As the semester is coming to an end I found myself reflecting on some of the topics we discussed in our philosophy class. I can honestly say that this was my most interesting and favorite class this semester.
We have been introduced to a lot of different concepts and ideas with the intention of putting our brains to work.
Looking back to the beginning of the semester when we read Adrienne Rich’s “on claiming an education” I must say that it was really refreshing to see that all of us claimed our education in this class. All of us seemed to be highly motivated and always engaged in good conversations.
The ethical and unwritten contract between teacher and students (as Adrienne Rich talks about in her essay) led to active and responsible participation of all of us.
Of course Philosophy itself gives a lot of room for free discussions. Since it is the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom by intellectual means many questions were being asked. Not all of them found a satisfying answer at the time. But that is ok.
I understand that life cannot be viewed and understood from one single perspective. For me there is no universally valid right or wrong answers that account for all human beings. It all depends on the viewpoint of each individual person I believe. And this is what makes it so interesting and wonderful. There is so much room for different ideas and as long as we remain open minded to other people’s idea it will never get boring and there will never be limitations to our thoughts. We may evaluate others idea and see how far we can come to agree with them or if we can even be persuaded and change our own ideas to the new ones but it is important to remember not to judge. One of my favorite philosophers is Krishnamurti (whom we did not discuss in class I know.) He once said something like “Thinking without judging is the highest form of intelligence. This seems like quite a challenging task and maybe even impossible for humans, but only this let's us stay open minded and be tolerant of other people's thoughts.
However, sometimes I think life would be a little easier if we didn’t have so much intellectual freedom and just had to follow rules and opinions. If there was a definite right and wrong. But since humans constantly evolve this can’t be the case. We thrive forward… we want new stuff, new ideas, new concepts. Things just don’t ever stay the same. We change our attitudes and ideas over time as we learn more. This all helps to sort our own thoughts and discard old useless stuff.
This course was really the best example how things can turn out when students actively claim their education and not be limited to learning fixed things dictated by teachers. Not only are students encouraged to challenge themselves but also teachers (as I mentioned in my very first blog entry) to be open to challenging questions and recognizing the idea that things can also be learned from the student. This concept has really been successfully implemented in this class. Philosophy covers such a big terrain that unfortunately we were only able to touch on a few things and not go through anything thoroughly but I have made some mental bookmarks for myself on things I want to return to later and read/learn) more about.
Some of the most basic and fundamental questions in life to me are:
Who am I? How can I transform myself? How important is authenticity and is the ultimate purpose in life “the quest for happiness”?
I really loved this class and feel like I have learned quite a bit.
Monday, April 25, 2011
A practical guide to personal freedom
The Four Agreements (by Don Miguel Ruiz)
Don Miguel Ruiz realized as a neurosurgeon that what needed to be healed was not only the physical brain, but the human mind as well. After a car accident the direction of his life shifted dramatically and he experienced himself as pure awareness outside the constraints of his physical body. He realized that the Toltec wisdom of his family contained all of the tools needed to change the human mind.
If one is on a quest for authenticity, the four agreements can definitely help to influence this process. I thought about how they can be implemented in our daily life, why they are so difficult to pursue and how they can actually make our lives better. I tried to find answers to the following questions for each one of the four agreements.
What does it mean?
Why is it so hard to do this?
How can it help us transform our lives?
1) Be Impeccable with your words
Impeccable means flawless, without sin. We can do this by taking responsibility for our actions and words without blaming ourselves. Say only what you mean. Avoid using the word against ourselves or gossip about others. Don’t use words that go against your own integrity, your own self worth. When we speak we should ask ourselves these questions: how am I using my words? Am I judging? Am I blaming? Gossip is one of the hardest bad habits to break. People talk about other people behind their backs, people judge. When we are young we are taught not to be truthful with our words in order not to hurt the other person or to appear “polite.” Be careful what you tell your children, it forms character. Set yourself free from opinions formed during your own childhood when you feel they don’t go conform with your present views and beliefs.
2) Don’t take anything personally
We need to understand that we don’t see things how they really are, we see things as we are. Everything we see and the way we speak is always filtered through our own set of beliefs. Therefore it is always a limited perspective. So when people make judgments about you, it is more about them than it is about you. However his agreement is hard to understand and put in context when someone attacks you verbally, or crosses a boundary. I find it really difficult not to take this personally because this verbal attack is directed towards me at this very moment. However, sometimes we project our own emotions onto other people. What this agreement does not mean is to close ourselves off to the feedback of other people that can actually help us grow. Communication is the key component that can build bridges. We want to be open and at least listen to what other people have to say. It is up to us to decide which people we want to listen to, which people influence us and then make our own decisions based on that. Respect other people’s opinions as well. Tolerance is the way to freedom. Open the conversation by saying: “You must have a reason to say this. I am curious to hear what that is.” And then they probably will dig deeper into the real issue and we have a conversation. I think this is the most difficult agreement to follow
3) Don’t make assumptions
Is this realistic? Don’t we always make assumptions? Isn’t it part of our life? People always try to make meaning out of their life experiences. In science assumptions are totally necessary. In order to have innovative breakthroughs in life it is necessary to make assumptions so we can start receiving things from a different point of view. Making assumptions helps us to create a bigger framework of what is possible. Ruiz however, is probably talking about the assumption as it relates to our personal relationships. When we make assumptions we base all of our reactions, or what we think, on something that may not even exist. When we make assumptions it is negative for us. We put ourselves and other people down. Ruiz says that people make assumptions because they are afraid to ask questions. When we don’t have the facts as human beings, we are going to fill in the blanks. We make up our own story. Another thing he talks about in terms of personal relationship is that people assume they can change someone. They get into relationships that may not be working the way and assume they can change it and the other person. We expect people to act a certain way, again based on our own assumptions. When you stop making assumptions, your world becomes impeccable, and your life is completely transformed. What you need comes to you easily because spirit moves freely through you.
4) Always do your best
This agreement sounds pretty simple, but often we don’t do the best we can and we usually know when this is the case. We compromise for less. A lot of times there is a big gap between stuff we do and the stuff we could do. “Always do your best” is about practice and knowing that we are going to make mistakes. We should learn from our mistakes and move forward. Our best today may not be our best tomorrow. Face every situation the best you can possibly do. Bring the best out of people. At the end of our journey we then don’t have to regret the things we didn’t do, because we always gave things our best effort.
As human beings we are always evolving and always changing. What happens when we constantly ask ourselves these questions is that we become more aware. Self awareness is the core principal of personal development. Seek to always improve yourself, the relationship with ourselves and with others.
Following these rules can bring about so many positive results including the accomplishment of personal freedom and the improvement of our interpersonal relationships.
Don Miguel Ruiz realized as a neurosurgeon that what needed to be healed was not only the physical brain, but the human mind as well. After a car accident the direction of his life shifted dramatically and he experienced himself as pure awareness outside the constraints of his physical body. He realized that the Toltec wisdom of his family contained all of the tools needed to change the human mind.
If one is on a quest for authenticity, the four agreements can definitely help to influence this process. I thought about how they can be implemented in our daily life, why they are so difficult to pursue and how they can actually make our lives better. I tried to find answers to the following questions for each one of the four agreements.
What does it mean?
Why is it so hard to do this?
How can it help us transform our lives?
1) Be Impeccable with your words
Impeccable means flawless, without sin. We can do this by taking responsibility for our actions and words without blaming ourselves. Say only what you mean. Avoid using the word against ourselves or gossip about others. Don’t use words that go against your own integrity, your own self worth. When we speak we should ask ourselves these questions: how am I using my words? Am I judging? Am I blaming? Gossip is one of the hardest bad habits to break. People talk about other people behind their backs, people judge. When we are young we are taught not to be truthful with our words in order not to hurt the other person or to appear “polite.” Be careful what you tell your children, it forms character. Set yourself free from opinions formed during your own childhood when you feel they don’t go conform with your present views and beliefs.
2) Don’t take anything personally
We need to understand that we don’t see things how they really are, we see things as we are. Everything we see and the way we speak is always filtered through our own set of beliefs. Therefore it is always a limited perspective. So when people make judgments about you, it is more about them than it is about you. However his agreement is hard to understand and put in context when someone attacks you verbally, or crosses a boundary. I find it really difficult not to take this personally because this verbal attack is directed towards me at this very moment. However, sometimes we project our own emotions onto other people. What this agreement does not mean is to close ourselves off to the feedback of other people that can actually help us grow. Communication is the key component that can build bridges. We want to be open and at least listen to what other people have to say. It is up to us to decide which people we want to listen to, which people influence us and then make our own decisions based on that. Respect other people’s opinions as well. Tolerance is the way to freedom. Open the conversation by saying: “You must have a reason to say this. I am curious to hear what that is.” And then they probably will dig deeper into the real issue and we have a conversation. I think this is the most difficult agreement to follow
3) Don’t make assumptions
Is this realistic? Don’t we always make assumptions? Isn’t it part of our life? People always try to make meaning out of their life experiences. In science assumptions are totally necessary. In order to have innovative breakthroughs in life it is necessary to make assumptions so we can start receiving things from a different point of view. Making assumptions helps us to create a bigger framework of what is possible. Ruiz however, is probably talking about the assumption as it relates to our personal relationships. When we make assumptions we base all of our reactions, or what we think, on something that may not even exist. When we make assumptions it is negative for us. We put ourselves and other people down. Ruiz says that people make assumptions because they are afraid to ask questions. When we don’t have the facts as human beings, we are going to fill in the blanks. We make up our own story. Another thing he talks about in terms of personal relationship is that people assume they can change someone. They get into relationships that may not be working the way and assume they can change it and the other person. We expect people to act a certain way, again based on our own assumptions. When you stop making assumptions, your world becomes impeccable, and your life is completely transformed. What you need comes to you easily because spirit moves freely through you.
4) Always do your best
This agreement sounds pretty simple, but often we don’t do the best we can and we usually know when this is the case. We compromise for less. A lot of times there is a big gap between stuff we do and the stuff we could do. “Always do your best” is about practice and knowing that we are going to make mistakes. We should learn from our mistakes and move forward. Our best today may not be our best tomorrow. Face every situation the best you can possibly do. Bring the best out of people. At the end of our journey we then don’t have to regret the things we didn’t do, because we always gave things our best effort.
As human beings we are always evolving and always changing. What happens when we constantly ask ourselves these questions is that we become more aware. Self awareness is the core principal of personal development. Seek to always improve yourself, the relationship with ourselves and with others.
Following these rules can bring about so many positive results including the accomplishment of personal freedom and the improvement of our interpersonal relationships.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Humanity and Morality
Immanuel Kant argued that moral requirements are based on a standard of rationality, thus immorality is thereby irrational. He believed all humans have within them the capacity for moral behavior.
I am somewhat still confused about what morality and ethics are and if there is a universal morality?
The term “morality” can be used either
1. descriptively to refer to some codes of conduct put forward by a society or,
a. some other group, such as a religion, or
b. accepted by an individual for her own behavior or
2. normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons.
So morality is either defined by society as a whole, and can thus vary from group to group or it refers to something put forward by all rational persons.
Does this mean there must be some kind of universal morality that accounts for all of humanity?
If human beings are moral and ethical why do they treat each other so unequally? If a creature was completely moral or ethical inequality of any kind would be impossible. Maybe human nature is completely amoral and we are just pretending something we are not?
Morality is an individual phenomenon but it only works or makes sense in a social context. When humans form into social groups, there is something that naturally happens by virtue of human psychology and the motivations for forming groups. Different societies have different beliefs which form the basis of their morality.
To me it seems like most morals arise out of real-life situations. Religions and philosophers looking for universal moral truths are just trying to fix morality. Why does it need to be an all or nothing sort of thing? Can there not be human morality and ethics of a personal or conditional type? Must we claim that if a human idea or belief or value is not UNIVERSAL and proven objectively, that it does not exist?
Individual people have ethics and moral codes. Groups also have codes, defined by the agreements between members of the group on such things. Morality is never unchanging, permanent or able to be “proven” somehow. I don’t think there is a universal moral law. Ethics is not “in nature”. It is human; it is in us. However, this does not make it any less real.
Humans are formed by their biology and by their social interactions and motivated by a mixture of ego, malice and compassion. When people who believe in morals and ethics say that everybody else must behave in a way that is considered moral or ethical, they make such statements by believing there has to be some independent existence that everybody must conform under. That definitely sounds like either Kantians or Christians – ironically both of a dying breed in Germany where Kant was from.
But even Kantians and Christians see such systems only as an ideal and not the real day to day behavior of ordinary people – they express how they would like people to behave.
I look at morality and ethics as a sort of socio-religious form of thinking.
Like religion beyond belief there is no hardcore evidence for believing in morals and ethics other than that it makes those who believe in them feel "good" about themselves and the world around them. This is where the belief in god is very similar to the belief in morals and ethics. Also there is no proof to what makes a specific action “right” whereas another “wrong.”
I am really surprised that postmodern humans seek to salvage morals and ethics which are based on theological forms of thinking.
I am somewhat still confused about what morality and ethics are and if there is a universal morality?
The term “morality” can be used either
1. descriptively to refer to some codes of conduct put forward by a society or,
a. some other group, such as a religion, or
b. accepted by an individual for her own behavior or
2. normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons.
So morality is either defined by society as a whole, and can thus vary from group to group or it refers to something put forward by all rational persons.
Does this mean there must be some kind of universal morality that accounts for all of humanity?
If human beings are moral and ethical why do they treat each other so unequally? If a creature was completely moral or ethical inequality of any kind would be impossible. Maybe human nature is completely amoral and we are just pretending something we are not?
Morality is an individual phenomenon but it only works or makes sense in a social context. When humans form into social groups, there is something that naturally happens by virtue of human psychology and the motivations for forming groups. Different societies have different beliefs which form the basis of their morality.
To me it seems like most morals arise out of real-life situations. Religions and philosophers looking for universal moral truths are just trying to fix morality. Why does it need to be an all or nothing sort of thing? Can there not be human morality and ethics of a personal or conditional type? Must we claim that if a human idea or belief or value is not UNIVERSAL and proven objectively, that it does not exist?
Individual people have ethics and moral codes. Groups also have codes, defined by the agreements between members of the group on such things. Morality is never unchanging, permanent or able to be “proven” somehow. I don’t think there is a universal moral law. Ethics is not “in nature”. It is human; it is in us. However, this does not make it any less real.
Humans are formed by their biology and by their social interactions and motivated by a mixture of ego, malice and compassion. When people who believe in morals and ethics say that everybody else must behave in a way that is considered moral or ethical, they make such statements by believing there has to be some independent existence that everybody must conform under. That definitely sounds like either Kantians or Christians – ironically both of a dying breed in Germany where Kant was from.
But even Kantians and Christians see such systems only as an ideal and not the real day to day behavior of ordinary people – they express how they would like people to behave.
I look at morality and ethics as a sort of socio-religious form of thinking.
Like religion beyond belief there is no hardcore evidence for believing in morals and ethics other than that it makes those who believe in them feel "good" about themselves and the world around them. This is where the belief in god is very similar to the belief in morals and ethics. Also there is no proof to what makes a specific action “right” whereas another “wrong.”
I am really surprised that postmodern humans seek to salvage morals and ethics which are based on theological forms of thinking.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)