Existentialism, Anguish, Despair, & Monogamy

Two core feelings that existentialism addresses are anguish and despair. In the context of existentialism, anguish is considered to be the negative feelings that we develop (such as having stress or anxiety about a decision) are direct results of the state of freedom that we exist in according to Sartre. Because we must take responsibility for our actions, a certain level of anguish arises when contemplating the fact that you’ll have some level of culpability attached to the results of decisions you make. Existentialism takes the stance that existence precedes essence, or to put it more simply, the essence of an action or person or thing cannot be understood until it exists because there was no like image for the essence to be derived from. So, people are defined by their actions because their actions create the essence of who they are, making each person individually responsible for how they act and who they are. Each action sets a precedent for future action, as we begin to use our essence as a precedent for action once it is developed. When a person acts in a way that defines who they are and choose what they believe is to be the best course of action, they further solidify that essence and create a certain image of humankind that will be looked upon by humans of the future. This breeds greater feelings of anguish due to the responsibility of creating a lasting image of man.

Despair arises from that which is out of our control, and that we can only rely on that which we know to be true from our own action. Sartre argues against inaction still, because we are defined by our actions as much as our inaction, or that which results of our inaction. With time and understanding the essence of other individuals and things, we can rely on them if we know that they have made themselves to be reliable or good, but we cannot assign this same trust to everyone/thing because, if existence comes before essence, there is no foundation of goodness that we can reasonably believe exists in all things, only that we can reasonably believe in things where we are familiar with their essence.

“When we say that man chooses himself, we do mean that every one of us must choose himself; but by that we also mean that in choosing for himself he chooses for all men. For in effect, of all the actions a man may take in order to create himself as he wills to be, there is not one which is not creative, at the same time, of an image of man such as he believes he ought to be. To choose between this or that is at the same time to affirm the value of that which is chosen; for we are unable ever to choose the worse.” -J.P. Sartre

https://thinkingbeings.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/sartre.pdf (p.3 par.1)

Sartre explains here that we do what we believe we ought to do as the best reaction. When the same choice is made over and over, it creates a norm in regards to it that others will then use for guidance in their actions, further perpetuating this as the norm. In regards to individual marriage, this has contributed to the norm of human monogamy. The first person to marry created something to be replicated and with each replication, further solidified the normalcy of it. Because monogamy is essential to marriage, each person who marries further normalizes this for all of humanity, therefore committing future generations to replicating this and in turn, committing monogamy to all of humanity.

Word Count: 600

Memento

In the movie Memento, the main character, Leonard, has short term memory loss as a result of an attack so he relies on scribbled notes and photos in order to move through life. Throughout the film, he is confused and taken advantage of by a few different characters and they use his condition to manipulate his actions to their own benefit. As a viewer, this is stressful to watch him try and navigate through his life without much of a clue as to what is going on and the other characters echo this same opinion but eventually, he makes an argument as to why his method of memory is actually better and more reliable than the mind’s memory that those around him rely on. He goes as far as claiming that eyewitness memory is worthless.

“Memory can change the shape of a room; it can change the color of a car. And memories can be distorted. They’re just an interpretation, they’re not a record, and they’re irrelevant if you have the facts.”

Leonard Shelby, Memento

I would argue that this is valid in almost every case except for the movie. Because Leonard’s perception of the world is so limited, his own notes are unreliable. The mind may not be able to recall all details of a situation accurately, but it can accurately recall the emotions one felt and that is largely unchanging. In addition to this, Leonard’s notes are also quite limited- just a few words associated with a photo capturing only a single second where a million different things are also going on and there is no way one person could gather all of these details and write them all down in a way that is so sufficient that it can be considered more reliable than memory. It is just simply impossible for him to keep all of the information he needs to make informed decisions in the world around him by scribbling short notes.

When coupled with memory and eyewitness testimony, however, notes and written down, unchanging recollections of events can be useful to help recall the past more reliably and accurately. I believe that memory is able to capture a more all encompassing view of the situation, despite the compromised accuracy. Simple notes and photos provide too narrow of a view for one to base their life and decisions off of. I do believe that this creates a more sincere identity, though. We change very slowly over time as a result of life experience, but with Leonard’s condition, he acts with the most honest conviction in everything he does because all he knows is that very moment. I think that Hume would say that Leonard’s condition is very different from the typical human condition and that people suffering from a condition such as this have the most real and honest identity possible. Memory causes us to act based on what we think is going to happen based on the past, inhibiting our natural reactions that come from our true selves. Leonard gets to be his truest form in every single moment, unaffected by the past or future.

Word Count: 520

Of the Nature of the Human Mind

In the Cartesian method of philosophy, he discusses the ‘cogito’, or the principle that allows an individual to confirm the existence of a being by it’s own thinking or self-awareness. He tells us that the body is separate from the mind, considering that the mind is not physical and cannot be touched or seen or destroyed; conversely, we only know that the body exists because its’ physical nature. Therefore, the fundamental nature of body and mind are completely different. The body is a limited form that can manifest the unlimited thoughts of the mind which never ceases to exist. The body is nothing more than a placeholder for the mind.

In the wax argument, Descartes explains how the physical is deceptive and we cannot trust it to be true because looks can be deceiving, so we should not trust that what we see is what we believe when we lack a proper way to confirm the legitimacy of its’ existence. He describes a wax body that melts into its original form, shapeless and becoming unrecognizable as a body- but very recognizable in the form of melted wax, and yet started off appearing to be a real human body. He uses these changes to explain the significance of not trusting what is seen with the eyes, but what is known to be true by the mind. Only our mind can know the unadulterated truth of what our eyes might see and identify it as its true form. Our eyes have the ability to deceive us, but by engaging in deep and considerate thought, the mind is decently reliable.

Descartes claims to be a “thinking thing”(p.18, par.4). He determined that if something thinks, it exists- so to think is to confirm your own existence. All other actions are borne of the body, so they are performed in the physical world, received by our senses, and therefore cannot be trusted. Say, for example, you were to say “I speak, therefore I exist.” This is no reliable way to think because you must take into consideration that the senses are required to engage your own speech and hear yourself, and hearing can be deceiving. If you were to think, “I think, therefore I exist”, this would undoubtedly confirm your existence as you needn’t go out of your own mind to think. Descartes is showing us that there is a difference between minds and bodies, and that we know our own minds much better than we know any body, even our own.

Princess Elisabeth asks Descartes to explain how if the soul of a person is only his thoughts, how could his thoughts create voluntary physical action and affect the body that is supposedly quite separate from the mind. Descartes explains to the Princess that it is weight which moves the body rather than the soul. I feel that his answer does not adequately explain how weight controls our bodies, but more that our mind is in control of the things with weight that are around us. This idea that we are able to will ourselves into action does make sense, but the connection to a thought willing the body to move and the body actually making the movement is not well explained.

Word Count: 538

Art in Music

There is a song by J. Cole called “4 Your Eyes Only” that to me, is particularly striking and full of emotion. Cole tells the story of James McMillian Jr. and the messages he wanted to pass down to his daughter, Nina. Heavily involved in gangs and other dangerous street activity, James came to the realization that his life was in serious danger, so he left Cole with a story to tell to his daughter in the event of his passing which is weaved throughout the whole album. J. Cole then used these tapes to create a song dedicated to sharing James’ message with his daughter and sharing the struggles their community faces with the world.

The part of his song that I feel the most emotionally moved by comes towards the end of the eight minute ballad where he discusses the details of how James’ life story became a story he was responsible for telling. It starts at about 6 minutes.

“One day your daddy called me, told me he had a funny feeling, What he been dealing with lately he wasn’t telling… but I could feel the sense of panic in his voice and it was chilling. He said… “In case I never get a chance to speak again, I won’t forget the weekends spent at your crib that’s the way I wish my family lived. Listen, I got no time to dive into descriptions, but I been having premonitions… I got a feeling I won’t live to see tomorrow, like the time I’m living on is borrowed. With that said, the only thing I’m proud to say I was a father, Write my story down and if I pass go play it for my daughter when she ready.”

To me, this absolutely meets Leo Tolstoy’s definition of art and infectiousness. Intriguing and unique, it’s revealed that Cole took the story of his friend’s life that was simply meant to be passed on to his daughter and turned it into a beautiful tribute to him. Individuality is the first standard used for assessing art and the song definitely has this. Making his story into an album and creating this specific song to really solidify the message is a very thoughtful and different way to pass on someone’s final words of life and advice. J. Cole took the story and made it into an art form using the medium that is most important to him.

Tolstoy’s second condition of art is clarity. This song in particular is actually named after the album it’s featured on, and seems to do the best job in telling the big picture story of the album overall. The song ties together topics and references made throughout the album and ends with a two minute explanation of why the song was made, who it is for, and why it is important. “4 Your Eyez Only” is sang the way a story is told, with the stage and scene set by the first words and tied together and explained by the end. The artist’s feelings on the subject matter are clear and his purpose in relaying the message is even more so.

“4 Your Eyes Only” meets every required condition art should meet by these standards. J. Cole exceeds qualifications in terms of sincerity. By taking this story and turning it into an entire album describing different aspects of his story, the artist shows his dedication to a thorough retelling of McMillian’s life. The song itself carries heavy emotion, where you can hear the tone change and Cole’s sadness. The feeling of loss is something everyone can relate to in some way or another. Listeners who grew up with parental figures can also sympathize with and respect McMillian’s desire to pass on the lessons to his daughter that he wouldn’t be there to teach, as well respect the value of his forethought and obvious love for his daughter. The story behind the song is very serious to trust someone with and we can find sincerity in the care and respect used to create it.

To evoke in oneself a feeling one has once experienced, and having evoked it in oneself, then, by means of movements, lines, colors, sounds, or forms expressed in words, so to transmit that feeling that others may experience the same feeling – this is the activity of art.

http://web.csulb.edu/~jvancamp/361r14.html

Since “4 Your Eyez Only” meets the standards for infectiousness in terms of individuality, clarity, and sincerity, it should be considered art. Everyone can relate to certain aspects of the song like familial relationships and loss, and it lets you understand the message that James McMillian Jr. wanted to pass on. The feelings of sadness, love, loss, and fear are woven throughout the song and as a listener, you feel it too. The feeling these men both experienced is passed on in song, so that song is considered art.

Word Count: 811

Existenz and Plato’s Forms; Levels of Reality

The film Existenz explores ideas about different levels of reality which are similarly expressed by Plato’s theory of forms and hierarchical scheme of reality. Existenz is a game within Trancendenz which is a virtual reality game within the movie. This mirrors Plato’s ideas on the hierarchy of forms of reality where the most basic and natural form is reality, followed by the sensory world, and levels beyond that are thrice removed, etc. Because each level of reality had tangible and visible aspects of themselves, it was confusing for the characters to distinguish which level of reality they were experiencing, as well as for the viewer. To put the movie in a similar perspective to Plato’s explanation, the true form is the movie when the characters were completely outside of the games whereby everything else originates. The sensory world is supposed to be represented by the game Trancendenz as this is where the formulation of ideas of the participants comes to life in a tangible way, yet it is not the true form of existence. The final level which would be thrice removed and it is portrayed as Existenz in the movie, the game within the game.

The complexity of each world in the movie reflected many ideas Plato has considered such as art forms as discussed in the Republic. The movie world is comparable to the first level of reality containing the forms in which all forms originate (the idea of a bed), the world Trancendenz is the physical form being replicated to show the sense of reality that we live in (carpenter manifesting/building the idea of a bed), and the world Existenz is the art form of that (the painting of the bed built by the carpenter).

It is important to note that each existence felt completely real, to the point that the characters questioned the legitimacy of their true reality because the art forms were so convincing. This intentional separation of worlds is meant to allow viewers to understand the different levels of reality that Plato talks about and how each game fits into each spot in the hierarchy of reality, making it something like an allegory referencing Plato’s famous allegory of the cave.

Word Count: 366

What Is Art?

In his analysis of art, Leo Tolstoy considers the standards and measurements by which we should use to judge art and to define art itself. He starts off by claiming that art is meant to evoke a feeling, and that the feeling should be so infectious and natural that the receiver of the art recognizes the message as one that he himself already knew and has yet to put express in an art form. The ability of the art in question to achieve this infectiousness is how Tolstoy believes we should judge the art, or even grant something the title of an artwork.

So, when he uses this standard to measure what should count as art, and what is good art, he measures infectiousness. For example, if a Muslim person who was formerly jailed in one of China’s gulag escapes and lives to tell his story on a stage and his listeners receive his story with a deep sadness and feelings of empathy for those affected, his retelling would be considered art. This is true based on Tolstoy’s definition of art in that his story has “infected” the hearts and minds of its listeners and caused them to feel those same feelings that he once experienced. The retelling stirs up sincere emotion and understanding, and so it is sufficiently infectious enough to be considered art.

In order to further scrutinize and evaluate the quality of an art piece, Tolstoy suggests that we consider 3 conditions, all of which fall under the umbrella of sincerity. First, the individuality of the art speaks to the sincerity of the art itself. So, the more original the art is, the more sincerely it will be perceived by its receivers and the more readily they will accept the message which the art tries to convey. Second, the clarity of the arts’ message determines how simply the feelings that the art is meaning to convey will be transmitted. The more clearly that the artist expresses something, the more sincerely the receiver will find his own true personal expression in another mans art. Lastly, sincerity encompasses both the first and second because a sincere production of art will be an original idea, therefore creating individuality that attracts consumers of art. This sincerity itself also should create a desire in the author to clearly convey their message- therefore, being sincere has certain prerequisites that confirm the sincerity of the art and when the art fulfills all of these requirements, it can be granted the title of art.

“Art begins when one person, with the object of joining another or others to himself in one and the same feeling, expresses that feeling by certain external indications.” -Leo Tolstoy

http://web.csulb.edu/~jvancamp/361r14.html (Line #7)

His claim here suggests that art must be a personal interpretation to begin with, and that it conveys a particular feeling about the subject. This, then, would also suggest that all art represents the given artists’ feelings about the subject and it would be disingenuous to require that each viewer hold the same feelings about it, when art is meant to be individual.

I do not believe that this is a very useful proposal in evaluating the quality of art. If the standard of art is based on its ability to transmit emotions and invoke deep feelings of connection to the piece, then there can be no consistent standard because each persons perception will vary. If I were to listen to the story of the Muslim refugee and feel the same deep sorrow, fear, and pain that the author is relaying to the audience but the person next to me feels indifferent, I wouldn’t say that this disqualifies the expression as art. At the very least, there should be some distinction made in Tolstoy’s argument that there are endless valid perceptions of art and that if one were to use this as a standard for evaluating art, he must also acknowledge that his interpretation is not the only legitimate evaluation of it. This test of sincerity can be used as a means to evaluate art to a certain extent, but the art’s ability to invoke specific feelings in the viewer will not be consistent with everyone, yet this consistency or inconsistency does not actually determine the quality or validity of the art.

Word Count: 712

Plato’s “The Republic: Book X”

Plato discusses about the difference in the idea of existence and actual existence. In one example he talks about “beds in the world” vs. “the idea of a bed.” It is first explained the three ways in which we perceive existence and that is through levels of imitation. God creates the nature of the bed itself and is the natural maker of the bed and everything that flows from it should be derived from his creation of beds in nature. Following that, the carpenter makes the bed and imitates the bed as it is. This is the bed in tangible form and only once removed from the truth of what a bed essentially is, it is one original interpretation of what God created to be a bed. The carpenters try to turn it into something we can see to understand and show our eyes the truth that our minds can perceive. Painters are the final level of perception, as they can deceptively imitate the bed from any angle they see fit, and cater the image to how they perceive or wish others to perceive the bed. This is twice removed from the truth of what a bed is by what God has distinguished. It is a muddled, one sided picture of what the carpenter attempted to manifest based of the nature of a bed by God.

So, beds in the world are just attempted semblances of existence, trying to create God’s true idea of beds while the idea of a bed is the truth and what the physical bed is derived from. The art form is an intentionally depicted version that the painter creates and is not to be taken as the true form of a bed.

Plato argues that art is deceptive. “A painter will paint a cobbler, carpenter, or any other artist, though he knows nothing of their arts; and, if he is a good artist, he may deceive children or simple persons, when he shows them his picture of [one of them] from a distance…” (sect. 36). His explanation here helps us to understand why we should not take art in any form at face value, as art is based on replication of preexisting subjects, or a personal interpretation of a subject. Because this is not the original form, it should not be taken as true. The only thing we know to be true and real is what precedes all depictions of the topic, or its essence. Replications always must include personal interpretation of the essence, and essence cannot be created if it simply is. I agree with his argument because it is true, if the artist has sole discretion in depicting what he creates and controls the narrative attached to the image, he can convince people who know no better that this is the truth, when his depiction is actually twice removed from the truth.

Word Count: 478

The Duty of Inquiry: Standard Form

In William Clifford’s “The Ethics of Belief,” he discusses the duty of inquiry and its relation to honesty determines the sincerity of actions. Near the end of the third page, he questions the ability of a person to make an inquiry without bias when that person already holds a certain belief or prejudice.

No man holding a strong belief on one side of a question, or even wishing to hold a belief on one side, can investigate it with such fairness and completeness as if he were really in doubt and unbiassed… Nor is it that truly a belief at all which has not some influence upon the actions of him who holds it. He who truly believes that which prompts him to an action has looked upon the action to lust after it… it is stored up for the guidance of the future… No real belief, however trifling and fragmentary it may seem, is ever truly insignificant; it prepares us to receive more of its like, confirms those which resembled it before, and weakens others; and so gradually it lays a stealthy train in our inmost thoughts, which may some day explode into overt action, and leave its stamp upon our character for ever.

William Clifford, “The Ethics of Belief, Section I: The Duty of Inquiry” pp. 3-4; par. 4-5

To simplify the author’s argument, going into an investigation of some sort while holding any strong opinions, wishes, or preconceived notions in regards to the truth of the outcome of the situation makes you unfit to assess the situation because you will be more easily swayed in favor of what supports your preferred outcome.

If an investigation is completed fairly, then the person who investigates cannot hold any strong beliefs about the situation.

The argument is sound because the first and only 2 premises are true.

The argument is valid because the conclusion necessarily follows the premise and is guaranteed by them.

1. If an investigation is completed fairly, then the person who investigates cannot hold any strong beliefs about the situation.
2. A person has strong beliefs about the situation, therefore
3. That person cannot fairly investigate the situation.

This reasoning cannot be fallacious because it applies only to investigations that are completed fairly. In cases where attorneys fight for clients whom strongly believe actually committed the crime, yet attempt to find and use evidence that contradicts this, they are contributing to a false and unfairly determined result. I would argue that there are no instances wherein a fair investigation can be conducted by someone holding strong beliefs about it. The moment a person attempts to investigate a situation where they already have a particular view or preconception about the details of the event, their perception will be skewed in favor of the belief. Or, if they do argue against their own preconceptions or beliefs, the outcome should be considered unfair because it lacks sincerity and is done with the intent to deceive the opponent, or whomever is assigned with determining the result that should naturally follow the evidence presented.

Word Count: 506

Philosophical Terms & Methods and Arguments

A Valid Argument with a False Conclusion:

1. I have 2 sisters and one brother.
2. My neighbor has 2 sisters and one brother.
3. Therefore, me and my neighbor have the same siblings.

A Sound Argument

1. I either take the light rail to work or drive my car each day.
2. I did not take the light rail to work today.
3. Therefore, I drove to work today.

A Cogent Inductive Argument

1. I usually have class on Tuesday afternoons.
2. Today is a Tuesday afternoon.
3. Therefore, I have class.

A Weak Inductive Argument

1. My downstairs of my house is decorated pink.
2. The first bedroom upstairs is decorated pink.
3. Therefore, every room in my house is decorated pink.

Persuasive Argument

1. High schoolers are irresponsible.
2. Driving is an activity for responsible adults.
3. Therefore, high schoolers should not drive.

Word Count: 129

About Me

My name is Celeste Mitchell, I’m 19 years old and a Sacramento native. This is my second semester at Sac City College. I’m in the process of getting my associates for transfer in criminal justice and hope to transfer to one of a few schools in southern California, especially since I’ve wanted to live there since I was little. Before this, I attended school at Folsom High and Capital Christian High School. In the time that I transitioned between those two schools, I experienced a great deal in terms of family, mental health, exposure to secularity, drugs, and more that has deeply influenced my world view from a young age. Currently, I work in downtown Sacramento at a restaurant next to the Golden 1 Center on Capitol Mall. I started off as a barista in July 2018 and have worked my way up to hostess, assistant manager, and server. My favorite hobbies are going on road trip travels and anything in the water- wakeboarding, tubing, kayaking, swimming, surfing, all of it!! My main goal is to create a life for myself where I can enjoy my hobbies, travel often, and spend time with family with financial stability. 

Word Count: 194