewer. I think that Tolstoy puts a lot of pressure on the person creating the art but if the viewer isn’t moved by what the artist created then that doesn’t necessarily make that art ‘bad’. Just like beauty is in the eye of the beholder, that is how I like to understand the beauty in art. Subject matter to me does not matter when deciding between something being good or bad, it’s all about how the person feels in the end. This is important because even if I wasn’t a fan of horror films I could watch one and be able to say if it is a good movie or not. Bringing individuals out of their isolation using art is Tolstoy’s biggest argument and he stresses that everyone feels the same feeling because that is essentially what makes it powerful. When a group of people all have the same feeling towards something there’s no telling what can be done when they put their minds together and I think that is what Tolstoy is trying to convey to us. Although I do disagree with saying that art is bad just because you didn’t invoke the same feelings the artist did, I do agree with the general point that art is supposed to bring out feelings in the viewer. The stronger the infection that is felt through art according to Tolstoy is the defining factor of what makes that art great. Although him and Aristotle have some similar feelings towards art I see a difference in how the imitation or infection is viewed. According to Aristotle, there are different forms of imitation and this imitation is only good if there are no errors and it is very close to the truth. Tolstoy on the other level does not stress being close to the truth but stresses the emotions the viewer should feel in relation to the art. Overall, I have taken key points from Plato, Aristotle, and Tolstoy and I understand all of their opinions when it comes to art.

    “First, the instinct of imitation is implanted in man from childhood, one difference between him and other animals being that he is the most imitative of living creatures, and through imitation learns his earliest lessons; and no less universal is the pleasure felt in things imitated (Poetics).” Aristotle believes that there are three different categories in which imitation within art lies, the medium, the objects, and the mode or manner. These different categories all have elements of imitation embedded with them but according to aristotle they do differ. He explains that people imitate physical objects using color, words, and or different forms. A poet or an artist are all connected through the medium of imitation, this medium is what bridges the gap between all forms of imitation. Aristotle is not against imitation through art but he is against making imitations through art incorrectly. He stated that if something was going to be imitated it needed to be exact without errors, of course grammatical errors would be fine if we were talking about a poem but if the error were to change the meaning then that is when the imitation becomes problematic. Successful imitation is something he discusses that can be done if no errors happen when imitating the real object. This view is very different from Plato because he believed that any form of imitation is bad and that there could be no way that imitation could be useful. Throughout the reading Aristotle continues to make distinctions between tragedy and epic. These distinctions make tragedy to be more superior to epic because it uses all the elements epic would use including more. I believe that his understanding of art in terms of imitations can be very useful and I actually agree with how he viewed art. If your going to be someone that uses imitation in ways that don’t take away from the reality then I believe there is no harm in that. However, if someone uses their poetry in a way that is harmful and their imitations are far from truthful then I believe that is up for the viewer to decide. Aristotle argues that the way we imitate can be broken up into three categories, our world just as it is, how we think it is, and how it should be. These three categories are very broad and leave a lot of room for the artist or poet to come up with how they choose to imitate. Imitation to Aristotle is just an act of trying to capture life in some way and duplicate that, since we are imitative in nature it’s hard to put a box on how or why there should be way things are to be imitated. That box is necessary though because since people are imitative in nature and have a sense for duplication it is easy to mislead people and create false agendas. Being a person that expresses themselves through art it’s important to remember someone is always viewing and you never know how your art will influence that person. In this way I understand why Plato feels strongly about art and any form of imitation being something that is bad, because it could take away from reality and how people view reality. However, we are expressive people and the fact that we can use our gifts in order to bring emotions and feelings out of people is beautiful if done in a correct useful way. After reading ‘Poetics’ I have a better sense of the different ways art can be imitated and why we are so drawn to art. Being a ECE major, early childhood is very pivotal when it comes to a person’s development because of how vulnerable a child can be. A child clings to everything from their home environment to their school environment and if those environments are toxic then there is of course a higher chance for the child to cling to some of those toxic tendencies. I can relate that back to art because even as adults we still are vulnerable to what is around us including art. We still can be impressionable and if we are constantly imitating things that are far from the reality then that can become an issue for anyone. I strongly believe that art is a beautiful thing but it something that should be done with care.

The film Existenz played on Plato’s hierarchical scheme of reality in many different ways. In the film their were different games that meant different realities for the characters. The realities were a product of their own minds and although it wasn’t necessarily real it played on real aspects of life. In Plato’s allegory of the cave we see the same sort of set up where Plato suggests that the shadows in the cave are just our interpretations of reality. In the allegory of the cave Plato uses a scenario where a prisoner in the cave escapes and sees the true reality and his eyes couldn’t handle the grave difference so he had to allow his eyes to get used to what he was seeing. This same analogy Plato uses can be connected to his interpretation of the bed. He explains that there is the maker of the bed who is divine, then after the maker there is the copy which can symbolize the physical world. Lastly, there is art which would be the artist who paints a picture of a bed. All these different realities have some sort of real component to them but according to Plato the only one that matters is the divine or the original reality. Plato further criticizes art, believing that it brings us further from the truth and causes us to live a life filled with illusion. With the different games in the movie you can see how the allegory of the cave and Plato’s hierarchical scheme of reality is being associated with one another. Throughout the movie you can see how the different games caused the actors to have minor changes to their appearance and their world. These minor changes could show how the people are a little further from reality and although they are still themselves it’s not quite the original. The game Transcendenz was pivotal in making the connections between Plato’s hierarchical scheme of reality because it showed how even though it was a game there was still a confusing part in what was real and what wasn’t. I concluded that the game could be art in the real world according to Plato. Just like art, the game is making the real world seem further away. The pods in the movie were flesh like nasty looking objects, I had a hard time trying to figure out why the director would want the pods to look like that. My first thought would be because the pod is something that is essentially hurting them but they’re drawn to play it. The characters would confuse their reality with the game to the point where game characters could travel into different alternate realities. In the movie Ted says, “I find this disgusting, but I can’t help myself”. To me this pretty much summed up the whole idea of the movie and how it relates to Plato. Everyone in the movie knew that the virtual realities had something off about it but they all still took part in playing the game, they lived for it. At the end of the movie Ted and Allegra face off in somewhat of an unplanned ending. Allegra kills Ted as she reveals that she knew he was never real in the first place. As soon as this scene was over it made me think when Ted told Allegra he wanted to be in her game but sticking stuff in his flesh bothered  him. Also the part where the man tells Allegra beware of people in the game with accents. Another example of foreshadowing could be when the two headed insect and two headed salamander appeared in the movie. This foreshadowing could be a way the director was trying to tell the viewer that something shady is going on. Overall the movie helped me make connections with Plato’s hierarchical scheme of reality and it was interesting to see how this could play out in fictional way. 

Socrates tells Glaucon that their are three different versions of a bed. You have the natural version created by God, the carpenter who made the bed, and the artist who paints a picture. Socrates believes that the artist is in fact deceitful because he knows nothing about the true process of making a bed, only enough to create a picture. The same can be measured with poetry, if a poet writes a sad poem and invokes feelings of sadness the reader will applaud the poet for bringing out such emotions in him or her. However these same emotions are repressed in real life when dealing with real sadness in the public eye. Socrates connects the two by saying poetry can also be deceitful because it allows almost a false reality that contradicts the reality that we really live in. Later he sais that the only way for the two to exist without being problematic is by somehow paying some sort of homage towards the actual “creator”. “Shall I propose, then, that she be allowed to return from exile, but upon this condition only –that she make a defense of herself in lyrical or some other metre? (The Republic). I agree that art in a sense can be deceitful but I believe its all up for interpretation. In the most basic sense people know when viewing art that the artist is a skilled painter, and just that. In a more complex situation if you have someone preaching about something that they know nothing about and use certain tools to bring out emotions in people then that seems a lot more problematic. Overall Socrates idea is true but I think that it just depends on the scenario, I wouldn’t say all art is deceitful or creates a false sense of reality. It is definitely up for interpretation.

In Allegory of the Cave, prisoners are stuck in a cave-like environment where they are seeing a false reality. The prisoners live in a cave where there is no source of light and they can only see shadows on the walls. These shadows are the reflections of shadows coming from a fire that is lit that the prisoners can’t see. This false reality has been fed to them their whole lives until a prisoner escapes and sees a different side of “reality”. The previous conditions that the escaped prisoner was use too made it hard for him to accustom into this new reality. He is exposed to the sun which gives him a natural bright light that the cave lacked. This made it so that his eyes temporarily were blinded, essentially meaning that the real light was of a greater danger than the fake light that the cave had. This can be interpreted in many ways because in the world we live in there are many false realities that we willingly come in and out of. The movie theatre is one alternative reality that can be very harmful if you aren’t aware of the tactics used in cinema.  When you’re viewing a movie in a theatre you are voluntarily viewing fiction as fact. Whether you know that what you are seeing is fake it can still have very real implications. If a director creates a movie and makes a name for all girls under 5 foot and this name becomes popular in the real world then you can see how something false reality impacted something in the real world. This can become problematic with the media because many people will not question what they are shown, assuming that it will always be fact unless otherwise. Throughout history the media has been used to control the masses because of how we use it to stay connected. A great example of this is the history of blackface in the media, black people were once not allowed to act in movie roles so white people would imitate black people. This imitation included their interpretations of how they felt black people looked and behaved and in return a lot of damage was created. Blackface in the movie industry has given birth to many stereotypes that we have today when it comes to different groups of people. We get our information, stories, news and etc from the media, so when only one person or one group controls the narrative creating a meta narrative then that can also become very problematic. The misrepresentation in Hollywood films is a part of American history and although our media isn’t as singular as it once was, we still see how that control over the narrative created stereotypes and perceptions that hold no substance. The detrimental part of this is that because of these false realities many people will suffer behind what someone else deemed to be fact. In many cases we mistake fiction for reality in our world because when you’re fed something and you know no different then it makes it hard for you to question it. Plato, being a greek philosopher used this story to suggest that people need to not trust their senses to gain knowledge because those same senses can be tricked, but to only gain knowledge through critical thinking and philosophical reasoning. I agree with Plato’s reasoning with gaining full information before making inferences but it is very hard in today’s world. We live in a world now where almost everything is controlled by something else, down to the very information we get. So I do feel like it is our duty to be open minded with the information that we are fed by others , especially public institutions. In my own life I see how allegory of the cave plays out and it makes me think deeper into the things that I believe without question. Philosophy on the other hand I think sometimes makes you question a question so I try not to get wrapped up in that too much because I do believe not everything can be understood on the human level. Plato overall makes great points with the allegory of the cave and I think it is something each person should read and fully understand. The underlying meanings are very important because in a world with so many false realities it is important to be aware of them and how they can be harmful.

Description of “options” and examples:

William James suggests that you can see the origin of every belief which is divided into three categories, live, forced, and momentous. He believes that the decision made before believing something is an “option”. To have a “live” option means that whatever your choosing between makes sense to who you are in some way. Whether this is based on societal, cultural, or financial reasons the option should be something that could happen. A person could ask me if I believed in the water gods and that would be a “dead” option for me, because I am monotheistic ad believe in one God If the same question was asked to a person who believes in many gods but maybe not those in particular then it would be a “live” option because it is something makes sense to them. If someone asks you to choose between two options and you have no option to not choose then that is a forced option. Although you are still having some form of freedom you are still put in a box. If I give you some skittles and tell you to pick out your favorite flavor then I am forcing you to pick a flavor. You may not even like skittles but the fact that you have no say makes it a “forced” option and assumption that you like skittles. Lastly, a momentous option is something that is spontaneous, whether that is because it is a once in a lifetime opportunity or maybe its something that is very rare. If a person has the option to study abroad for one semester all paid for, rather than stay at their school they may choose it just because its a one time experience. This is indeed a momentous option. The once in a lifetime opportunity becomes the reason for someone to believe they need to go.

Belief that fits all:

I think religion could be something that fits all categories. With different beliefs and customs in religion it leads to many “live” and “dead” options. Religion is also something that could be “forced” option depending on family, community, and sometimes where you live. If you believe in some form of religion or custom then that means that for whatever reason that religion is spontaneous to yourself, and the “momentous” option comes in because we essentially only have one life, and our way of life now in most religions will affect your way of life or existence in the “afterlife”.

Exception:

Clifford argues that any belief based upon insufficient evidence is wrong but James suggests that their are reasons for choosing certain things whether you know every piece of information or not. James does in my opinion give an exception to Clifford’s argument and gives 3 reasons why someone may believe or choose something without all forms of evidence. For example, some people choose religion because it gives hope and a clear understanding for our whole existence. Because of this many don’t even question what they are told, they just abide by it, which in Clifford’s case would be wrong and in James case would be a momentous option.

My Opinion:

I agree with both Clifford and James, I feel like in certain situations it is not good to believe things without all of the information. However to James point there are reasons for believing something without all the evidence or information. So I stand in the middle

1. If you go your whole life believing something with insufficient evidence and avoid everything that contradicts that belief then your life is one long sin against mankind.
2. Believing something with insufficient evidence is a sin.

C: Make sure you are knowledgeable about something before you believe it.

Clifford’s thesis is very sound but lacks validity. He wants the reader to just automatically believe his argument with not much evidence. Clifford does include stories that align with his argument, which do provide some evidence. Some of the fallacies I noticed throughout his argument were appeal to questionable authority and appeal to people. Appeal to people is when someones argument is implied to be correct because it is widely believed. Although his arguments are very sound they lacked validity.