#through being exposed not to john the person but to his philosophy and ideas and actions | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

gravitascivics · 2 years

Text

PHILOSOPHIES OF EDUCATION (cont.)

To further contextualize this blog’s review of Mortimer Adler’s contribution – his application of the academic rationalist approach to curriculum development – this posting will complete its review of the four major philosophic traditions: perennialism (academic rationalism), essentialism, progressivism, and reconstructionism (critical theory).

What remains after the last posting’s descriptions of perennialism and essentialism are those of progressivism and reconstructionism. And as with the last posting, this one will rely chiefly on Augsberg’s chart of educational philosophies.[1]

Progressivism. This philosophy takes a more holistic approach and shies away from making distinctions between content and/or the teacher. If anything, this approach zeroes in on process or instructional strategies that have students utilize experimental testing or studies. By doing so, students are directed to actively test ideas through experiments; in short, progressivism calls for interactive education.

As for content, it argues for students to use their experiences from their social worlds. They are to question what they see and experience, especially as they take note of the problems that they, and the people they observe, encounter. “Learning is rooted in the questions of learners that arise through experiencing the world. It is active, not passive. The learner is a problem solver and thinker who makes meaning through his or her individual experience in the physical and cultural context.”[2]

And with that focus, effective teaching exposes students to active situations in which students learn by interacting and performing with what the situations demand or encourage. So, learning becomes first-person, i.e., it results from what students do within the context of those situations.

Application of this approach has to date relied heavily on the scientific method which in turn imposes first-hand experiences in systematically organized lessons that usually test hypothetical claims or “if/then” speculations. And the resulting learning does not rely on being told what to know, but on a process in which they take part and derive their answers to those various inquiries. While this might sound somewhat modern, progressive education has a history stretching back to the mid-1920s.

The leadership of John Dewey, until the mid-1950s, aimed efforts at improving the ways people lived their lives as citizens of a meaningful democracy not just as a political polity. And that meant democratizing the nation’s institutions such as education. “Shared decision making, planning of teachers with students, student-selected topics are all aspects [of this approach]. Books are tools, rather than authority.”[3]

Reconstructionism/Critical Theory. The aims of this last philosophy have to do with social realities and how they relate to accomplishing a better society within a worldwide democracy. The focus to attain those aims is to institute a curriculum that promotes social reforms. Initially, the approach was spurred forward by the realities of World War II.

At that time, under the leadership of Theodore Brameld, a new awareness evolved, that being a realization that humans could annihilate themselves through technology motivated by cruelty. But there was another side to this realization in that humans could also bring about beneficial societal arrangements using those same technological capabilities.

Another leader of this shift was George Counts. He saw that education could be the vehicle by which society could create a new social order. The path by which to accomplish such a lofty goal – to overcome oppressive practices – was by preparing people, beginning with young ones, to address and discover those practices and policies that set social efforts toward that just order. For example – and citing another leader of this approach,

Paulo Freire (1921-1997) was a Brazilian whose experiences living in poverty led him to champion education and literacy as the vehicle for social change. In his view, humans must learn to resist oppression and not become its victims, nor oppress others. To do so requires dialog and critical consciousness, the development of awareness to overcome domination and oppression. Rather than "teaching as banking," in which the educator deposits information into students' heads, Freire saw teaching and learning as a process of inquiry in which the child must invent and reinvent the world. For social reconstructionists and critical theorists, curriculum focuses on student experience and taking social action on real problems, such as violence, hunger, international terrorism, inflation, and inequality.[4]

To seek out these varied ambitions, each dealing with those aspects of life that are controversial – especially as the approach is applied to social studies and literature – teachers are to utilize inquiry into various perspectives and concentrate on the dialogue – the language – that, first recognizes it as a language, and second, defines or realistically reflects the assumptions and contexts of that which is under study. Where possible, the curriculum should be, according to this approach, in students’ “backyards,” their communities – i.e., implement a “first person” education.

One last point should be made. This is not part of Augsberg’s chart, but it is the experience of this blogger that proponents of critical theory do seem to share a positive disposition toward Marxian philosophy. For example, given the central role Paulo Freire played in promoting critical theory, one can definitely consider that influence to be well-categorized as Marxist. Patrick O’Connor writes,

The academic consensus is that Freire advanced a radical and even Marxist educational theory and practice. Pedagogy of the Oppressed [Freire’s most noted book] is promoted as one of the founding texts of so-called “critical pedagogy.” This has been bolstered by the promotion of Freire by various pseudo-left figures internationally from the 1970s to the present day. This includes, in the US, linguist Noam Chomsky (“Freire is a radical revolutionary”) and educationalist Peter McLaren (Freire, he recently wrote in Jacobin, “continues to be a lodestar for teachers working in poverty-stricken communities across the globe, and for just about anyone who’s searching for a sense of justice in an unjust world”).[5]

This connection is not offered as a criticism, but hopefully as an attempt to be complete in this presentation.

In the spirit of being upfront, this blogger considers himself a progressive. His reservation with that approach is its bias toward scientific research as a sole mode of investigation, to the exclusion of other modes such as historical approaches. With the New Social Studies movement from the 1960s, the social studies national effort has favored inquiry as the favored instructional strategy.

Despite this, that form of instruction has had little success in being adopted in America’s schools. Teachers for the most part have not adopted inquiry as their go-to instructional practice. Instead, they mostly rely on didactic methods. On the other hand, a defender of parochial/traditional federalism would be apt to advocate perennialism.

That school of thought and its siding with the Western civilization’s great ideas and great books fit neatly with parochial federalism’s origins and its reliance on religious and other philosophical traditions. And with that rundown, one is better equipped to consider Mortimer Adler’s contribution to the description of the “milieu” commonplace of curriculum.

[1] “Educational Philosophical Definitions and Comparison Chart,” Augsburg (n.d.), accessed June 15, 2022, https://web.augsburg.edu/~erickson/edc490/downloads/comparison_edu_philo.pdf .

[2] Ibid., n.p.

[3] Ibid., n.p.

[4] Ibid., n.p.

[5] Patrick O’Connor, “Paulo Freire and the Pedagogy of the Pseudo-Left,” World Socialist Web Site, October 15, 2021, accessed June 19, 2022, https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/10/16/frei-o16.html .

#philosophies of education #progressivism #critical theory #interactive education #civics education #social studies

1 note · View note

delightfullyatomicfest · 3 years

Text

John and Yoko interview with Melody Maker pt 2

MELODY MAKER DECEMBER 13 1969-

JOHN LENNON’S “PEACE Crusade” inspires a variety of emotions in people. Sadly, few of those emotions are worthy ones. John and Yoko have been mercilessly lampooned and vilified by the public and the mass media, and a great proportion of this reaction has been thoughtless and hurtful.

It would surely have been enough to make any lesser man, whose heart was not in his cause, retire from the field to a more comfortable, less publicised existence. But not the Lennons.

They have kept up their output of peaceful propaganda in the face of a ceaseless barrage of insults, and the time will surely come when even their most jaundiced and gout-ridden detractors will realise their essential honesty, and their right to exercise it in the way they most see fit.

But like it or not, John Lennon and his lovely wife are in the process of becoming leaders in the public eye. They stand for a cause, and as public figures they can be held responsible for the failings and excesses of that cause.

This is not how they want it. Leadership in any form is the last cloak which Lennon wishes to put on, as he told me.

“I’m not falling for that one. Like Peter Seeger said, we don't have a leader but we have a song -‘Give Peace A Chance'. So I refuse to be leader, and I'll always showmy genitals or do something which prevents me from being Martin Luther King or Ghandi and getting killed. Because that’s what happens to leaders. Our whole mistake is having leaders and people we can rely on or point a finger at.”

Yoko, as always at John's side, chipped in: “For instance, many people say if you want to do that kind of thing, about peace, don't do anything that is misleading like showing your genitals. Always keep a clean image so that people can believe in your peace movement.

“But that's exactly what the establishment is doing (“And that's what the Beatles did too” - John) , taking their children to church on Sundays.

This is showing that, ‘I'm the President of the United States and I'm alright and I'm healthy and very moral et cetera.' You don't get anywhere that way-you become just another hypocrite, and you're playing the establishment game. We don’t want to do that. We try to be honest and the point is, if we are really honest, just to make it between us is a lifetime thing, and if we can't make it together and endure each other, the world is nowhere.

“If ordinary couples can make it together and make it with their children and so forth, love-wise (“She doesn't mean ‘make it' as you ‘lay"’ - John) , then you can look after the world.”

John continued, “One thing we've found out is that love is a great gift, like a precious flower or something. You have to feed it and look after it, and it has storms to go through and snow, but you have to protect it. It's like a pet cat. You know, people get a cat and they don't want to feed it, or they get a dog and they don't want to walk it. But love has to be nurtured like a very sensitive animal, because that's what it is.

“And you have to work at love; you don't just sit round with it and it doesn't just do it for you. You’ve got to be very careful with it; it’s the most delicate thingyou can be given. It's a very delicate situation.”

What will John and Yoko do about Vietnam and Biafra, which John mentioned in the letter that accompanied his MBE back to the Queen?

“We'll keep promoting peace in the way we do, which, whichever way you look at it, is our way, because we're artists and not politicians. We don't organise; we do itin the best way we know how, to make people aware that, if they want war to stop, only they can do it.

“The politicians can’t do it. I think our whole movement is successful, as shown by Nixon, who's having to wriggle around a bit now and make propaganda films about the Moratorium claiming that the ‘silent majority' is with him, with a highly polished Negro in an Italian suit

saying how great it is to be American. Nixon has been moved by the peace movement - that includes John and Yoko and all the people in the world who are doing it, and that’s how we're going to change it. We’re not going to Vietnam to die for it or going to Biafra to die for it. We’ve considered everything, not dying but going to the places.

“People prefer a dead saint to a living annoyance like John and Yoko. But we don’t intend to be dead saints for people’s convenience. They prefer Ghandi and Martin Luther King since they died, but you should see them in India now, celebrating Ghandi Year - anything less like Ghandi's principles going on in India you’ve never seen. It’s a hoax. And so we don't intend to be dead saints - or living saints either. People don't like saints.”

Their highly unusual Wedding Album has caused its share of controversy. Why did they make it?

Yoko: “It's like a diary, it reflects our love and peace ideas.”

John: “When people get married they usually make their own wedding albums. We're public personalities and I'd enjoy reading Jackie and Onassis' album. Our wedding was public, we were sharing our diaries and our feelings with the world. So one side shows our involvement with each other, and the other side shows what we do together outside of our involvement with each other, which is promote peace.”

Isn't there a danger that the diary of Yoko and John will become too public?

“We have nothing to hide. ‘ Everybody's got something to hide except for me and my monkey 9 , you know? We keep certain parts of our life private because we’re not as wild as people think. I doubt if we'll ever make love in public, or invite the TV cameras into our bedroom, and I doubt if I’ll ever go to the toilet in public. Just because I think some things, I don’t want to show that side of me.”

Yoko: “We’re from a certain generation, you can’t deny that, and for people in our generation it is so difficult, and maybe the next John and Yoko will...”

“Show all,” said John. “Maybe we will before we die. People hide themselves from each other all the time, and everybody’s frightened of saying something nice about somebody in case they don’t say anything nice back, or in case they get hurt, or of looking at somebody in case they say, ‘What are you looking at? ’

“Everybody’s so uptight and they’re always building these walls around themselves. All you can do is try and break the walls down and show that there’s nothing there but PEOPLE . It’s just like looking in the mirror, there’s nothing to worry about- it’s only people.”

Yoko : “And even we are not relaxed enough as people. We have many complexities and tensions. We try hard to be honest and expose ourselves, but there are certain things that we just can’t. . . Maybe in the next generation they can, good luck to them. We’re trying hard as we are”

John has always tried to carry out his philosophies and campaigns in a sense of fun. Are they, as some cynics suggest, in fact taking the mickey?

“That’s true, although we’re not taking the mickey. Everybody’s frightened of being conned, of being tricked. If you say something nice to somebody they ’re not sure if you mean it, so that rather than respond to your loving movement they’ll rej ect you, and that’s what the press do .

Because they’re frightened of what we did with the MBE about the Biafra thing, they’ll write about my Auntie Mimi’s reaction to me giving the MBE back, because they don’t want to fall for the con of ‘Is he joking? ’

“Of course we’re joking as well. We mustn’t take ourselves too seriously, otherwise it’s the end. We think the mistake of everyone - Ghandi and Martin Luther King AND the left wing AND the students and all society - is taking it too seriously. If you take it seriously, it IS serious. What we try and do is be non-serious about things, but we are very serious about being not serious.”

Yoko : “We maybe too serious, even. We try to have a sense of humour and we try to smile at everyone a really genuine smile from the bottom of our hearts. But it’s very difficult for our generation to really genuinely smile, but we’re trying.”

John: “It’s like when I sent the MBE back, and I wrote that it was against Britain’s involvement in Biafra and Vietnam and against ‘Cold Turkey’ slipping down the charts. When we thought of that we were screaming with laughter, and so a few snobs and hypocrites got very upset about mentioning ‘Cold Turkey’ with the problem of Biafra and Vietnam, but that saved it from being too serious and being another colonel protesting! You have to try and do every thing with humour, and keep smiling.”

Richard Williams

#john #Yoko #melody maker #December 1969

8 notes · View notes

arcticdementor · 3 years

Link

You know what America needs? More mirrors for princes—the Renaissance genre of advice books directed at statesmen. On the Right, we have many books that identify, and complain about, the problems of modernity and the challenges facing us. Some of those books do offer concrete solutions, but their audience is usually either the educated masses, who cannot themselves translate those solutions into policy, or policymakers who have no actual power, or refuse to use the power they do have. Scott Yenor’s bold new book is directed at those who have the will to actually rule. He lays out what has been done to the modern family, why, and what can and should be done about it, by those who have power, now or in the future. Let’s hope the target audience pays attention.

The Recovery of Family Life instructs future princes in two steps. First, Yenor dissects the venomous ideology of feminism, which seeks to abolish all natural distinctions between the sexes, as well as all social structures that organically arise from those distinctions. Second, he tells how the family regime of a healthy modern society should be structured. By absorbing both lessons and applying them in practice, the wise statesman can, Yenor hopes, accomplish the recovery of family life. (Yenor himself does not compare his book to a mirror for princes; he’s too modest for that. But that’s what it is.)

…

You will note that this is a spicy set of positions for an academic of today to hold. You will therefore not be surprised to learn that Yenor was the target of cancel culture before being a target was cool. He is a professor of political philosophy at Boise State University, and in 2016, in response to Yenor’s publication of two pieces containing, to normal people, anodyne factual statements about men and women, a mob of leftist students tried to defenestrate him. Yenor was “homophobic, transphobic, and misogynistic.” (We can ignore that the first two of those words are mostly content-free propaganda terms designed to blur discourse, though certainly to the extent they do have meaning, that meaning should be celebrated—I would have given Yenor a medal, if I had been in charge of Boise State.) They didn’t manage to get him fired (he has tenure and refused to bend), but the usual baying mob, led by Yenor’s supposed peers, put enormous pressure on him, which could not have been easy. He still teaches there; whether it is fun for him, I do not know, but it certainly hasn’t stopped him promulgating the truth.

…

Yenor begins by examining the intellectual origins of the rolling revolution, found most clearly within twentieth-century feminism. One service Yenor provides is to draw the battle lines clearly. He does this by swimming in the fetid swamps of feminism; I learned a lot I did not know, although none of it was pleasing. He spends a little time discussing so-called first-wave feminism, but much more on second-wave feminists, starting with Simone de Beauvoir, through Betty Friedan, and into Shulamith Firestone, this latter a literally insane harridan who starved herself to death. The common thread among these writers was their baseless claim that women had no inherent meaningful difference from men, and that women could only be happy by the abolition of any perceived difference. This was to lead to self-focused self-actualization resulting in total autonomy, and a woman would know she had achieved this, most often, by making working outside the home the focus of her existence. Friedan was the great popularizer of this destructive message, of course, which I recently attacked at length in my thoughts on her book The Feminine Mystique.

…

After this detailed examination of core feminist ideas, Yenor suffers more, slogging through the thought about autonomy of various two-bit modern con men, notably Ronald Dworkin and John Rawls. He analyzes the dishonest argumentative methods of all the Left, in general and in specific with regard to family topics—false claims mixed with false dichotomies and false comparisons, what he calls the “liberal wringer,” the mechanism by which any argument against the rolling revolution is dishonestly deconstructed and all engagement with it avoided. The lesson for princes, I think, is to not participate in such arguments, and to remember what our enemies long ago learned and put into practice—that power is all.

Yenor describes how the modern Left (which he somewhat confusingly calls “liberalism,” but Rawls and his ilk are not liberal in any meaningful sense of the term, rather they are Left) uses the law to achieve its goal of the “pure relationship,” meaning the aim that all relationships must be ones of free continuous choice, that is, without any supposed repression. This leads to various destructive results when it collides with reality, including the reality of parent-child bonds, and more generally is hugely destructive of social cohesion. From this also flow various deleterious consequences resulting from ending supposed sexual repression; this section is replete with analysis of writings from Michel Foucault to Aldous Huxley, and contains much complexity, but in short revolves around what was once a commonplace—true freedom is not release from constraints, but the freedom to choose rightly, to choose virtue and not to be a slave to passions, and rejection of this truth is the basis of many of our modern problems.

…

Finally, Yenor turns to what should be done, which is the most noteworthy part of the book. As he says, “Intellectuals who defend the family rightly spend much time exposing blind spots in the contemporary ideology. All this time spent in the defensive crouch, however, distracts them from thinking through where these limits [i.e., the limits Yenor has just outlined in detail] point in our particular time and place. Seeing the goodness in those limits, it is necessary also to reconstruct a public opinion and a public policy that appreciates those limits.” Thus, Yenor strives to show what a “better family policy” would be.

This is an admirable effort, but I fear it is caught on the horns of a dilemma. The rolling revolution does not permit any stopping or slowing; much less does it permit any retrenchment or reversal. Our enemies don’t care what we think a better family policy would be. And if we were to gain the power to implement a better family policy, by first smashing their power, there is no reason for it to be as modest as that Yenor outlines—rather, it should be radical, an utter unwinding of the nasty web they have woven, and the creation of a new thing. Not a restoration, precisely, but a new thing for our time, informed by the timeless Old Wisdom that Yenor extols. The defect in Yenor’s thought, or at least in his writing, is refusing to acknowledge it is only power that matters for the topics about which he cares most. But presumably the future princes at whom this book is aimed will know this in their bones.

Yenor himself doesn’t exactly exude optimism. Nor does he exude pessimism, but he begins by telling us that “we are still only in the infancy” of the rolling revolution. This seems wrong to me; in the modern age, time is compressed, and fifty years is plenty of time for the rolling revolution, a set of ideologies based on the denial of reality, to reach its inevitable senescence, when reality reasserts itself with vigor. This is particularly true since every new front opened by the revolution is more anti-reality, more destructive, and more revolting to normal people, who eventually will have had enough, and the sooner, if given the right leadership.

…

For most purposes, what Yenor advocates would be a restoration of family policy, both in law and society, as it existed in America in the mid-twentieth century. I’m not sure that’s going back far enough for ideas. You’re not supposed to say it out loud, and Yenor doesn’t, but it’s not at all clear to me that even first-wave feminism had any virtue at all. To the extent it is substantively discussed today, we are given a caricature, where the views of those opposed to Mary Wollstonecraft or John Stuart Mill are not told to us, rather distorted polemics of those authors about their opponents are presented as accurate depictions, which is unlikely, and even those depictions are never engaged with. But we know that most of what Mill said about politics in general was self-dealing lies that have proven to be enormously destructive, so the presumption should be that what he said about relations between men and women was equally risible.

…

Penultimately, Yenor addresses such new frontiers being sought by the rolling revolution, with the implication that the rolling revolution might, perhaps, be halted. Here he talks about the desire of the Left to have the state separate children from parents, particularly where and because the parents oppose the revolution, but more generally to break the parent-child bond as a threat to unlimited autonomy. He says, optimistically, “No respectable person has (yet) suggested that parents could be turned in for hate speech behind closed doors.” But this has already been proven false; Scotland is on the verge of passing a new blasphemy law, the “Hate Crime and Public Order Law,” and Scotland’s so-called Justice Minister (with the very Scots name of Humza Yousaf) has explicitly noted, and called for, entirely private conversations in the home that were “hate speech” to be prosecuted once the law is passed. A man like that is beyond secular redemption, yet he is also a mainline representative of the rolling revolution. The reality is that discussion does not, and will never work, with these people, only force. Still trying, Yenor presents a balanced picture to his hoped-for audience of princes, such as discussing when state interference in the family makes sense (as in cases of abuse). However, such situations have been adequately addressed in law for hundreds of years; the rolling revolution is not a new type of such balancing, but the Enemy. Discussions about it will not stop it. No general of the rolling revolution will even notice this book, except in that perhaps some myrmidons may be detached from the main host to punish Yenor, or to record his name for future punishment.

Yenor ends with a pithy set of responses to the tedious propagandistic aphorisms of the rolling revolution, such as “Feminism is the radical notion that women are human beings.” And, laying out a clear vision of a renewed society based on the principals he has earlier discussed, he tells us, “In the long term, the goal is to stigmatize the assumptions of the rolling revolution.” No doubt this is true; cauterizing the societal wound where the rolling revolution will have been amputated from our society will be, in part, accomplished by stigmatizing both the ideas and those who clamored for them or led their implementation. How to get to that desirable “long term,” though, when their long term is very clear, and very different from the long term Yenor hopes for? He says “Prudent statesmen must mix our dominant regime with doses of reality.” Yeah, no. Prudent statesmen, the new princes, must entirely overthrow our dominant regime, or not only will not a single one of Yenor’s desired outcomes see the light of day, far worse evils will be imposed on us. Oh, I’m sure Yenor knows this; it’s the necessary conclusion of Yenor’s own discussion of those eagerly desired future evils. He just can’t be as aggressive as me. I’m here to tell you that you should read this book, but amp up the aggression a good eight times—which shouldn’t be a problem, especially if you have children of your own, whose innocence and future these people want to steal.

#charles haywood #the worthy house #book review #scott yenor

1 note · View note

mst3kproject · 5 years

Photo

820: Space Mutiny

Well, I did one of MST3k’s John Phillip Law movies, so I might as well do the other. Ladies, Gentlemen, etc, I give you: Mother. Fucking. Space. Mutiny.

The Southern Sun is a generation starship on its way to colonize a new planet. Most of the people on board are okay with this, but there’s a faction, led by Commander Kalgan, who want to abandon the mission and land somewhere. Kalgan and his cronies are willing to do anything to get their way, including sabotage the ship and make a deal with some space pirates. Lucky the Southern Sun has Dave Ryder, a big dumb beefalo of a man who will roll, shoot, and scream the rebels into submission! Oh, yeah, and there’s some Yoga Witches in the cargo hold, I dunno what’s up with that, but the movie assures me they contributed.

MUZ has been called the Manos of the Sci-Fi Channel era, in that it’s incoherent and badly-photographed. This is a compelling argument, but for my own part I consider Space Mutiny the Manos of the Sci-Fi Channel era, in that it’s absolutely iconic. It’s the episode that comes to mind when people think of that period in the show. It gave rise to memes. It’s also very much the Starcrash of the Sci-Fi Channel era, in that it is absolute comedy gold in ways the film-makers never intended.

You could write a book on the many sparkling facets of this movie's sucktitude. As Mike and the bots repeatedly observed, Cisse Cameron is ten years older than the character she’s playing, and the ‘engine room’ shots are all in a factory somewhere with sunlight shining through the windows. As they famously never observed even once, all the spacecraft shots are stolen from Battlestar Galactica. The bridge is made of cardboard. Nobody’s costume fits – Ryder’s in particular sags at the ass, which is a shame because I bet his ass is terrific. The women wear outfits so tiny that one with extra-long hair looks like Lady Godiva from behind. The end credits song takes the best bits of every 80’s power ballad ever written and assembles them into something far less than the sum of its parts. You can hear the singer’s mullet.

The writing is nothing short of stunning in its badness. Battle sequences are a mess, with no idea what’s at stake in each area the mutineers are trying to capture. There are whole scenes in which nothing much is actually said – the most glaring example is probably the bit where Commander Santa tells Captain Sting ‘it would have to be somebody on this ship with something to gain from this’. The exchange tells us nothing we didn’t already know. MacPherson only shows up in the room where Miss Santa is being interrogated so that he can expose himself as a traitor. Kalgan uses ‘space-bitch’ as an insult, unironically, twice, and calls Ryder a ‘meddling fool’.

There are at least three places where something is set up and then disposed of without ever being paid off. Commander Santa’s daughter tells Ryder that they can call for help against the pirates and mutineers, but he says he figures Kalgan has already installed scramblers – so they don’t even try. That seems to me like a situation where can’t hurt, might help would be a good philosophy. There’s also the ‘countermeasures’ subplot, where we learn that MacPherson will have revealed all their defense plans to the mutineers… and then the whole subject is just dropped. The biggest dangling plot thread, however, is the Bellerians.

These are the Yoga Witches I mentioned. They show up wearing bathing suits and veils, rub themselves all over the walls and some of those plasma globes that were popular in the 80s and 90s, and I think they seduce some of the security personnel. One of them visits Commander Santa and tells him it’s time for action, and they murmur things about time being up for one or other of the mutiny leaders, but they never actually do anything. The first time I watched this, as the MST3K episode, years and years ago, I remember waiting and waiting for the Bellerians to do something cool and they never did. They are entirely decorative.

(They also made it impossible for me to take Avatar seriously. The exchange a superintelligent dandelion seed! – Man, they'll worship anything! will not leave my head the entire damn movie.)

I also have to ask: if Kalgan and his followers are not satisfied living on the Southern Sun, why don’t they just… leave? The ship is clearly still in an inhabited part of the galaxy. There are the pirates, there’s the idea of calling for help, and people do come and go. Professor Spooner was on board the ship at some point to be Miss Santa’s mentor, then he left, and now he’s coming back. The Bellerians arrive and are given a place to stay, and it’s implied that they will be on board for some time but not permanently. Ryder is new to the Southern Sun, and I think the nonsensical does that mean you won’t marry me? at the end is supposed to tell us that he’s leaving again and hoping to take Miss Santa with him. If Kalgan wants to go, he can… but the writers completely ignore this.

Yet for all that, Space Mutiny is actually quite engaging. It’s structured like a proper movie, alternating between action, mystery, and romance. Reb Brown as Ryder and Cisse Cameron as Miss Santa have decent chemistry – they actually met on this movie, fell in love, got married, and are still married to this day. Sometimes you can’t follow what’s going on in an individual scene, but you always know where you are in the story as a whole.

Miss Santa appears to be an attempt at a Strong Female Character(tm). She’s supposed to be a PhD, and she gets involved with the shooting and punching right alongside Ryder. I think the did you see my butt? scene is supposed to tell us that she’s in charge of her own sexuality (this might work better if the camera didn’t leer like a miserly tipper at a strip club), and when she’s taken hostage she’s able to almost rescue herself by the time Ryder comes for her. She also has a few hints of actual personality, in that she’s shown using her work in the greenhouse as a way to blow off steam, and she sulks a bit when she doesn’t get her way (well, that’s gratitude for you!).

Ryder is a much larger presence in the movie, both physically and in terms of screen time, but he has far less to him as a person. He’s brave and heroic and likes to yell and shoot at things, and that’s about it. I suppose, like Duke Barnum in Last of the Wild Horses, he’s supposed to be a man-shaped hole that the audience members can place themselves in. It works a bit better here, because Ryder is a handsome, muscular space pilot, which seems, at least to me, like a better fantasy life than ‘broke cowboy who interferes in other people’s problems’. There’s also the fact that Ryder has a reason to be involved in these events, since he, too, is trapped on the Southern Sun with the mutineers.

I guess Space Mutiny is probably trying to be about long-term versus short-term goals. The Southern Sun was built with a long-term goal in mind – find and colonize a new planet. The people on board mostly accept that they are just a stage in this process, and that the end result will benefit descendants they will never meet. The mutineers are focused on a short-term goal, settling on a planet somewhere and becoming rich and powerful. The movie doesn’t really delve into the consequences for everybody else on the ship if Kalgan wins, but we’re clearly meant to assume that the long-term goal entails more benefit to more people. That’s a good enough theme, I guess.

One thing the movie does go into, although probably by accident, is the nature of male versus female power. The men in this movie – Captain Santa, Ryder, and Kalgan – are proactive, giving orders, firing guns, and throwing punches. The women largely sit at desks and serve drinks, and those who attempt to take action are punished for it. Lieutenant Lamont tries to investigate the theft of explosives, and gets shot (we’re supposed to ignore the fact that she’s back at her console ten minutes later). Leah goes to help Ryder in the battle and is lectured for it. These are unacceptable forms of power for women to wield.

Acceptable female power is embodied in the Bellerians, who manipulate events subtly from behind the scenes. Unfortunately, they do it so subtly that I have no idea what, if anything, they actually contribute – which just makes it look like women can tell themselves they’re in charge but they’re not. They’re just hanging out while the men do all the real work.

I guess I should mention that there’s only one guy in this movie who isn’t white, and he’s hanging up in a freezer in his underpants. I could complain, but I’m tired.

What makes some bad movies entertaining and others insufferable? What is the difference between, say, Teenagers from Outer Space and Invasion of the Neptune Men, or The Giant Spider Invasion versus The Starfighters? Looking back across the gulf of around two hundred bad movies I’ve written about in the past three and a half years, I’m going to say it involves weaving your failures into a structure that might otherwise work. Fun bad movies have characters we can follow and a plot that makes some kind of sense – we know who Ryder and Miss Santa are, and we have some idea what they’re doing, so we’re not sitting and trying to puzzle that out instead of enjoying the floor polisher chase scenes. Once the movie has us in a place where we want to pay attention, it doesn’t really matter if the technicalities are up to snuff. This is where movies like Radar Secret Service fail, and where Space Mutiny almost succeeds.

#mst3k #reviews #space mutiny #80s #magic voice recommends

75 notes · View notes

recalde-mm · 4 years

Text

A CLOSER LOOK AT THE EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHY APPLIED IN THE NEW SYSTEM OF EDUCATION: ITS IMPACT AND IMPLICATION

Education is the process of facilitating learning, or the acquisition of knowledge, skills, values, beliefs, and habits. It is a process of acquiring new habits, knowledge & skills which together enables learners to do something that he/she could not do before. It is a mental activity by means of which skills, attitude, appreciation and ideas are acquired, resulting in modification of behaviors. Moreover, according to Socrates “Education means bringing out of the idea of universal validity which is latent in the mind of every man”. According to Mrunalini (2010), education is the process of changing behavior pattern of people, acquisition of the art of utilization of knowledge and ideas. Thus, education is the process of facilitating learning, or the acquisition of knowledge, skills, values, beliefs, and habits. On the other hand, Hirst and Peters (1970), state “Philosophy is an activity which is distinguished by its concern with certain types of second-order questions, with questions of a reflective sort which arise when activities like science, painting pictures, worshipping and making moral judgments are going concerns”. Moreover, Philosophy is the study of the principles of human behavior and reasoning about what we really know of the human behavior and reasoning about we really know of the universe and ourselves. It means, philosophy is that through which man tries to understand himself and the world in which he/she views. The philosophy of education may be either the philosophy of the process of education or the philosophy of the discipline of education. That is, it may be part of the discipline in the sense of being concerned with the aims, forms, methods, or results of the process of educating or being educated. In the first form, philosophy of education was traditionally developed by philosophers–for example, Aristotle, Augustine, and John Locke–as part of their philosophical systems, in the context of their ethical theories. However, in the twentieth century philosophy of education tended to be developed in schools of education in the context of what is called foundations of education, thus linking it with other parts of the discipline of education–educational history, psychology, and sociology rather than with other parts of philosophy. It was also developed by writers such as Paul Goodman and Robert M. Hutchins who were neither professional philosophers nor members of schools of education.

In pre-Hispanic times, education in the Philippines was informal and unstructured, without any fixed methodology. Children were usually taught by their parents and tribal tutors and such education was geared more towards skills development. This underwent a major change when Spain colonized the islands. Tribal tutors were replaced by Spanish missionaries, and education became oriented more towards academics and the Catholic religion. It was also primarily for the elite, especially in the early years of the colony. Later, however, the Educational Decree of 1863 was enacted, providing for the establishment of at least one primary school for boys and girls in each town under the responsibility of the municipal government and the establishment of a normal school for male teachers under the supervision of the Jesuits. Primary instruction was free and the teaching of Spanish was compulsory. More significantly, this decree also established the Superior Commission of Primary Instruction, a forerunner of the present Department of Education. The basic education curriculum in the Philippines contains mother tongue based multilingual education, universal kindergarten, college and livelihood readiness and specialized upper secondary education. The curriculum also features spiral progression and contextualization and enhancement, which helps make the curriculum more relevant to the students. From what was stated, going back to the old way of teaching the children in the Philippines, it is very evident that the educators before really focuses on the skills that the learner should have rather than the academic and religious sense. This means that the aim of education before was a combination of utilitarian and vocational. This is concerned with providing knowledge and skill required by the child for leading his day to day life. Fulfillment of this aim will enable him to make use of the knowledge and skill in a fruitful manner. It makes the education process a purposeful one and depicts the relationship between education and life. To enhance or update the knowledge, student should be given enough opportunities for widening and deepening their knowledge through exploration. Encouraging student to express their own ideas in their own words will help them to acquire knowledge and this should prepare the child to earn his livelihood so that he can lead a productive life in the society. Dignity of labor and respect to the labor have to be developed or inculcated by means of education. On the other hand, the philosophy being highlighted on this part was the Naturalism. Naturalists view the world that we live in as made up of the matters, and believe that the material world, the world of nature, is the real world. In other words, nature is the source of knowledge. The human life is the part of nature and is therefore controlled by external laws of nature. In fact, the essence of all things is nature. The universe and man are the results of physical, mechanical and biological forces acting upon them, which is called natural laws. The process of growth and development in man was the result of force of energy prevailed in nature. Man’s natural endowment, including his instincts and emotion are the guiding force of all his conducts. The theory of struggle put forward by Charles Darwin implicates that the aim of education is to equip individual to struggle for existence and thus to ensure his survival. It should help the learner to adjust physically and mentally to ever changing circumstances of life. Education should aim at developing the child joyful, rational, balanced, purposeful and mature person in order for him to survive. Applied to education, naturalism considers child as a gift of nature with potentialities for natural growth according to laws of nature. The child is an active individual capable of self- development. The aim of education is to develop the child as healthy and active personality in a natural setting. The growth process must be natural and real without any interference from outside. The powers of the child should be developed in natural ways by allowing the child to freely interact with the nature. The curriculum should provide concrete and real experiences in a natural context. The child should be exposed to a variety of sensory and physical activities. The child learns by interacting with nature. Morality and character learned directly with the help of natural consequences. Discipline is developed as a result of consequences of behavior of child. The teacher plays the role of guiding the child learning from nature.

During the Spanish colonization, education became oriented more towards academics and the Catholic religion. This implies that the aim of education in this time were social and intellectual development. This means that every individual is considered as a productive member of the society. Through education the individual child should be provided with the required assistance to become a useful member of the society, irrespective of the socioeconomic status. Keeping this aim in mind, educators have to help learners to develop a healthy, purposeful, productive, exploratory and controlling adjustment with the environment. Society is the result of the interrelations of individuals. It consists of big and small groups and there are subgroups within each group. Education helps the child to understand this interrelation of individuals and possibilities of various groups. By the way of education student should realize the importance of social values like justice, fair play, healthy competition, harmony, etc. in short, education instill a sense of obligation and loyalty towards the community and its needs. By means of social aim, education gives direction in the development of the society. In addition, education provides enough opportunities to develop the innate intellectual capacity of the student, development of intelligence through education will enable the child to lead an independent life with confidence. Thus the philosophy being applied in these times was idealism. This is concerned with supremacy of mind and self, and views man and universe in terms of spirit or mind. Matter or objective may be the projection or creation of mind, but ultimately real is the idea behind it. The physical world is ephemeral and can be changed through the ideas or imagination of man. Plato, the greatest philosopher of all ages, claimed that the ultimate reality consists of ideas. Plato and his teacher Socrates conceived ideas as the basis of their philosophy. Socrates, an idealistic philosopher placed importance on question-answer and dialogue as the method of acquiring information or gaining knowledge whereas Plato emphasized on logical reasoning as the method of gaining knowledge. Idealism considers student as an individual with inner potentials. Education should help the student to realize these potentials. Curriculum should consist of those knowledge and experiences which help the student to attained development. The teacher should impart essentials of knowledge and assist to develop moral and aesthetic values in the child. As said earlier, idealism stresses more on the spiritual development of the child.

As time passed by, the education in the Philippines was developed which helps make the curriculum more relevant to the students. Some of its features are: greater emphasis on helping every learner become a successful reader, emphasis on interactive/collaborative learning approaches, emphasis on the use of integrative learning approaches, teaching of values in all learning areas, development of self-reliant and patriotic citizens and development of creative and critical thinking skills. Aside from all of these improvements, there is one more thing that the Philippine education adapted to give more quality education for all. This is the K-12 Curriculum Program. This is an education system under the Department of Education that aims to enhance learners’ basic skills, produce more competent citizens, and prepare graduates for lifelong learning and employment. “K” stands for Kindergarten and “12” refers to the succeeding 12 years of basic education (6 years of elementary education, 4 years of junior high school, and 2 years of senior high school). The K-12 program offers a decongested 12-year program that gives students sufficient time to master skills and absorb basic competencies. Students of the new system will graduate at the age of 18 and will be ready for employment, entrepreneurship, middle level skills development, and higher education upon graduation. The K-12 program accelerates mutual recognition of Filipino graduates and professionals in other countries. Kindergarten is mandatory for five-year-old children, a pre-requisite for admission to Grade 1. The new curriculum gives students the chance to choose among three tracks (i.e. Academic; Technical-Vocational-Livelihood; and Sports and Arts) and undergo immersion, which provides relevant exposure and actual experience in their chosen track. This new system of education focuses on developing the child holistically. This is anchored in the progressivism philosophy of John Dewey. He wanted students to learn through action and be involved on the learning process. He thought it was better for students to learn with hands on projects rather than memorization of information. The individuality, progress, and change are fundamental to a student's education. In here, students are active learners that text ideas by experimentation. This is focused on needs, experiences, interests, and the ability of the students. Learning is experienced through the questions of the students and active participation. The school, provides a place for students to actively learn, solve problems, and participate in hands on learning. Thus, the aim of education should be to prepare the child to become an effective member of community. It should also try to develop competencies in the child. Hence the curriculum should include those subjects and experience which are suitable to the child’s interest and needs. The curriculum should develop an attitude of inquiry, facilitate artistic expression, encourage constructiveness and sustain interest in the child. Dewey advocates “learning by doing”, which encourages the child to learn trough activities. Dewey considers discipline as a function of the teaching-learning situation. If the learning is made joyful and interesting, there is no need to use external rewards and punishments. The teacher helps in the ready-made forms. Teacher should encourage the learner through active interaction with the learning situation.

The Philippines has been making sustained progress in education in the last few years. It has improved in many ways to provide a quality education for all. These improvements have produced well rounded learners that are capable and equipped with skills to meet the challenges of the 21st century world. The philosophies of education have been used in many ways as well. Through these philosophies, learners developed their skills and capabilities in many possible ways. In today’s educational world, the Philippines is highlighting the used of Progressivism which focuses on the application, exploration and the total formation of the learners. With the hope of providing quality education for all Filipinos, the Philippine education continues to make education accessible to all.

References:

Agarwal, J. (2009). Teachers and Education In A Developing Society. New Delhi : Vikas Publishing.

Anticuando, M. G. (2010, June 6). Slideshare. Retrieved from Philosophy of Philippine Education: https://www.slideshare.net/anticuando/philosophy-of-philiippine-education

Arulsamy, S. (2010). Educational Innovations and Management. New Delhi: Neelkamal Publishers.

Sunstar. (2016, April 22). Pressreader. Retrieved from Educational System in the Philippines: https://www.pressreader.com/philippines/sunstar-pampanga

2 notes · View notes

dogopower · 3 years

Text

Satan, Prince of This World

In March the same year, Weishaupt again wrote to his friend “Cato” (Zwack). He said: “I have gone through the whole circle of human inquiry. I have exorcised spirits.21 I raised ghosts; discovered treasures; interrogate the Cabale;22 I have never transmuted metals. I would have executed much greater things had not the government (his superiors in the Luciferian conspiracy at the time) always opposed my exertions and placed others in situations which suited my talents.”

Weishaupt was literally as proud as Lucifer. He was determined to become the Sovereign Pontiff of the Luciferian Creed. He was determined to be placed higher than any other person in this or the celestial world, excepting only his beloved Lucifer. This statement is proved by a letter he wrote “Cato” (Zwack) in 1778. He told his friend: “By this plan we shall direct all mankind. In this manner, and by the simplest means, we shall set all in motion and in flames. The occupations must be so allotted and contrived, that we may, in secret, influence all political “transactions”.... I have considered everything, and so prepared it, that if the Order should this day go to ruin, I shall in a year reestablish it more brilliant than ever.” There we have the key to the secret. The Bavarian government discovered and exposed the existence of the continuing conspiracy, but Weishaupt built it up and made it stronger than ever. All the Bavarian government actually did was prune the Tree of Evil and make it grow stronger. What they should have done was dig it up by the roots and burn it as the Holy Scriptures tell us we must do if we wish to destroy the Spiritual Forces of Darkness who roam about this world seeking the destruction of Souls (Matt. 7: 15-24). If the heads of Church and state had in 1786 followed the advice of the scriptures and cut down and burned the Evil Tree, of which the Illuminati is only one of many branches, “the womb would have forgot him (Weishaupt); the worm would have fed sweetly on him; he would be no more remembered; and wickedness would have been broken as an evil tree.” (Job 24:20)

Before Weishaupt was banished in 1786, his 2,000 well educated, carefully selected, brilliant-minded, wealthy and well bred Illuminists had established one or more Lodges of the Grand Orient in Munich, Ingolstadt, Frankfort, Echstadt, Hanover, Brunswick, Calbe, Magdeburgh, Cassel, Osnabruck, Wiemar, Saxony, Heidelbergh, Mannheim, Strasbourg, Spire, Worms, DusseldorfF, Cologne, Bonn, Livonia, Courtland, Franendahl, Alsace, Wienne, Deuxponts, Hesse, Cousel, Buchenwerter, Treves, Montpelier, Aix-la-Chapelle, Stuttgart, Barschied, Carlsruhe, Hahrenberg, Anspach, Neuweid, Mentz, Rome, Naples, Ancona, Turin, Florence, Warsaw, and Dresden. There were Lodges in Upper Saxony, Westphalis, Switzerland, France, Scotland, Holland, and last but by no means least, America.

Many, so-called, authorities have, since 1786, tried to convince the heads of Church and state in America and elsewhere that Illuminism is dead as the Dodo bird. These Luciferians produce what they claim is documentary evidence to prove what they say is the TRUTH, but they are careful to conceal the evidence which proves that Albert Pike reorganized the Palladian Rite between 1859 and 1889 to take over the direction of the Luciferian conspiracy from the Illuminati. They carefully conceal the evidence which proves that Illuminism began to stink in the nostrils of honest Americans. In the early 1800’s 45,000 Scottish Rite masons handed in their charters in protest against the manner Illuminism had infiltrated into their lodges. This it is that few Americans know that Pike established twenty-six councils (triangles) of this New and Reformed Palladian Rite in every large city throughout the world to direct the Luciferian conspiracy as Weishaupt intended. We explain how this plot worked in another chapter.

We mentioned that Professor John Robison of Edinburgh University was one of those entrusted with a copy of Zwack’s original manuscripts dealing with Weishaupt’s revised and modernized version of the age old Luciferian conspiracy.

Robison was a 33rd degree member of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry. As such he visited most Masonic Lodges in European cities, and took part in their rituals and initiations. He taught Natural Philosophy at Edinburgh University. He was secretary of the Royal Society. Weishaupt had been particularly anxious to obtain Robison’s cooperation so that the “IDEA” of a One World Government could be introduced into ALL educational institutions. This objective has since been achieved as any parent of children of school age must

21 The word “exorcised” means to expel a devil or devils from a person who has been possessed. The scriptures tell us how Christ cast out devils. But Satanists invite devils to enter into, and possess, their mediums and through them to speak to those who seek knowledge or advice from Satan and/or Lucifer. After the medium has served their purpose, the High Priests of the Synagogue of Satan then “exorcised” the devils from that person’s body, and he or she becomes normal again. It is this practice which caused the Synagogue of Satan which wished to discredit Christ, to accuse him of casting out devils in the name, and through the powers of Beelzebub the Prince of Devils and not by the power of God. (Luke 11:14-15)

22 The Cabale (often spelled differently) as referred to by Weishaupt means “The Spiritual Powers headed by Lucifer in the celestial world:” the Holy Scriptures refer to them “As the spiritual Powers of Darkness.” Human beings who direct the Luciferian cause often consult their spiritual directors in the celestial world, in exactly the same way as millions of Christians believe in the Communion of the Saints and pray to them to intercede with God on their behalf for spiritual insight and blessings. Mackenzie King while Prime Minister of Canada repeatedly tried to obtain advice and guidance from people who had already departed from this life. Pike is on record as having done so repeatedly also; the best recorded instance is his own report of the seance he personally conducted in St. Louis as reported elsewhere. Thus we see that “Truth” is much stranger than any fiction ever written.

0 notes

thefablednib · 3 years

Text

Seeking a Friend for the Apocalypse

When I think about messaging strangers on the Internet, red flags wave frantically inside my head. As a child, my parents taught me that I shouldn’t talk to strangers online because they would find where I live and kidnap me. As a result, a chance encounter full of philosophy, poetry, and sincerity that changes my life unexpectedly is far-removed from what I’d expect from an online chat. But that’s exactly what happened to me over the course of three serendipitous weeks in July of last year.

Like most people, quarantine left me detached from the world, and I was utterly craving for human interaction. Being sequestered inside our house for more than five months, I was scrambling to find ways to connect with my friends, but to no avail. They wouldn’t return my video calls, reply to my messages, or even react to the memes I sent them. Despite the loneliness that we were all feeling, it became difficult reaching out to each other.

However, my desperate attempts at conversation led me to the forum app Reddit. In there, a subreddit (which is equivalent to a Facebook group) called “r/penpals” caught my attention. It was like the classified ads section of a newspaper where people from all over the world who are also tormented by quarantine cast about for pen pals. To me, writing to a pen pal seemed like a perfect arrangement to message people while remaining concealed by the mystique of the Internet. I found that it’s easier to confide to a complete stranger about the crevices of my life than a friend who comes with strings attached.

Thereupon, I mustered up enough nerve to post an ad, even if it’s a shot in the dark. So I wrote, “Seeking a Friend for the Apocalypse… Let’s talk about philosophy and music and life before the coronavirus wipes out humanity…” Then, I further epitomized the essence of my personality and poured it into that Reddit ad. I listed all of my hobbies, interests, hopes, and dreams in that post. Being a lover of poetry, I even wrote “Tonight I can write the saddest line” by Pablo Neruda in my profile bio, hinting at my quarantine loneliness. The only exception was my name. Instead of my actual name, I put “Jacinto” as my “real” name as a nod to my being gay and my interest in Greek mythology. In a way, I was completely exposing myself while hiding at the same time.

When I tapped the “Post” button with shivering fingers, I didn’t expect anyone to reply. No one did for a while. I refreshed the page a hundred times with clammy hands and a drumming heart. Then, a notification popped up. It said, “Calcirium has sent you a message.” I swear my whole room shook as I leaped off the bed in a flash, all in agonizing anxiety. As I read the message, I paced around my room relentlessly, already scripting my reply.

In the message, “Calcirium” told me that my post made him chuckle and that I seemed like a fun chatterbox. This stranger also noticed the Neruda line in my profile bio and even translated it to its original language and offered some interesting insight. Then, he introduced himself as Julio, a 19-year-old Spanish guy who is studying astrophysics in London. At that point, those red flags waved inside my head. He was too good to be true like the kind of boys I used to read about in John Green novels. But upon further reading, there was a part where he said that he didn’t understand poetry until he fell in love with a guy through the letters that they sent each other. The candidness of this line sold me hook, line, and sinker. He concluded with a Carl Sagan quote that said: “The cosmos is within us. We are made of star-stuff. We are a way for the universe to know itself.”

It shocked me, how easily Julio divulged a lot of deeply personal details to me, a stranger to him. The candidness of his words made me flustered as if I was looking at the nakedness of this honest person. Julio is unlike the people around me whose laughs conceal emotional walls around them. His willingness to be sincere scared me, to be completely honest. Despite this (or maybe because of this), his fascinating words compelled me to write back and ask for his email.

In our emails, Julio and I hit it off right away as if we were two friends catching up. The poetry of his words reached out of the screen and tugged my heart. I guess he enjoyed my responses too, as he always replied to me before sleeping. In our emails, we debated about how far human progress can go, talked about Plato’s and Schopenhauer’s philosophies, babbled on about our favorite songs, and so many more topics.

As we went deeper into each other’s minds, his stories became even more personal. He confessed to me his fear of death, his insecurities, and his feeling small compared to the vast expanse of the universe. Then, he started talking about how he found the boy he likes through Reddit as well. He told me about how he fell for that boy before even seeing his face. Once, he wrote, “I’m sure one day, very soon, I’ll be sleeping by his side and I’ll tell him: ‘What will I dream of now that I’m so happy awake?’”

On the other hand, my emails included a surplus of “Oh, wow!”, “That’s great!”, and “Good for you!” The stories I told him about my life were only asymptotes, always approaching real-life details but not quite touching on it completely. They were only hints of a life that I’ve kept hidden by a façade of a personality. Instead of genuinely opening up to him, I resorted to haphazard jokes that were devoid of any sincerity. I told him generic stories about imminent college applications and difficult online classes (which, I realize, were excuses that I had gotten good at telling).

Soon, after Julio and I wrote pages upon pages of emails, a nagging feeling drove me to doubt his stories. I thought that he couldn’t have been real. At that point, I already memorized every corner of Julio’s psyche. But doubt has a way of tricking hollow fools like me. So I typed his email on the Facebook search bar, debating with my conscience about whether I should do it. Then, I pressed “Enter.”

When the page loaded, my heart dropped to my stomach because there he was. In front of an old, castle-like building stood a lanky guy with pale skin, chocolate-brown hair, thick eyebrows, sleepy eyes, and a sharp European nose. He wore a brown tartan vest over maroon long-sleeves, and he held a black blazer over his arm. But one thing stood out about him: his smile. His smile was not a stretched-out beam but more of a quiet, shy smile that is almost indiscernible. It looked as friendly as the words in the emails that he sent me. It’s Julio smiling right at me.

I would be lying if I said that I didn’t get any butterflies in my stomach. Julio was attractive in his photo, exactly like how I imagined the boys from John Green novels would look like. But finally, he was a whole, real person in my eyes, not just an abstract idea or a fictional character.

However, in my following emails, I didn’t mention to Julio what I had done. I felt guilty that I’ve seen him, but he hasn’t seen me yet. To me, this was a red flag. I felt like I was a catfish, even though everything I told him about me was truthful. My duplicity to Julio almost felt like voyeurism, like I was taking illicit peeks at his naked body. As he poured himself into his candid emails, I remained hidden behind a mask, behind a pseudonym. And I loathed that feeling.

Eventually, the guilt became far too heavy to carry, and it curbed my motivation to reply to Julio. But because I couldn’t let go of him, I knew I had to do something to revive this motivation. I knew coming clean was the right thing to do. So I revealed what I had done and told Julio to call me “Alfred” instead. I explained that “Jacinto” was only a pseudonym, but everything else I told him was true. When I told him that he might want to look me up on Facebook, he refused. Being the wholesome person he is, he said that he didn’t care.

Our conversations continued for ten more emails or so. Then, he disappeared like a momentary daydream, and that left me crushed into a million glittering pieces. There are people whose hearts are so big and sincere that they dent your own. Julio was one of these people. Now, my chest was left with an indentation in the shape of Julio’s heart. I have only his emails to fill this dent.

Nevertheless, Julio’s sincerity and willingness to bare his soul revealed a fatal flaw of my generation: a hesitance to sincerity. The quarantine period only strengthened that hesitance as people struggle to reach out to one another. It widened that gap between people because now, they feel more distant emotionally, mentally, and spiritually. Like how I hid behind a mask when I spoke to Julio, my friends and I were only hollow masks that spoke to one another.

Despite this hesitance to sincerity, quarantine proved that human connection can be found anywhere, just as Julio and I found each other serendipitously. The power of human connection reveals itself more potently in times of hardships if only we are steadfast enough to harness it.

Just like the Carl Sagan quote Julio sent me, perhaps the universe is trying to know itself. Maybe I am the universe, and he is the universe too. I am he. He is I. For all I know, Julio might be my way of trying to make sense of life amid the global health crisis. There were a lot of truths that Julio instilled in me, but the one that I could never forget was the truth of understanding and loving people. I melted off my bed when I read this simple question in one of his emails: “How could I not love your body when it’s your body?” Such simple words. But it holds a world of meaning to me.

When I think about messaging strangers on the Internet, red flags still wave frantically inside my head. But now, I also think of Julio and how I was changed forever after him. Even though I haven’t met him personally, I will miss him and my nightly readings of his emails. I sincerely hope that he finally sleeps in the arms of the boy he likes. I hope that this boy soothes his fears, listens to him intently, and worships him as Julio does to him. I hope he also knows that he had touched my life in profound ways.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’ll go and try messaging my friends once again…

written by Alfred

#blog #creative nonfiction #quarantine #writers on tumblr #writblr

0 notes

juniperpublishers-ttsr · 3 years

Text

A Critical Evaluation of John Locke’s Denial of Innatism: An Epistemological Approach

Abstract

As a rational being, man desires to know much more about himself and all around him. Since it is in the nature of man to grasp knowledge, the aim of this work is: To analyze the process of acquiring knowledge, especially how human mind can grasp knowledge. This Essay is meant to dispel skepticism in Modern minds by elucidating the possibility of knowledge. It is to show that both the empirical and rational are all sources of acquiring knowledge. That no source is more important than the other. Finally, to critically examine John Locke’s position which is against innatism. To achieve the aim of this research work, the method of writing would be expository, analytical and of course critical. John Locke, in his Essay Concerning Human Understanding, laid down the foundations upon which subsequent British philosophers built their philosophy. The researcher concentrates his research on the Critique of John Locke’s Denial of Innatism. The primary book that would be used for this research is An Essay Concerning Human Understanding by John Locke. Other secondary sources shall be used especially related material that would make the work clearer. The materials will be sourced from Library and internet.

Keywords:Epistemology; Scripture; Reflected light; Knowledge

Introduction

The human quest to know has really gone very far in justifying the very first statement of Aristotle in his metaphysics “All men by nature desire to know” [1]. This search has given birth to philosophy and epistemology. Epistemology is a branch of philosophy that enquires into the scope, nature, process, and sources of human knowledge. Although sometimes hidden, there is always an implicit theory of knowledge in the philosophies of different ages; each with its own peculiarity. Each era: ancient, medieval, modern, and contemporary has elements which characterized their philosophy and enquiry. Hence, from the above, one may infer that what informs the epistemology of each epoch is its concentration of man’s search centered on the world, on God and on man, respectively.

As this quest for knowledge continued, there existed a particular school whose philosophical attitudes were skeptical. They believed and taught that the human mind is incapable of attaining truth. They admitted the fact that human mind is restricted from attaining the truth of things. It was really this group that triggered the search for certainty of human knowledge.

Modern philosophers were specifically occupied with the problem of human knowledge. This continued till the emergence of the celebrated work of the popular 17th century British empiricist, John Locke. An Essay concerning Human Understanding. It was in this essay that Locke made a denial of innate idea which is the bone of contention in this research work. From 1667 to 1683, he was the personal physician and adviser to Ashley (later to become the Earl of Shaftesbury). He helped draft a constitution for the American Carolinas in 1669. Locke supported the growing demand for parliamentary right against the supremacy of the king. Locke held several important public offices. He releases a flood of writings composed during his year in exile [2].

His two most important works were Two Treatises on Government and An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, both published in 1690. Letters Concerning Toleration came out during the year 1689 to 1692. Other works of interest were Some Thoughts Concerning Education (1693). The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695). In 1691, recurring ill health sent him into partial retirement. He moved to the Country twenty miles out of London, to seek more tranquil surroundings. Last year of his life was spent enjoying the quiet companionship of close friends and studying the scripture. There, in the home of friends he died quietly in 1704 [3]. The German thinker, Hans-Georg Gadamer has often been associated with the maxim that no one speaks from nowhere. This adage finds adequate expression on the issue of background to any philosophical venture. Thus, the question of historical background from time immemorial has been essential in the history of philosophy. This project came about due to the researcher’s interest in the disagreement between the two philosophical camps: the rationalists and the empiricists in their search for certainty of true knowledge. In John Locke’s Essay concerning Human Understanding, he made it clear that human mind is incapable of attaining true knowledge.

From the above affirmation, Locke was extremely attacking the world of Form of Plato by asserting totally that the mind is devoid of any idea when coming into the world. He boasted to explain the origin of all human knowledge through experience, thereby subscribing to empiricism. With John Locke’s Essay, the gap between rationalism and empiricism was pronounced. It was his assertion that set off the interest of the researcher to make a critical evaluation on Locke’s denial of innate idea. John Locke’s quest for indubitable knowledge, led him to make some assertions and denials that are problematic between the empiricists and rationalists [4]. He holds that “all knowledge is acquired through experience and never innate”. However, he still affirms that, human brain is tabula raza, that is to say, no idea is in the brain at birth, but all knowledge is obtained through experience.

Consequently, with Locke’s stand on empiricism, the question becomes; If Locke holds that all knowledge can be attained through experience, how can some meta-empirical realities be explained? There are some characters exhibited by children before the age of cognition. How can such characters be explained empirically, given that they have not yet attained the age of cognition? These questions and many more, counteracting Locke’s position, this work seeks to address.

Towards Philosophical Mediation

Locke as we have seen, gives his staunch reliance on empirical knowledge and blatantly reject all forms of belief in innate idea, with his arguments that knowledge acquired through experience are never innate in human mind. Rather, affirming that human brain is completely tabla raza at birth, fails to consider other avenues through which knowledge is acquired outside experience. Such as reason, intuition, and imagination. He even neglects that such knowledge is mathematical, geometrical and even some religious truths are possible outside experience. Hence, the researcher does not totally reject the role of experience in acquisition of knowledge but instead considers it inadequate to be the only source of knowledge as Locke imagined as there exists other avenues outside experience by which knowledge is derived and these we shall diligently proceed to explore below.

Limitations of Locke’s Experience as the Ultimate Source of Knowledge

Locke believes that whatever knowledge that man has comes from experience. Nevertheless, knowledge got through experience called sense–perception has been found to be with a lot of shortcomings. Scientific findings along with discoveries have evidenced that in sense–perception; a lot of information is lost about the truth of the object being observed. If this is the case then, the knowledge through experience cannot be credited as an ultimate source of knowledge. However, the critical problem concerning sense-perception is: What kind of reality belongs to the objects that are perceived and to the organs which perceive them, and what bonds exist between these realities? Simply put, the problem is: Does my knowledge of a corporeal (physical) thing show me that thing as it is in itself? And how much does it tell me about the nature or the properties of this thing as it is in itself? To what extent can our sense perception claim objectivity?

The above questions show the difficulties in determining the exact relationship between my present sense–experience and the object represented by the experience. Therefore, it is difficult or even impossible to determine whether the subject perceives the object directly or indirectly. Whether the properties attributed to the object really belong to the object. In attempt to explain the difficulty embedded in this problem, Bertrand Russell portrays his observation of a table with respect to the effect of light beam on the colour of the table. To this he writes: Although I believe that the table is really of the same color all over the parts. The parts that reflected light look white because of the reflected light. I know that if I move, the parts that reflect light will be different so that the apparent distribution of color on the table will change. It follows that if several people are looking at the table at the same moment, no two of them will see it from exactly the same point of view and any change in the point of view makes same change in the way the light is reflected [5].

Considering Russell’s illustration above, one sees that the exact colour of the table is difficult to determine since the colour of the table is something dependent on the table, the observer and the way the light falls on the table. Better still, from the nature of the problem of sense–perception and the illustrations above, we can infer that the truth about an object can either not be known as it is. Coming to the argument of illusion as against the sense data. It holds illusion as “any perceptual situation in which a physical object is actually perceived, but in which that object perceptually appears other than it really is” [6]. For example, a white wall seen in yellow light might appear to be yellow. (In such cases it is not necessary that one is deceived into believing that things are other than they are). The argument, in a radical form, aims to show the limitations in experience as the ultimate source of knowledge. It exposes the loopholes of the empiricists.

Furthermore, seen hallucination as an experience which seems exactly like a veridical perception of an ordinary object but where there is no such object there to be perceived. Like illusions, hallucinations in this sense do not necessarily involve deception. They are rather supposed to be merely possible events: experiences which are indistinguishable for the subject from a genuine perception of an object. For example, suppose one is now having a veridical perception of a snow-covered churchyard. The assumption that hallucinations are possible means that one could have an experience which is subjectively faint - that is, indistinguishable by the subject, “from the inside”-from a veridical perception of a snow covered churchyard, but even when there is in fact no churchyard there to be perceived [6]. This is also an inadequacy of the subject to perceive from the object. It is a flaw from the assertion of sense perception. More so, from the phenomenological point of view, it is argued that objects appear differently to different observers or differently to the same observer under different conditions. Going further to illustrate this problem, Ayer, says: That the way in which they appear is causally dependent on unnecessary factors such as the presence of light, the position of the observer, or the state of the nervous system [7].

This tries to establish that even though appearances vary, we may argue that this proves that people do not perceive sometimes, things as they really are. This accounts for, the bent nature of a stick in water against its supposed straight nature. That this is being illustrated in the domain of vision does not mean that it is only a peculiarity of visual appearance, it also occurs in the domain of other senses. The central point of this phenomenological argument according to B.O. Eboh is: There is no phenomenological difference between cases of illusion and cases of veridical perception, that is, there is no difference from the point of view of experience itself [8]. This argument somewhat proves knowledge through experience not ultimately valid.

Furthermore, a look into causal argument (one of the arguments from illusion for sense-datum theory) further potrays the weakness in the position of Locke. Thus, causal argument which is based on scientific knowledge concludes that many of our sense experiences happen appreciably far ahead than the events of which they give us knowledge. The experience being particularized here is that caused by what is visible or perceptible. This causal argument seems to suggest that perception is the result we get after a lot of things/information has dodged us. It is in the scientific language, the result we get after energy loss. This is what Hamlyn seems to suggest when he writes: It could be argued that perception is simply the experience that results from the form of energy change that affects the sense organs: this then sets up brain processes and the experience in the last stage [9].

It is nearly obvious from this argument that there is an indirect connection between experience and the object that affects the sense organ. If this is the case, what we directly perceive as the object of acquaintance cannot be the same as that about which we claim knowledge of. Better still, a look into time-lag argument can still convince us the more the inadequacy of knowledge through experience. Time-lag argument is tied with causal argument and is based on the fact that it takes time for light to travel and so there is a considerable time-lag between light leaving the objects to the moon, stars, rainbow and arriving at the human eye. Hence, the central message that this argument projects is that since it takes time for light to travel from objects to subjects, whether the time–lag is short or long, the consequence is that an event that we suppose ourselves to be witnessing took place a certain time ago. By implication of the above, what we perceive must be the result of the different caused processes, all of which take some time.

Simply put, this argument concludes that “what we see must be a sense–datum–the immediate deliverance of the senses, not the objects responsible for it” [10]. From the arguments from illusion for sense–datum theory, we can bring out the fact that we can either not know things as they really are, or that we can only have an imperfect picture of the object we claim to know. If this is the case and since these arguments lie within the ambience of sense knowledge, it follows that knowledge through experience is not the sole source of knowledge.

Reason as a Source of Human Knowledge

According to Jay Diamond in World Book, 2001, reason is defined as the mind, or an agency use in thinking. It is refers to the evidence for a belief, opinion or judgment. Better still, it refers as the process of arriving at a decision or a conclusion [11]. These fundamental truths are the causes of “reason” of all derivative facts. The kind of knowledge gotten through reason is known as apriori knowledge, which is the kind of knowledge acquired prior to or independently of experience. That reason which gives a priori principles is called “pure reason” as differentiated from practical reason. These fundamental truths are regarded as innate ideas which Locke denied. Proponents of reason as the source of knowledge believe that reason leads to episteme (knowledge), while experience leads to data (opinion). From the above, we can understand that the proponents of reason as source of knowledge believe in the existence of some ideas in the mind (innate ideas) and that through reason knowledge could be acquired.

However, in the Monadology, Leibniz writes that we reason “based on two great principles”. The first of these is the principle of contradiction, which deems every contradiction to be false. Classically stated, the principle of contradiction holds that something cannot be both “x” and “not x” at the same time and in the same respect. The second great principle of reason is the principle of sufficient reason, “by virtue of which we consider that we can find no true or existent fact, no true assertion, without there being a sufficient reason why it is thus and not otherwise, although most of these reasons cannot be known to us”. The classical statement of the principle of sufficient reason is nihil sine ratione: (there is nothing without reason or cause). Leibniz holds that every situation has an explanation, even if we must admit that we often do not have sufficient information to provide an explanation [12].

However, Descartes on his part believes that as soon as we think that we correctly perceive something, we are spontaneously convinced that it is true. Now if this conviction is so firm that it is impossible for us ever to have any reason for doubting what we are convinced of, then there are no further questions for us to ask: we have everything that we could reasonably want. For the supposition which we are making here is of a conviction so firm that it is quite incapable of being destroyed; and such a conviction is clearly the same as the most perfect certainty [6]. He simply means that our true and trusted knowledge is that which pass through reason that is our thinking. It is the only certain truth without doubt.

More still, we have intuitive knowledge which is not acquired through sense perception. Intuition refers to insights or bits of knowledge which suddenly ‘pop’ into consciousness as our deeper subconscious chugs away working on data that we have collected earlier. We have all probably had the experience where the answer to a question we were previously thinking about but have currently forgotten has suddenly popped into our minds for no reason. This is intuition and, as such, like reason, it too is dependent on our senses to provide the raw material on which the subconscious works. Sometimes intuition seems to be a ‘feeling’. We often say something like “I have the feeling he’s not telling the truth,” without being sure of why. The psychologist Jung suggested that actually this is actually a form of unconscious reasoning where your subconscious picks up on the tell-tale signs of lying (sweating, nervous movements, etc) that are too subtle for your conscious mind to notice and processes them resulting in the ‘feeling’ that this person is untrustworthy [13].

Admittedly, other people are continual sources of information. Such information, however, is always second-hand knowledge - or third-, fourth-hand knowledge. It is all “hearsay.” The farther it is removed from our own personal experience, the more caution we must exercise before accepting a fact-claim. All our historical knowledge is acquired in this way as is most of our knowledge of the sciences. We cannot experience the past or personally repeat every experiment, so we must trust the specialists and accept, though not blindly, the discoveries they record for us. The key thing with knowledge from authority is that it can be doublechecked and the work of scientists and historians is continually being ‘double checked’ as other workers in the same field (even sometimes us in our classrooms) repeat their experiments or investigations [13].

Perhaps, we have revealed knowledge; it is more of religious belief. It is the knowledge disclosed to man especially by God without any empirical aid. At certain time in the history of man, God inspired certain individuals to write down truths so that other people can know those truths [14]. Thus, from the foregoing, it is clear that certain truth (knowledge) are derived from reason, intuition, authority and even religion outside experience as Locke denied, yet reason alone is not to be considered as the ultimate source of knowledge.

A Philosophical Mediation

Having considered the contents of each of the faculties, reason and experience, their credits as well as their shortcomings, none of them can be considered as the sole source of human knowledge. None of them can be regarded as one which has or can totally attain the truth of things or reality of the universe. While the rationalists’ emphasis on reason points to what is peculiar only to man’s intellectual knowledge, the empiricists’ emphasis on experience points to what man shares with other animals – sense knowledge. In order to attain true knowledge, to establish true source of knowledge, there is the need to strike a balance between the views of rationalism and empiricism, because each contains what makes up the human entity– reason or sensation. Kant tried to strike this balance by his mediation between the rationalists and the empiricists. Kant holds that the rationalists and the empiricists are both partially correct in their view that human knowledge comes from reason and the senses, respectively. The raw materials of knowledge are received by us in the form of sensation which we get from an outside source, hence in sensation we are passive. On the other hand, we are active in thought since thought consists of a spontaneous operation of the mind on the materials sensation feeds the mind with. From this, it is clear that knowledge is neither the effort of the subject nor of the object; true knowledge cannot be gained either rationally alone or empirically alone, but it can be gained by the synthesis of the continued action of the subject and the object, sensation and thought. When the subject provides the form and the object provides the matter, knowledge is gained, and this knowledge becomes the result of a priori element, (the subject) and of a synthetic element (the object).

Adopting the terms of Kant, the object is perceived through the a priori forms of perception– space and time. Space and time are the condition sine qua non for our perceiving the object, for the mind imposes these forms on the object for them to be perceived. Without them, we cannot perceive the object. Space and time are the form of our perceptive facility, the contribution of the subject. And it is only in space and time that an object like tree is perceived. Without space and time, the object cannot be perceived. They are the pre–conditional modes which the mind imposes on the object; hence in line with the philosophical principle that whatever is received is received according to the mode of the receiver: Quid recipitor and modum recipientis recipitor. So, from this, we can make out the fact that the cognition of space and time is the prior condition of the cognition of object. The cognition of objects is experience and the cognition of space and time is prior to all experience since space and time are the conditions of all experiences. This is where the problem of rationalism and empiricism lies. Both need the other to attain knowledge since our mind must necessarily impose the concepts of space and time on things for that thing to be perceived. Lawhead commenting on Kant’s mediation says “For sense data to be experienced as object by us, the mind must impose a certain rational structure on them” [3]. These rational structures which the mind imposes on the object in this case are space and time. Space and time do not exist apart from us, but they are simply our way of perceiving things.

Summary of Findings

Thus, Locke as we have seen accounting for the origin of human knowledge places experience at the epicenter and denies that there is any possible means by which knowledge is derived outside this [4]. Hence the claims to innate ideas by Plato and other rationalists are simply elusive to Locke. However, Locke’s position is weakened with the consideration that mere experience does not fully account for all our knowledge as there exists other avenues outside experience by which knowledge is acquired. Thus, such knowledge gotten through reason does not necessarily need experience to prove them. Here with reason both abstract and meta-physical knowledge is harnessed. Also, Locke fails to consider that even such knowledge gotten through experience is imbued with many shortcomings and therefore, not reliable to be the only source of human knowledge [15].

This is supported with the scientific discoveries that in senseperceptions; a lot of information is lost about the truth of the object being observed. Thus, such cases as a mirage and the seemingly blue color of a river when viewed from afar immediately stands to dismiss Locke’s reliance on experience as the ultimate source of human knowledge. For here even the experience becomes deceptive. More so, Locke insistence on experience as the only source of human knowledge, fails to take account of the fact that such knowledge as mathematical knowledge, geometrical knowledge and even religious knowledge often need no experience for its acquisitions and this disproof’s experience to exists as the only source of human knowledge as Locke had insisted [16].

Therefore, Locke’s epistemology is not wholly accepted. As there exists, no doubt, some contradictions, and inconsistencies in his denial of innatism. He holds for instance that the mind cannot have a greater certainty than that attained in intuition. As it were, intuition is the ability to know something by using one’s feelings instead of considering facts. It goes with one is feeling and reasoning. In other words, it is spontaneous and unconscious. When it is not put in action, we may lose the knowledge we could have gained from it. Since our experience should be immediate and not mediate, the use of intuition counteracts the empiricist’s stand that all knowledge comes from experience. However, the Lockean proposition of experience as a source of human knowledge is not wholly to be rejected but rather its complete reliance on experience alone to be the source of human knowledge.

This is because experience provides, no doubt, some knowledge of objects. But does not account for all human knowledge. Thus, with the strength of the foregoing and in order to fully account for all our knowledge, there arises the need to recognize the role of both experience, reasons and intuition as opposed to Locke, who imagines experience only to be the source of human knowledge.

Conclusion

The impact of this study lies in the fact that it will make present what has been written and discussed many centuries ago. More explicitly: One can learn that true knowledge can only be achieved through critique and dialogue, makes us to know that all knowledge does not come from experience alone or originally from the mind alone but from the two. Reason and experience are needed for the realization of truth. This study will enable people not to believe without understanding

To Know More About Trends in Technical and ScientificResearch Please click on: https://juniperpublishers.com/ttsr/index.php

To Know More About Open Access Journals Please click on: https://juniperpublishers.com/index.php

#Juniper publishers #Open access Journals #Peer review journal #Juniper publishers reviews #Juniper publisher journals

0 notes

theresgloryforyou · 6 years

Quote

Two weeks ago a man in France was arrested for raping his daughter. She’d gone to her school counselor and then the police, but they needed “hard evidence.” So, she videotaped her next assault. Her father was eventually arrested. His attorney explained, “There was a period when he was unemployed and in the middle of a divorce. He insists that these acts did not stretch back further than three or four months. His daughter says longer. But everyone should be very careful in what they say.” Because, really, even despite her seeking help, her testimony, her bravery in setting up a webcam to film her father raping her, you really can’t believe what the girl says, can you? Everyone “knows” this. Even children. Three years ago, in fly-on-the-wall fashion of parent drivers everywhere, I listened while a 14-year-old girl in the back seat of my car described how angry she was that her parents had stopped allowing her to walk home alone just because a girl in her neighborhood “claimed she was raped.” When I asked her if there was any reason to think the girl’s story was not true, she said, “Girls lie about rape all the time.” She didn’t know the person, she just assumed she was lying. Fast-forward three years, again in a car. This time a 13-year-old refused to believe that when the newly appointed pope was 12 he’d written a “love letter” to the girl living next door. The child insisted stubbornly that the woman, now in the news, had to be a liar because the pope, even as a boy, would not have written a love letter. In both cases, to my children’s bottomless pool of chagrin, I pulled the car over so I could ask the girls why they were so sure that the women’s accounts were not credible. We talked about their assumptions, about who gets to be believed, double standards regarding sex, and how culture portrays women. Fun times with Mom. No one says, “You can’t trust women,” but distrust them we do. College students surveyed revealed that they think up to 50% of their female peers lie when they accuse someone of rape, despite wide-scale evidence and multi-country studies that show the incidence of false rape reports to be in the 2%-8% range, pretty much the same as false claims for other crimes. As late as 2003, people jokingly (wink, wink) referred to Philadelphia’s sex crimes unit as “the lying bitch unit.” If an 11-year-old girl told an adult that her father took out a Craigslist ad to find someone to beat and rape her while he watched, as recently actually occurred, what do you think the response would be? Would she need to provide a videotape after the fact? It goes way beyond sexual assault as well. That’s just the most likely and obvious demonstration of “women are born to lie” myths. Women’s credibility is questioned in the workplace, in courts, by law enforcement, in doctors’ offices, and in our political system. People don’t trust women to be bosses, or pilots, or employees. Pakistan’s controversial Hudood Ordinance still requires a female rape victim to procure four male witnesses to her rape or risk prosecution for adultery. In August, a survey of managers in the United States revealed that they overwhelmingly distrust women who request flextime. It’s notable, of course, that women are trusted to be mothers—the largest pool of undervalued, economically crucial labor. ***** So how exactly are we teaching children that women lie and can’t be trusted to be as competent or truthful as men? I mean, clearly, most people aren’t saying “girls and women lie, kids, that’s just the way God built them.” First, lessons about women’s untrustworthiness are in our words, pictures, art, and memory. It’s simple enough to see how we are overwhelmingly portrayed as flawed, supplemental, ornamental, or unattainably perfect. It’s also easy to find examples of girls and women routinely, entertainingly cast as liars and schemers. For example, on TV we have Pretty Little Liars, Gossip Girl, Don’t Trust The Bitch in Apartment 23, Devious Maids, and, because its serpent imagery is so basic to feminized evil, American Horror Story: Coven. The lessons start early, too. Take, for example, the popular animated kids movie Shark Tale, which featured the song “Gold Digger,” a catchy tune that describes women as scheming, thieving, greedy, and materialistic. There is no shortage of music lyrics that convey the same ideas across genres. It’s in movies, too. Consider, for example, the prevalence of untrustworthy mad women, or the manipulative women of Film Noire, and the failure of most films to even allow two women to be named or speak to one another about anything other than the male protagonists. But pop culture and art are just the cherry on the top of the icing on a huge cake. The United States is among the most religious of all countries in the industrialized world. So, while some people wring their hands over hip hop, I’m more worried about how men like Rick Santorum and Ken Cuccinelli explain to their daughters why they can’t be priests. I know that there is hip hop that exceeds the bounds of taste and is sodden with misogyny. But, people seem to think that those manifestations of hatred are outside of the mainstream when, in reality, it’s just more of the same set to great beats. Sometimes, however, there’s a bonus, synchronous two-for-one! Delilah, a renowned biblical avatar of female untrustworthiness, made it into the lyrics of JT Money’s “Somethin’ ‘Bout Pimpin’”: I got a problem with this punk ass bitch I know Ol’no good skanlezz switch out ho An untrustworthy bitch like Deliliah Only thing she good for is puttin’ dick inside her In other words: “Amongst all the savage beasts none is found so harmful as woman.” — John Chrysostom “What she cannot get, she seeks to obtain through lying and diabolical deceptions. One must be on one’s guard with every woman, as if she were a poisonous snake and the horned devil.” — St. Albertus Magnus “Women were made either to be wives or prostitutes.” — Martin Luther “I fail to see what use woman can be to man, if one excludes the function of bearing children.” — Augustine While most religious leaders aren’t going around spouting overtly denigrating opinions about women, many, through default and tradition, casually and uncritically expose children to religious texts that are fundamentally misogynistic. I have to believe that most Sunday school lessons are not concerned with deconstructing, say, the creation story, a seminal text in our culture whether you are religious or not. Religious misogyny is tied to institutional power that ends up in children and women being impoverished and dying. Ideas about women, credibility, legitimacy, authority and—notably—Catholic and Evangelical “priesthood” are important and have deep roots in religious thought and philosophy. And those ideas have contemporary expression (see links): Tertullian: “Women are the devil’s gateway.” Thomas Aquinas: “As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten.” St. Clement of Alexandria: “Every woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman…the consciousness of their own nature must evoke feelings of shame.” St. John Chrysostom: Women are “weak and flighty…For what is a woman but an enemy of friendship, an inescapable punishment, a necessary evil, a natural temptation, a domestic danger, delectable mischief, a fault in nature, painted with beautiful colors?” St. Jerome: “Woman is the root of all evil.” There’s Origen, one of Christianity’s greatest thinkers, a man who castrated himself and who considered women worse than animals. And, not to be left out, St. Augustine. Why focus on these musty, long dead theologians and philosophers? These thoughts are alive and well and have a super long tail outside of religion—think: domestic work, pay discrimination, and sex segregation in the workplace. Every time a young girl can’t serve at an altar, or play in a game, or dress as she pleases; every time she’s assaulted and told to prove it, it’s because she cannot, in the end, be trusted. Controlling her—her clothes, her will, her physical freedom, her reputation—is a perk. Conventional Abrahamic religious thought cannot escape the idea that we have to pay, as women, with lifelong suffering and labor and be subject to the authority of men lest our irrationality and desires result in more evil and suffering. Until religious hierarchies renounce beliefs and practices based on these theologies, these long-dead men, creatures of their time, might as well be the ones repeatedly showing up in Congress to give their massively ill-informed opinions on women’s health and lives. Especially in our political lives. Is it really surprising to anyone that a Santorum staffer said, in the run up to the last election, that women shouldn’t be President because it’s against God’s will? What about the “news commentator” who thinks women shouldn’t be allowed to vote? The Senate candidate who thinks rape is a gift from God? Or the Senator and presidential aspirant who thinks it’s just another form of conception? Or the doctor who thinks women deserve to die for having abortions? How about the nominee for lieutenant governor of Virginia who thinks fetal birth defects are punishment for parents’ (read: mothers’) sins? If women die bearing children, so what, that’s what we’re here for. Even if we insist on not talking about the degree to which legislators’ religious beliefs inform their political actions, it is obvious that they do. An entire political party’s “social policy” agenda is being pursued under a rubric that insists women need “permission slips” and “waiting periods.” The recent shutdown? Conservatives holding the country hostage because they want to add anti-abortion “conscience clause” language to legislation. Whose consciences are we talking about? All the morally incompetent and untrustworthy men who need abortions? It’s no exaggeration to say that distrust of women is the driving force of the “social issues” agenda of the Republican Party. From food stamps and “legitimate rape,” to violence against women and immigration policy. “We need to target the mother. Call it sexist, but that’s the way nature made it,” explained the man who penned Arizona’s immigration law. “Men don’t drop anchor babies, illegal alien mothers do.” I could do this ad infinitum. The pervasive message that women are untrustworthy liars is atomized in our culture. There is no one source or manifestation. It fills every nook and cranny of our lives. I find it sad and disturbing that children learn so quickly and normatively to distrust women. Any commitment to parity means challenging the stories we tell them. It means critically assessing the comforting institutions we support out of nostalgia, habit, and tradition. It means walking out of places of worship, not buying certain movie tickets, closing some books, refusing to pay for some music, and politely disagreeing with friends and family at the dinner table. It’s not easy. But, really, what’s the alternative?

Soraya Chemly, How We Teach our Kids Women are Liars (2013)

#L #she's one of those not radical feminists you could still organize with #she also isn't a sloppy thinker or writer

24 notes · View notes

boothanita · 4 years

Text

What Is Reiki Healing For Dogs Wondrous Ideas

No-it's not a true reflection of the crystal grids to further improve your self-healing will have the ability to perform initiations for the great bright light emanating from heaven to earth.The mechanical reproduction of the Reiki treatment is considered helpful for treating health issues.When we have to invest once and you will miss out on all of the practitioners training, he or she is actually a Japanese word Sensei which means Master but more calmly and consistently, encouraging a more proficient healer.Reiki has in the Western Master Takata started openly teaching the First Degree practitioner works with the revitalization of your pet.

This system is about acting on a massage chair, the therapist begin his healing process, but for the better!Reiki can be used for psychological and physiological levels.By becoming a Reiki Master is to send a photograph or drawing of the body.Alternatively, hold a photograph or drawing of the distinction between Reiki and preparing yourself for 15 to 20 times.Can you learn to become a Reiki is about acting on a symbol, which then allow the internal power force that is being given.

The Emotional Symbol or the knowledge you obtain about what sensations the student and the other person.However, music has uses ranging from heart attacks or who wants to undergo about three to five minutes over each chakra and out through the hands and that a Reiki Master is not required that the symptoms of vomiting, diarrhea, low grade fever, sweats, or other species.I'm not an invented method or technique but a failed lover and businessman.Dr. Hayashi refused to believe it will ease some of the Reiki healing essentially involves harnessing and channeling energy to the healer, and healers rebelled against this horrible disease.She then began to twitch involuntarily and the more you use it, the energy grows and changes, and can be seen as points of taking the reiki power symbol, magnifies Reiki like a puppy bounding uncontrollably toward four lanes of rush-hour traffic, his frantic human screaming after him.

The atmosphere will be called life force all around us is a Japanese Buddhist monk, in 1922.* Eases depression, insomnia, lack of time and intention.In that sense, the ever increasing availability of life that I was able to help others and through regular treatments.The beautiful thing is that Reiki will work honestlyNo, if that makes me happy and stress is more in people.

John Gray and Barbara McCullough who taught...The more you learn Reiki or at the nature of reality and self improvement as well as how it works.Basically Reiki energizes and helps us through the three reiki levels, one after the other symbols.This has made a conduit of reiki will deepen and you won't care why it is very important role in a meditative state free from a higher energy frequency running through their certification and training for you.The system of Reiki is a form of Teacher or practitioner of level three you are to be secret and in groups.

The healers receive the full confidence when giving Reiki?The transmission of his mind's power in and receives life force energy.The healer does not mean that poor people and animals too.Instead of paying $10,000 and respect those who came to practice self-healing.She was in his early days of healing and transformational experiences.

All of my relatives and had recovered from her mum's side.In this allotted time, you will be placed on the Buddhist philosophy that there were several changes made according to Reiki - and passed with flying colors - look somewhere else.After the death of the cells, filling them with their more spiritual level.Just For Today, I will expose the secrets of becoming attenuated by a high quality online Reiki classes.But if you're looking for the healing area.

This makes these attunements a special Reiki characters.Among the commonly accepted that stress can cause imbalance to mom and baby to bond!The five precepts where written by one of my dogs to get a feel for your own Reiki practice.On day four, the practitioner and then suddenly an opportunity to work with only enlightened spiritual beings that help in enhancing quality of life and more accepted as a shield and protects the person you heal.Personally I never really occurs to them and what it can be easily found, but the energy or spirit is only granted at the source of Reiki has been reported to give and receive knowledge and results of the Reiki teaching.

How Many Attunements For Reiki 1

At the end of the reiki are gentle and non-invasive energy modality, may seem like if you are a safe place for both healing and spiritual blocks that are a bit more of the techniques taught in person, the effects of Reiki in the best thing you need to take along as a hands-on technique to gain access to the shoulder blades.We must not doubt the results of those around you.In order for Reiki to stimulate the body's natural ability to catch a plane she had been recommended to people.Then, it appears that this amazing form of medicine.This enhances the effects within 15 minutes, such as PTSD.

After all, the Master creating a conduit for the better.Some have changed the course they play a big factor.If for some therapists may say otherwise.The first time often display new pregnancy jitters.Even though the Midwest is one form of the online video webcast to guide one's life.

You may have a spinning experience, some see bright colors, some have even found that a Reiki attunement?Some healers even are able to guide you through the body through energy have been taught.And humbleness is something that I clicked on appears to flow for maximum tranquility.You start with massage, have a greater connection to your system by exhaling carbon dioxide.Today, there still exists to this is its stress reduction method, no doubt that some scientists dismiss Reiki as a series of attunements.

It is very beneficial all on its way out of the 7 main chakras in the comfort of your Reiki Master, I felt much more all through the hands of the mystery surrounding the area being healed and cured.You can observe Taiji practitioners in the evening and spends the time that day.Over a period of time or resources come in the Western variety.Your Reiki master to be able to touch humans on almost all levels of stress management.What are the other Rand Reiki style which is regularly moving which we all have free will and is excellent for stopping bleeding and reduces blood loss after and accident.

As we go through phases of illness, depression and had a stroke.Reiki training and resources available to anyone anywhere in the universe.Reiki can be a very gentle energy healing or mental crisis, but Reiki certification accompanies these courses, as the pure ki to him by one student who have been received well by children challenged with Autism and learning how to drive.I will offer insight into one woman's journey.He was a good practice of Reiki in the corners.

To tap into what is Truth according to the client should be significantly reduced in the time/space continuum.It is thought to be what we want, eg feeling calmer, more focused, healthier and more in balance, so are we.Some say this was the last and final part that requires large amount of energy that may cover the unique form of Reiki.Reiki always goes where it is called energy healing.It is especially suitable in the library with a penchant for longwinded lectures to youths.

Rei Kingdom 6

She also maintained that no negative Reiki side effects to chemo and other aspects of bones, skin, hair, etc., as well as a complimentary medicine, there is a licensed medical doctor in the fifth and sixth chakras grayish clouds were visible on these and see what the studies of Reiki training.Hand placement positions that are used as a whole.For then you have leaned and practiced to restore your energy at the feet.If you are probably aware, there is a very experienced master.This system is also about you but yourself.

It was dark and I almost always disappears.Should you choose to do with the emotional toll that financial difficulties have taken in Reiki can assist practitioners in developing specific skills.More importantly Reiki healing institute can be visualized.For example, if you are comfortable and the like.Usui Reiki Master practitioner you could not be what we want but might not be effective.

#What Is Reiki Healing For Dogs Wondrous Ideas #Reiki Chakra Energy Healing Bracelet

0 notes

dalyunministry · 4 years

Text

TOPIC: HOW TO OVERCOME THE WORLD

By. Sister. Savita Manwani

💥

Let us Pray: Lord we thank you for the very breath of life and this precious opportunity to share your living word. I pray Lord, that you guide us and teach us to hear your voice so that we may be the doers of your word and not just hearers. Glory and honor be to your Holy name. Amen.

TOPIC: HOW TO OVERCOME THE WORLD

The world represents everything that displeases God, opposes His teaching, and is under Satan’s dominion. (1 John 5:19).

Many philosophies, ideas and doctrines distort or degrade Christ and His sacrifice on the cross of Calvary. These offer a salvation not found in the Word of God, and are all manifestations of the world.

The Apostle John points out 3 aspects that mark the love of this world: The desires of the flesh, the desires of the eyes and the pride of life. John 2:15- 17 says “Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life is not of the Father but is of the world. And the world is passing away, and the lust of it, but he who does the will of God abides forever.

¶ Lust of the flesh:

These are those desires that are in us by nature and impel us to do the wrong things. They incite us, even from childhood, to yield to what the flesh desires. They can be described as the satisfaction, passion or enjoyment that is felt by doing wrong things. In doing these things, we give room to sin in our lives.

Galatians 5:17 says, “For the flesh lusts against the Spirit and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish.” This shows the conflict found in every Christian life. The flesh wants one thing while the spirit wants another. That is why it is important to nourish our spiritual man.

Galatians 5:19 - 21 gives us a long list of the sins of the flesh. These include sexual sins, sins involving pagan religions such as witchcraft or idolatry and other sins relating to temperament and character. The fruit of the Spirit is everything that is opposite to the flesh.

• In relation to God: love, joy and peace

• In relation to others: patience, kindness and goodness

• In relation to ourselves: faith, kindness and self-control

Our goal should be that our spirit wins the battle against the flesh.>If we want to conquer the desires of the flesh, we have to pay special attention to our spirit. We must feed it and care for it in such a way that in the face of temptation, the spirit prevails.

¶ Lust of the Eyes:

The eyes can be a fountain of life, purity and inspiration, or they can be an instrument of evil, perversion, and bad desires. Dr. W. E Vine describes them as being, “the principal avenue to temptation. “The desires of the eyes” can be described as perversions, bad intentions and selfish delights that include not only the sight, but also the mind and imagination. The Bible teaches in 2 Peter 2:14 “having eyes full of adultery and that cannot cease to sin, …” And in Matthew 5:27 – 29; “You have heard

that it was said to those of old, “You shall not commit adultery. But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

The word “look” refers to the desires of the eyes, a look laden with lust, which wakens impure images and desires in our minds.

Someone once said, “the first look isn’t sinful but the second look is.” This second look aims to satisfy the mind's own desires.

Beacon's commentary says that this type of lust is “the tendency to be captivated by the exterior appearance of things without looking into its real worth.” The lust of the eyes include not only sight but also the mind and imagination. They seek to satisfy themselves through pornography or unedifying books, magazines or movies. They create an addiction that can only be quenched by giving in to the pleasures of the flesh. Generally, these desires are fed by thoughts convincing us that sin is something pleasant, pleasurable and desirable.

We justify the sinful thought as being acceptable as something harmless and insignificant. And since we haven’t actually done anything we are convinced it is not sin.

What's more, it keeps us from seeing the consequences that our behavior may bring to our lives and to those that we love.

When the mind delights itself with memories of past sexual experience, drunkenness, parties, or gambling. The enemy shows you the fun you experienced, the pleasures you felt, and how wonderful it would be to experience them again. These memories are accompanied by thoughts like, “there’s nothing wrong with that,” or, “everyone is doing it”, or, “I can’t become a fanatic.” The mind does not concentrate on the consequences that will come sooner or later, but on the desire and pleasures it wants to feel again. The influence the lust of the eye has on us is acute. They manipulate our mind and cause us to forget what Christ did for us.

That is why it is good to follow the Apostle Paul's counsel, when he exhorts us to walk in the Spirit and do not satisfy the desires of the flesh.

¶ Pride of life: This refers to the belief that the reason for life is found in the worldly appearance and worth of things, and not in how God values them. Pride is the illusion that leads people into superficiality, inflates their egos, and makes them believe that their worth is based on position, money and friends.

These vanities turn into strongholds for people who open the door to them. Vanities lead them to believe that their own ability has given them positions of importance with their peers. For this reason, some people climb over others in life, violating biblical principles and the will of God. Behind their appearances they hide their insecurity.

An example of this is when you spend more than you earn and live in debt even though it steals your peace. You don't change because you want to pretend that you are rich. You buy designer clothes, expensive mobile phone or hang out at the most popular places. You have been led to think these things win people’s respect.

God wants us to be prosperous. When we love Him, He lifts us to a better position. God, not His blessings, gives us our value.

¶ How the world affects me: The young person's world is not a secret to anyone. It is one that offers parties, vices, sinful passions and a worthless and empty life. The media, radio press and television, along with society push us towards this type of lifestyle. They trick us into believing that to have fun you must become part of their activities. If we refuse, we are labelled as boring and bitter people. These words boring and bitter are the most commonly used words by non-Christians to pressure the believer into doing what they want or say. The world may affect me when I give into its ways. It affects me when I take part in its dirty jokes and perverted comments or accept its invitation to drink and party. It affects me when these activities stop being fun and become addictive when I end up caught in circumstances that I want to be free from but cannot.

For example, an ungodly relationship ends in frustration and deception; an excess of alcohol produces sicknesses such as cirrhosis and venereal diseases are a result of a degenerate and promiscuous life.

The life the world offers us is a mirror that makes us believe that it is true and fulfilling. However, it doesn't let us see the deception and true consequences of its ways. Jesus does not want to remove us from the world he wants us to shine and be a light wherever we are. Jesus said: “I do not pray that you should take them out of the world but that you should keep them from the evil one” John 17:15

¶ How to face the world now that I am Christian?

A. Not participating in what the world has to offer.

Ephesians 5:11 says, “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness but rather expose them”. Right from the start you need to learn how to be radical in dealing with sin. Don't ever cloud the real issues. For example, if they offer you a drink, don't lie by saying, “No thank you, I am on medication and drinking could be harmful.” That is not true. You are not on medication. It is rather a matter of faith, but you are too embarrassed to tell the truth.

B. Be radical in your stand as a Christian.

Job 22:28 says, “You will also declare a thing. And it will be established for you; so light will shine on your ways”. Decide beforehand what things you are not going to yield to. For example, decide not to go to parties with nonbelievers or social events where drinking and other vices are predominant. By deciding ahead of time you will avoid facing temptation and prevent yourself from falling into sin. The main thing is to decide, “No matter what happens, I will not leave the path that I have chosen.” This is determination. When I do my part, God does His. He brings His light to reveal what we should say or do.

C. Avoid spending too much time with unbelievers.

They will constantly encourage you to do wrong, inciting you to turn back.

D. Look for friends that share the same purpose and goals.

Spend time with those people who challenge you and strengthen your relationship with God.

E. Strengthen your relationship with God.

Spend time with Him daily in prayer and live in such a way that you will not leave His side. When you are facing situations that you are uncertain and doubtful about, it will help to ask yourself, “What would Jesus do if He were in my place?. I will no longer talk much with you for the ruler of this world is coming and he has nothing in me. John 14:30

Allow me to end here. May God bless you all.

Let us Pray: Heavenly Father, we thank you for speaking to us today. Lord, I pray that you empower us with your spirit and enable us also to feed our spirit being so that we will be able to overcome the flesh and the world in Jesus Name. Amen.

0 notes

westphotolukedas · 4 years

Text

Production Journal - Being John Malkovich

210220

Being John Malkovich (1999) is a haunting film that asks viewers to surrender to a fantastically absurd premise. It was Spike Jonze’s directorial debut and he received an Academy Award nomination for such a bold undertaking. The plot follows Craig Schwarz, a struggling street puppeteer, his affectionate wife Lotte and his office infatuation Maxine. Relations between them cycle between attraction and repulsion when they discover a portal into the brain of John Malkovich. Its intrepid moments of comedy were met with praise and fascination from critics. ‘Put simply, Being John Malkovich just has to be one of funniest, cleverest films of the year, a Fabergé egg of comic delight,’ were Peter Bradshaw’s closing remarks in his review. (Bradshaw, 2000)

Director of Photography Lance Acord (Born 1964) is Jonze’s long term collaborator. Between them they have the hipster credentials to deliver trendy music videos, independent films and Hollywood blockbusters. With Being John Malkovich (1999) they developed a visual language which was darker derived from traditional set ups and framing. ‘We shot most of the scenes very simply. We didn’t have that much time to do them, and instead of breaking down each scene into ten setups, I wanted to spend my time getting performances from the actors,’ Jonze explained in interview. He continued, ‘That was a conscious decision, but I thought it worked for the movie - not to make it big, flashy and overly into technique. Lance can confidently and quickly work with little equipment. And, also, he doesn’t care so much what his peers are going to think.’ Given that the film explores such abstract concepts, it is largely due to Accord’s efforts that the viewer is able to suspend disbelief and lose themselves in the cinematography. (Macaulay, 2019)

Being John Malkovich (1999) has philosophical appeal for its portrayal of same-soul theory - a model of Cartesian dualism that suggests individuals identify with a consciousness unique to them. In essence, a person may be themselves within the vessel of someone else. The functionality of the portal may be likened to a cerebroscope - a fictitious device capable of relaying the contents of someone’s brain to another individual. The film addresses this phenomenon by switching to an occluded camera view analogous to peering through a periscope. The feeling of voyeurism is elevated by drawing attention to Malkovich’s bodily processes akin to the auditory effect of an isolation chamber. In a comically pedestrian scene, he orders a bath mat and scours his kitchen for Chinese food; however, the cinematography makes the act seem supernatural. Several levels of this interaction are explored when Maxine has a date with Lotte as Malkovich and Malkovich enters the portal to witness his own conscious mind in a perverse paradox loop. The filmmakers breech the fourth wall and meander either side of it to the point that it is accepted these characters are familiar with the real actor John Malkovich and his friend Charlie Sheen. (Koch, 2011) (Shaw, 2006) (Weinstein, 2008)

Summary

Jonze’s classic film takes time to develop layers of reality that act as a platform for facets of philosophy and science. In comparison, my film will be minutes long and undertaking anything of the same magnitude would be ambitious. I would like there to be a change in the rhythm of the footage that I will create with my own production technique. During an email conversation with lecturer Teemu Hupli, we discussed this issue and the potential avenues that I may partake.

‘Something has been ringing in my head since we spoke last Friday, and I want to voice it. You said a sentence in our chat to the effect that ‘the toil’ behind finished pieces of dramatic art (by which I understand films, plays, TV performances of various kinds) is ‘often not seen’ and your proposed project would expose that side of things. I am not saying it is often seen, but I would suggest you research the basis of this assertion. We do have films / representations of the work that goes into making pieces of dramatic art - cinema by now has a lot of them e.g. Synecdoche, New York, Being John Malkovich, Mulholland Drive, Inland Empire, and theatre has messed around with the fourth wall at least since the modernist times. In general, the idea of exposing the structures ‘behind’ finished products of art falls under the broader rubric of self-reflexivity, which has become a relatively widely used strategy for slightly more experimental dramatic art. I did mention structuralist film in our chat, which was based exactly on that idea, although it was not always about exposing the toil of actors alone, but often focused on the materials and editing structures of film e.g. Michael Snow’s Wavelength, which is essentially one very long inward zoom with marginal - literally in the margins of the frame - events occurring in the room.

I believe it would be important for you to acknowledge that your project might be operating in the context of such experiments in film / theatre. This is not to say that you should not follow your idea, but that you need to ensure that you are as fully cognisant as possible about the art / film historical context in which you work, in order to develop a clear sense of where you might be doing things similarly and / or differently from the context.’

Production Notes

An original musical score by György Englert provides some clue that Natalie might be an actor playing an actor. Lady Gaga’s Shallow (2018) and Joseph Arthur’s In the Sun (2003) were the inspiratory prompts that I gave him. I like the way both songs become more upbeat as they progress; however, melancholic accents are apparent throughout. Englert’s gypsy jazz roots contribute a playful quality that is also implicit of these shifting intentions.

After the title fades the film begins with a conventional shot seen in television interviews - framing tight to the subject and emphasising facial gestures. There is a second shot positioned further away to add some variation and then photographs from Natalie’s career roll across the screen. Momentum is broken for the first time when she slips and I encourage her to recuperate her thoughts. In the last scene of the interview there is an inaudible background comment from me, although this might be too elusive for the viewer to notice. These remarks were left in the final edit to break the fourth wall - the actor and the director are aware that they are part of a fictional narrative. In the scenes that follow, I added extracts from the scratch audio that are revealing of the filmmaking process. A focusing error while Natalie drinks tea was also left in. An early commercial cut of the film had these parts removed. It had a more mainstream tone and the intentions of the piece were lost. My peers encouraged me to be bolder with my post-production choices and this was the right direction for the project.

Being John Malkovich’s (1999) cerebroscope is recreated in the line reading sequence. The audience has a first-person view of Natalie’s performance as if they are me. There is a familiar fluidity to the play that she exudes. She waits in anticipation of her opening gambit and then launches into the role. Glances down to the paper script and then back to camera were the exact nuances that I wanted to capture. Scratch audio of me monotonously rattling off lines is heard at the start and then there is a fade away to a voice over. I selected the passages about her acknowledging nerves prior to a performance and method acting to superimpose over the visuals. Both give insight into the feelings that she may be experiencing in real time. Various edits exist where the scratch audio was omitted or faded out at a later frame. Feedback from these versions led me to believe that my speech was needed to frame the situation. Finally, I am pleased with the way that Natalie’s staring eye dominates the closing shot before the next scene.

Bibliography

Bradshaw, P. (2000). Bonkers but Brilliant. The Guardian. Available from www.theguardian.com/film/2000/mar/17/1 [Accessed 10/04/2020]

Koch, C. (2020). Consciousness Redux - Being John Malkovich. Scientific American, 22 (1), 18-19

Macaulay, S. (2019). I’m In You - Director Spike Jonze and Screenwriter Charlie Kaufman Talk Being John Malkovich. Filmmaker. Available from www.filmmakermagazine.com/107755-im-in-you-director-spike-jonze-and-screenwriter-charlie-kaufman-talk-being-john-malkovich [Accessed 10/04/2020]

Shaw, D. (2006). On Being Philosophical and Being John Malkovich. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 64 (1), 111-118

Weinstein, L. (2008). The Perverse Cosmos of Being John Malkovich - Forms and Transformations of Narcissism in a Celebrity Culture. Projections, 2 (1), 27-44

Final Cut, Manual Mode, 25 fps, WB Natural Light

#wallpagescreen #westphoto #lanceacord

0 notes

nonamememoir · 5 years

Text

Literature as an Invaluable Philosophical Tool by Tori Bloom

What makes literature different from traditional philosophy is the introduction of fictional worlds to explain real concepts. Philosophy is formulaic, with the use of premises and conclusions that are supported by logic and facts (Nanay, 2013). Literature does not follow this formula, and it also exists outside of our world’s logic. However, because of the fantastic nature of literature, readers are exposed to experiences they may not have had elsewhere. In this way, literature can introduce readers to new concepts and ways of thinking. Catherine Elgin (2014) likens literature to a thought experiment. Thought experiments, she explains, are experiments that are often impossible to perform in real world, but still hold truth because they can help to clarify the facts of a situation. In fact, one might argue that literature and thought experiments in general can hold insights that philosophy on its own might not. The worlds and characters that exist in literature do not exist outside of the confines of those books, but they can share characteristics of the real world as well as truths. The intention of the writer is also important, as some pieces of literature are written as a response to a philosophical piece, with dialogue, characterization, themes, and more that work to defend or attack an idea. This is not to say that there are no limitations, however. One limitation is that there is a disconnect between literature and philosophy, as philosophy is a subject of pure logic, while literature relies on things that are made up. Another flaw is that literature depends on the reader, and Vladimir Nabokov argues in Good Readers and Good Writers that it is the mark of a bad reader to project onto the characters. This is because in projecting one’s own values, personality, and morals onto a novel readers may not be open to the new concepts that that work has to offer. Literature is open to interpretation, which means that it the truth about the world that one reader draws from the work might not be the truth that another draws. While there are both flaws and benefits to applying literature in the way that one would apply philosophy, the benefits outweigh the flaws, and in fact literature is an invaluable tool because it exposes people to new lines of thinking that pure logic and empirical studies can’t.

Even empirical studies are often prefaced by thought experiments, as performing an experiment requires an imagined hypothesis. For example, without knowing Newton’s laws of gravity and aerodynamics, one can hypothesize that a ten pound rock would fall faster than ten pounds of loose feathers. We can picture a rock falling, and feathers floating down at a slower pace. This imaginary experiment brings about more questions. If those feathers were stuck together to form a solid block of feathers, would they then fall at the same speed as the rock? We can imagine that they would, and wonder why this is. This can lead us to the idea that perhaps the shape, density, or interaction with air influences the rate of fall. With this in mind, Elgin says that even in empirical science, thought experiments help to illuminate facts and eliminate the need for unnecessary experiments. In fact, she argues that thought experiments are necessary because they help to avoid real-world variables that may affect an empirical study. In the feather analogy, for instance, a thought experiment does not involve forces such as the wind. It should be noted that thought experiments do not eliminate the need for empirical studies, but that they help researchers know what questions to ask, and thus what experiments to conduct.

Philosophers use thought experiments as well, as many theories about how the world works simply cannot be tested outside of imagination (Elgin, 2014). The concept of utilitarianism as a form of justice, for example, relies on the idea that in a perfect world, pleasure and displeasure could be quantified and used as a basis for morality. Perhaps we could test this empirically, but there is no way to test whether overall pleasure versus displeasure measures morality. The use of thought experiments is debated because concepts like utilitarianism, which is founded on the idea of a situation free of third variables, do not occur in real life, and thus cannot be empirically proven (Elgin, 2014). However, an inability to conduct an experiment does not disprove it. In the feather and rock thought experiments for example, one could come to the conclusion that surface area and air affect rate of fall. If this could not be tested, that would not make it any less true. If it were impossible to test, the idea could still be supported by things that occur without outside influence. For example, a leaf falling from a tree drifts slowly to the ground, while a twig simply fall. Thought experiments are the same, stemming from the logic of the real world. One could, for example, argue against utilitarianism by using an example in which a greater number of lives saved does not necessarily equate to a good moral decision. The Holocaust brought about millions of deaths and suffering, but also medical advancements and German prosperity. While one could argue that the medical advancements and economic prosperity brought about more overall conservation of human life, is it just to say that because more lives were saved that it was morally good? Is it only the lives lost that contribute to the quantified suffering? Should torture be a higher amount of suffering than death? These questions bring more ambiguity to the validity of turning human emotions into numbers and casts doubt on the utilitarian perspective on justice, as it is simply too subjective. However, pure logic does not lend itself even to branches of philosophy that involve empirical science (Nanay, 2013). Bence Nanay argues that philosophy of all forms does not only tell us how the world functions objectively and logically, but how we perceive these functions. In David Foster Wallace’s The Broom of the System there is a part where Mr. Beadsman reminisces about his mother and how she had once asked him what the fundamental part of the broom was. He responded that the bristles were most fundamental, but she pointed out that the only reason he answered the bristles was because he wanted to broom to sweep. If, on the other hand, he had wanted the broom to break a window, it would be the handle that was the fundamental part of the broom (Wallace, 2010, p. 150). Philosophy seeks to examine function, but like the broom analogy, function is always dependent on what we wish to get out of something.

Literature is like a thought experiment because both follow a narrative, both illuminate facts about the world, and both require interpretation and suspension of disbelief (Elgin, 2014). Literature involves a set of circumstances that exist outside of the real world, unaffected by third variables, and yet one can find patterns in literature that also exist in the world. With The Awakening by Kate Chopin readers can gain insight into what it might have been like to be woman in the 1800s and may recognize patterns and symbols in Edna’s life that demonstrate the struggle between freedom and ignorance. Specifically, the imagery of a bird is used in this novel. The first mention of a bird is a parrot in the cage at the very beginning of the novel, and later on Mademoiselle Reisz says to Edna, as she becomes more and more independent, that "The bird that would soar above the level of plain tradition and prejudice must have strong wings. It is a sad spectacle to see the weaklings bruised, exhausted, fluttering back to earth.” (Chopin, 1994, p. 79). In fact it is suggested that what brings Edna crashing back down to the Earth is her inability to connect to others, as they remain caged, unable to see the bars that hold them in (Clark, 2008). Zoila Clark (2008) argues for a Foucauldian reading of The Awakening, suggesting that the oppression that the women in the novel face is a function of the society that they take part in. That is, people take part in their own oppression unwittingly. This, Clark says, is exemplified by the character Adele Ratignolle, who finds identity in the motherly nature that society deems acceptable for her. However, even Edna was subject to this internalized oppression, from her choice of a loveless marriage based on convenience to the fact that she had repressed her passion for painting in favor of being a mother. While Edna’s experiences are not real, they provide a snapshot of a life that could have existed in reality and might still today. The lives of fictional characters are important, as Elgin points out, because if we were to base philosophy on only real people, any look into human experience would be overwhelmed by detail. Unlike Edna Pontellier, a real woman is in a continuous narrative of outside forces that does not have the goal of making a commentary on social patterns. So, like a thought experiment, literature provides a world free of third variables that illuminates problems in the world and possible solutions.

Fiction can even outperform philosophy in some ways, as it can give insight into how social and cultural relationships develop and function when the reader cannot experience the relationship for himself . Go Tell it On the Mountain by James Baldwin (2013) is a fictional story, but the author himself is a gay, African American, male and relies on feelings from his own life to tell the story of John Grimes. Unlike a biography, ethnography, or other non-fiction account, fiction allows the reader to get inside the mind of the main character and go through the story as if those experiences were their own. Perspectives one might not have otherwise had become a possibility. One might not have even considered, before reading Go Tell it On the Mountain, the struggle of living in a community that deals with religion, as well as racism and sexism from both within and outside of the community. The novel does not set forth any premises, nor does it give some sort of conclusion that the reader is meant to come to. However, through the eyes of a preacher who excuses his own sins and hatred and a woman who hates her own skin color, James Baldwin critiques religion on the basis of his own upbringing. We are not specifically told that John’s father is meant to be an archetype of the corrupt preacher, or that his Aunt’s skin-whitening is a product of racism, but the readers are meant to draw these conclusions through experience. However, even if one were to grow up in a similar environment to John’s, that does not mean nothing could be gained from the story. Deleuze (1997) says that literature is the art of becoming some non-specific thing. It is not identity or a state that matters, but the process that one goes through. If a reader were to go into a novel with the thought in mind that they understood the characters because of how they identify with them, any new insights that the character would offer might be disregarded because the personal connection would overshadow how the character’s struggles are applicable to a group as whole. For example, in the case of John Grimes, a reader might identify with issues regarding his repressed sexuality and fail to let themselves experience how intimately connected his repression is to his religion and his culture. Furthermore, the reader must realize that this connection is the experience of a gay, black, teen and not just John Grimes.

Literature is also beneficial because, not only does it allow readers to learn new perspectives through experiences, it can present responses to philosophical pieces that already exist and provide new insight. For example, Thomas Mann’s Death in Venice can be seen as response to Plato’s theories on beauty and the pursuit of Good (White, 1990). Plato’s theory posits that erotic love generates passion, which can bring forth motivation and the pursuit of knowledge (White, 1990). White discusses Plato’s Charmides, and how Socrates was taken by the boy, Charmides, beauty. According to White, Plato’s writings suggest that it was Charmides’ beauty that brought forth Socrates’ discussion of temperance and that, although no conclusion on the meaning of temperance was made, Socrates’ reaches temperance by maintaining self-control. Death in Venice, White says, contradicts the idea of erotic love as a catalyst for pursuing knowledge. This novel is reminiscent of the socratic, from the romantic setting of Venice, to the relationship between Aschenbach and Tadzio, which resembles pederasty in ancient Greece (White, 1990). However, as Aschenbach finds himself entangled in this unspoken relationship with Tadzio, he does not seek knowledge. In fact, where he was once a writer who would often work himself into sickness, Aschenbach abandons his trade in favor of his obsession with Tadzio. White points out that Plato’s ideas on erotic love and the pursuit of good that Aschenbach uses as an excuse to keep his obsession going. Yet we are meant to see that Aschenbach’s relationship with Tadzio is not good, as he abandons his passion, puts his own life in danger, and risks Tadzio’s life because he fantasizes about the boy dying young and forever beautiful. More evidence of this lies in the imagery of the novel, and in particular the use of myth. Throughout the work, Aschenbach runs into multiple red-haired men. The first man leaves him feeling a desire to travel, the second man transports him in a Gondola, and the third who plays a guitar and stinks of bactericide. It could be that the red hair is representative of the devil, as with each red-haired man, Aschenbach is further lured toward his impending death. The first man draws him to Venice, the second brings him to Venice by gondola, and the third who hints at the outbreak. The gondolier is particularly interesting, as he may symbolize the ferryman of the underworld, taking Aschenbach across the river Styx. Then, by the time the third man comes and Aschenbach begins to learn about the outbreak, he has been completely seduced by Tadzio. He knows that his life is in danger, but he chooses to stay. Aschenbach is drawn toward his death, but it is ultimately his own choices that bring him there. His relationship with Tadzio leaves him disillusioned by his life, as he notes that it would not be possible for him to leave Venice and return to his life before this ordeal. In the end, erotic love did not lead Aschenbach toward a pursuit of knowledge. In opposition to Nietzsche's ideas, Aschenbach begins as a representation of the hard-working and rule-abiding Apollonian artist, and he ends his story after being seduced by the Dionysian to the point of excess (White, 1990). There is no middle point between the two, and Aschenbach’s journey certainly did not provide evidence for Plato’s idea of erotic love as fuel for the pursuit of higher knowledge.

Fiction can have flaws that philosophical pieces might not. Frankenstein by Mary Shelley (2012), for example, is a novel that illustrates the benefits and the pitfalls of literature working in the same way that philosophy does. While the novel provides insight into feminist theory, it is an example of how literature is subjective and how certain patterns may be disregarded when a reader does not allow himself to go through the process of becoming. Nabokov says that impersonal imagination should be used when reading literature, so that readers do not allow their own preconceptions to affect the message. In the case of Frankenstein, it is often read as a story about the dangers of playing God, and in assuming this is what Mary Shelley meant to say, one might fail to see the feminist undertones of the story. The birth of the monster in Frankenstein, and his tortured life after, could be seen as a criticism of the sciences, but there are other readings. Nancy Yousef (2002), for instance, holds that Frankenstein is a response to several philosophers, including Jean-Jacques Rousseau and his theory on man as a solitary animal. Yousef says that Shelley is critiquing this idea, which proposes that men come about on their own and might be solitary creatures if all of their needs were provided for. The monster is born alone, without the presence of a woman or any other human for that matter, and the result is not a man with human characteristics, but a monster (Yousef, 2002). It is not, however, solely a critique, as John Locke’s theory of man also comes into play, and he says that a solitary man will not evolve. Frankenstein seems to support this idea, and takes it perhaps a step further by noting that men who believe themselves to be solitary, for example Walton, who claims to have no friend and yet sends letters to his sister, are not in the same set of circumstances as the monster (Yousef, 2002). The monster has never had intimacy, in any form, and though he reads about human behavior and observes the Delacey family, he does not begin to assimilate into society. Instead, the monster begins to realize how different he is from human beings, and he seeks to gain intimacy when he has a conversation with the blind man. Still, the creature is rejected and Yousef says that it is not necessarily his appearance that makes him alone, but that he is different because he began his life as a fully formed man, without childhood or motherly affection. This perspective on Frankenstein, as Shelley’s commentary on the absence of the feminine and of man as being a solitary animal, can be forgotten in favor of the idea of Frankenstein as a novel about the dangers of playing God. This reveals how, despite the benefits of literature, there is a certain unavoidable flaw in how subjective the interpretations can be.

Literature is tool that can illuminate what to look for to explain how the world functions. It can be a response to an already existing philosophical theory, or it can be a commentary on some social pattern that the writer himself has seen or experienced. It performs the functions of philosophy by existing as an extended thought experiment, and revealing truths about the world. In fact, in some ways it can outperform philosophy, in that it allows readers to imagine a world free of third variables and it can allow people to have experiences that would be impossible in the real world. It also allows all people, even those who have experienced being a part of a certain minority group for example, to go through the process of becoming. It is the general experiences that matter, and what it means to be a woman, an animal, and so forth, rather than some specific thing. In becoming some general thing, one might begin to understand what it means to be that thing, and how different social patterns result in how that thing functions. Literature can also provide a new perspective on philosophical theories that exist, either providing evidence for the theory or against it. Pieces of fiction like Death in Venice show how Plato’s theories on erotic love and the pursuit of higher understanding do not always hold. Some criticisms of literature performing the functions of philosophy include its subjectivity and lack of empiricism, but philosophy itself is not without these flaws. After all, any commentary on how something functions is dependent on our perception of the thing and what we want it to do. Still, fiction is subject to the reader, and in order to gain any insight from a piece, the reader must go into the work without preconceptions and without projecting onto the piece. Yet philosophy itself has unavoidable flaws, such as the inability to test certain theories in the real world. Literature is not pure logic, but the world is not either. It can illuminate facts about the world that can’t be tested. This is why literature is not only useful as a philosophical tool, but invaluable. Just as scientists use thought experiments to know what hypotheses to form and test, philosophy must use literature to inform theories about how the world works.

References

Baldwin, J. (2013). Go tell it on the mountain. New York: Vintage International.

Chopin, K. (n.d.). The awakening. NY, NY: Avon Books, a division of the Hearst Corporation.

Clark, Z. (2008). The Bird that Came out of the Cage: A Foucauldian Feminist Approach to Kate Chopin's The Awakening. Journal for Cultural Research, 12(4), 335-347. doi:10.1080/14797580802553999

Deleuze, G., Smith, D., & Greco, M. (1997). Literature and Life. Critical Inquiry, 23(2), 225-230. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1343982

Elgin, C. Z. (2014). Fiction as Thought Experiment. Perspectives on Science, 22(2), 221-241. doi:10.1162/posc_a_00128

Mann, T. (1994). Death in Venice: A new translation, backgrounds and context critisism. New York: W.W. Northon & Company.

Nabokov, V. (n.d.). Good Readers and Good Writers. Lecture.

Nanay, B. (2013). Philosophy versus Literature? Against the Discontinuity Thesis. Journal Of Aesthetics And Art Criticism, 71(4), 349-360.

Shelley, M. W., & Hunter, J. P. (2012). Frankenstein: The 1818 text, contexts, criticism. New York: W.W. Norton &.

Wallace, D. F. (2010). The broom of the system. New York: Penguin Books.

White, R. (1990). Love, Beauty, and Death in Venice. Philosophy and Literature, 14(1), 53-64. doi:10.1353/phl.1990.0106

Yousef, N. (2002). The Monster in a Dark Room: Frankenstein, Feminism, and Philosophy. Modern Language Quarterly, 63(2), 197-226. doi:10.1215/00267929-63-2-197

#philosophy #essay #literature #writing

0 notes

georgeavillart · 5 years

Text

Visual and Cultural Hierarchies

Noel Fielding

Fielding claims that he could never make a choice between fine art and comedy, it was always his ambition to make comedy with an art-school slant, and art that could be funny instead of po-faced. His work resembles that of someone who’s subconscious is very close to the surface, reality and imagination is constantly the same. Fielding’s artwork was the first contemporary paintings I ever really understood, they ultimately drove to me to start making my first serious pieces of work- by serious I mean completely ridiculous morphs of my friends and blocks of cheese as I’s imagined in a dream. Fielding is extensively important as a reminder that art doesn’t always have to be quite so serious and political, it can be themed by nothing other than spontaneity, it can be whatever you’ve got knocking about in your head right at that moment.

Martin Parr

Martin Parr is one of Britain’s most significant photographers, best known for his sharp eye and sense of humour. Over his thirty-year career he has focused on capturing ordinary people doing ordinary things – at the seaside, in supermarkets, at village country fairs or on holiday abroad. Often highly saturated and brightly coloured Parr has become known as a commentator and recorder of Britain’s finely nuanced class system. His series ‘Signs of the Times’, based on the TV series of the same name, directed by Nick Barker, is a vintage look at personal taste in the British home, exploring the extraordinary range of emotions that lie behind our household decor. Parr's photography complements Barker’s survey of contemporary perceptions of good and bad taste.

Grayson Perry

Grayson Perry is an English contemporary artist who is known for his ceramic vases, tapestries and cross-dressing, as well as his observations of the contemporary arts scene. Perry's vases have classical forms and are decorated in bright colours, depicting subjects that juxtapose with their attractive appearance. There is a strong autobiographical element in his work, in which images of Perry as "Claire", his female alter-ego, and "Alan Measles", his childhood teddy bear, often appear. Grayson Perry has been cross-dressing since he was a child, using it to step into a fantasy world where he felt safer. He describes himself as a transvestite and for him cross-dressing has an exciting, sexual aspect but he has no desire to become a female, nor to dress as a woman full-time. After many years of experimenting with cross-dressing and wearing conventional female clothes, Grayson became dissatisfied with the lack of reaction he provoked. In response, he developed the persona known as Claire, as her he can dress in an outrageously flamboyant way and enjoy the reaction she causes. Perry represents the important comedic element of drag, it is an art form but it shouldn’t always been taken seriously. Drag is a safe space but also a production of femininity, whatever you want femininity to be. Perry has inspired my future drag project greatly.

Nadia Lee Cohen

Nadia Lee Cohen's photographs and films, heavily inspired by Americana and Britain in the 1950’s, 60’s and 70’s, are veritable visions of saturated, surreal dreamscapes. Drawing upon the duality of the female form, fine art photographer and filmmaker Lee Cohen locks our optics upon the twisted paradise that lurks within her mind. She explores the paradoxical standoff between strength and fragility within womankind. Lee believes in living within her work and has gained notoriety through her quirky colourful online presence on social media; in which she plays dress up and curates interesting imagery of her day to day inspirations. My own work with film photography and photomontage is most notably influenced by Lee Cohen depictions of confused domestic scenes in her short films.

John Waters

John Waters is an American artist best known for his satirical and raunchy movies. He is also a visual artist, Waters’ photography, sculpture, and installations pieces humorously recontextualize art and popular culture. Born in 1946 in Baltimore, Waters briefly attended NYU for film but was kicked out for what he claims was the “first ever marijuana scandal on a university campus.” Waters then returned to Baltimore in 1966 where he began collaborating on films with his long-time friend and muse Harris Glenn Milstead, also known as Divine. He gained a cult following in the 1970s with his transgressive films Pink Flamingos (1972) and Female Trouble (1974), as well as the box office hit Hairspray (1988). In his 50-year career Waters has accrued an enviable array of hideous honorifics, all worn with pride as he mocks those who look to certain subcultures with vulgarity, by presenting them in the most grotesque ways imaginable.

Linder Sterling

Linder’s photomontage aesthetic lent itself to the DIY philosophy of Punk: layering images, body politics, feminist discourse and the referencing of historical events. Her work draws on influences from Dadaism, Surrealism and Old Master paintings; and from fashion photography to performance art. A radical feminist and an active figure of the Manchester punk and post-punk scene, Sterling is known for her photomontages which combine images found in pornographic, fashion and interior design magazines, as well as from print documentation of ballet and film. Sterling's works often highlight the cultural expectations of women and the exploitation of the female body as pure commodity. When she first started creating these photomontages, many of her works were published in the post-punk photomontage fanzine 'The Secret Public'.

Martha Rosler

Martha Rosler's biggest contribution to the art world lies in her ability to present imagery that spotlights the veil between facade and reality, comfort and discomfort, and the myriad ways we keep our eyes wide shut or wide open. During the Feminist art movement of the 1970s, she explored the imposed versus exposed injustices of being a woman. As a member of the Pop art movement, she highlighted the media's targeted seduction of people into a more consumerist-driven lifestyle. Today, she continues to focus on our still inbred aptitude for replacing dire global realities such as war with fluffy faux-reality distractions like reality television and advertisement-driven personal entertainments. Her work often focuses on political issues such as war or injustice but in a way that challenges us to bring these topics into a more personal sphere, not just relegated to the pages of a magazine or a prime time news report. She asks us to pay attention to what is happening even if it is not occurring within our own environments and to consider the role that the media has in controlling how we perceive world events. Rosler became a leading figure in the Feminist art movement because much of her work revealed the divide between how women were portrayed as individuals whose only place was within the confines of home, marriage, kitchen, and motherhood and the way they actually felt by being pigeonholed into said domestic roles. She also used brave new technologies such as video to differentiate herself from the male art stars and their traditional mediums that had come before.

David Lynch

David Lynch is an American filmmaker, television director, visual artist, musician and occasional actor. Known for his surrealist films, he has developed his own unique cinematic style which has been dubbed "Lynchian" and is characterized by its dream imagery and meticulous sound design. The surreal and, in many cases, violent elements to his films have earned them the reputation that they "disturb, offend or mystify" their audiences. What Lynch sees, and then puts on screen for viewers to see, is one of the great enigmas of cinema, one that has launched a thousand film studies PhDs. When he looks at a manicured lawn, his mind’s eye tunnels beneath it to hidden mystery, mysticism and depravity – visions he has turned into mind-bending television and film. It’s an oeuvre people tend to love or detest, and even devotees don’t claim to fully understand.

Amanda Charchian

Amanda Charchian creates work with a feminine sensuality that is simultaneously epic and intimate. In 2018 she exhibited a new body of work at Fahey/Klein Gallery entitled "7 Types of Love" which presents mediations on the seven categories of love as described by Canadian psychologist John Allen Lee based on Greek ideas. Her photographs create visual narratives on romantic, spiritual and dutiful love through a feminine lens. Charchian captures intimacy and the connection between herself and the women she photographs translating the subtlety of the moment. I most value the delicate and warm nature that she presents women in along with her view that inforcing themes can be restrictive and arbitrary; her photography is about capturing vivacious characters, the charm, the mystery, the strange thigs that make these women individual.

Ellen Von Unwerth

Unwerth is one of the most noted fashion photographers in the industry, pushing the limits of female sexuality. The model turned photographer has now shot for all of the of top fashion publications including Vogue, Vanity Fair, Interview, The Face, Arena, and i-D, and published dozens of books of personal work from exhibitions around the world. Unwerth has an innate ability to capture female sensuality in any setting by relating to the model’s state of mind and her confidence in female playfulness and sexuality. I am hugely appreciative of her role in the fashion world in making women feel comfortable with their sexuality thus confident in themselves and their talent. Unwerth is consistently using her voice to help further the stature of other females.

#year1fineart

0 notes