Post- 3 To Be or Not To Be

I don't think that there is such a thing as complete happiness. I think that happiness exists but for everyone to have it seems a little far fetched. I bet that that sounds a litte confusing so i'll explain. Something that makes me happy might not make someone else happy and vice versa. So therefor we would forever be stuck in a never ending circle of people being unhappy.

I do believe that achieveing happiness is possible. There is no doubt in my mind that becoming happy is not achievable. I think that being happy can be defined differently in 1,000,000 different ways. I think that these ideas that Bancah suggest can be a little narrow minded.

For example when he says that human happiness comes from within. I believe that that is possible but I don't think that that is the only thing that one should rely on to be happy. I don't think that there is anything wrong with achieveing happiness fromt things outside onself. If in the end you are happy (without endangering others) then that is all that matters.

I can not stress how tired I am of this question, "Are we free?" For the umteenth time, no. Freedom, can also be defined in many different ways. I don't want to be extreme. In a way we are free, we are not confined to cages and shuned from the outside world. But in Banach's POV we kind of are.

Human life follows a cycle, we are born, we go to school, we raise hell, more school, start a family, we die. More or less that is what will happen to most people. So from that point are we free? If we all do the same thing how does that make us free?

Comments 2

Steph F:

I like how you start off your post with a question because right from the start the reader is both thinking about what your paper is about and thinking about their own feelings.

I was a bit confused when you said that you didn't agree with Banach's point about how we are born and then we make our nature. Because when you state what you do believe in the ideas sounds the same to me.

I like how you talk about how we change our personalities depending on who we are with. I can agree with that but I don't think that we do it on purpose I think it is something that just happens.

I don't think that it means that we are fake I think it means that we know how to moderate ourselves. This idea can be connected to respect as well.

I agree heavily with your point about how many of his ideas can be topics for debate as well.

Oh yeah, I enjoyed this post. It really made me think about what I was reading and how it can connect and be used for greater discussion.

For Richard D:

This post is really interesting, the opening line is really great, "Living in this world there are so many unsolved answers." because it connects to what the lecture is about and it makes me think.

I like that you agree and then you explain why you agree. I think that for this point I also agree with what Banach is saying. That we are born and then we basically control what comes after that.

Do you think that makes all humans identical in a way? Because we all have on belief, do you think that makes us individuals or do we stand alone?

I agree when you say that we are not free. I think that there are many things that go against us being free. Banach tries desprately to prove that we are free but in fact we are not. But somehow it all connects to us being individuals who make our own nature.

This post was really interesting, it made me think of things that I had not realized when I was reading the lecture.

Hw 3- Just How Long Is This Lecture?

This guy Banach is trying so hard to get his point across in my opinion. He is hammering this idea that we are individuals in to our heads.

I have to be honest I don't think I care. But for the sake of homework I'll ponder it... Okay so Banach (by the way if you want to know how to say his name: http://www.pronouncenames.com/pronounce/banach ) Anyway, Banach begins to talk about how because we are human beings we have the power to make ourselves in to anything that we want. It gets a bit fuzzy for me here we he says "we exist and then we create our nature, our essence, who we are." But what about people that choose to exist and create the same things? Lets say that you have freedom as Banach suggests, and with that freedom you choose to become identical, choose to become something of a replica of something else? Then are you still separate from them?

I think its nice how Banach is so sure of his thoughts, there is not one hint of uncertainty. But I don't think that we are free. We are and will always be limited, there are always going to be rules and authority. I don't think that "complete happiness" exist either because there are different things that make people happy and one thing that makes you happy may cause unhappiness in someone else.

I like the question "Can we share emotions?" I would like to think so. If we were to believe that I would think that it makes us feel better, that it makes us feel as if we are not alone and I believe that that is what matters. Feelings are everything, they are the motors to out minds and our bodies. If we don't feel something we don't believe that its real. Being connects to someone else's feelings, to me I think that that helps to add depth to things being real.

I feel that with Banach's ideas, we can never really know whats real and what is not. If he believes that we see everything as we want to see it then no one really knows what they are looking at.

And I'd like to think I know what I'm seeing out my own two eyes.

Hw 2- Comments 1

To Stephanie F:

I like how you gave quotes from the reading to show that you were actually giving thought to what you were reading and not just staring blankly at the text.

I also agree with the point that you make about or feelings making us indivduals. Also the point you made about how you can never truly know what anyone else is feeling.

I like that you agree with the text and then state why by giving an example. Its cool how you included how that being an individual comes from what you make of it and not the other way around.

This was a good post, looking forward to reading more.

To Richard D:

I think its really cool how you start off explaining what you believe in and how it connects to Banach's ideas.

I agree with you when you say that your viewes and belifs make a difference when it comes to the ideas that Banach is expressing. WHy do you think there are so many sides to Banach's belifs? Why?

Is this something new or has the idea of being individuals (mentally) been brough up to you before. I think that it it interesing how you say that Banach seems to talk like there is an illusion.

I find myself thinking that when Bancah says we have "absolute freedom" he means that we are completely free, in the sense that we are also alone. What do you think?

I think you post is interesting. You bring up some great thoughs.

Hw 1 - Ripping Apart a Lecture

Okay, so when I took a look at the first page of this large essay, I wasn't overwhelmed but I realized that I was going to have to rip it apart piece by piece. The entire theme to this paper is: Individualism & freedom. Two topics that most everyday people kind of know about. When Banach says "absolute freedom" I interpret that in this context "absolute" means complete instead of "for sure". So Banach's whole point of the lecture is to talk about complete freedom. In the second paragraph Banach goes on to say that we, as humans are absolute individuals. To be an individual means in a way to be alone, to think for oneself and to be apart from everyone and everything else. This point that he is making goes nicely with his meaning of absolute. So so far he is saying that we are completely alone.

Banach says that we are alone because no one else but you can ever know how you truly feel. You may be able to see someone and touch them and talk to them but they are still alone as are you. To an extent I agree, because what he is saying here is true. You can't truly know someones emotions or thoughts. I feel as though we are alone in out own minds, not trapped as Banach put it just alone. We as humans can try to venture out, can dream can imagine can think but only to an extent. It's like a curfew, fro some time you may explore others thoughts and try to mentally feel what someone else is feeling but when its all over something pulls you back to your own mind to your own room to your own space.

Because we are alone we can never connect to other people. I don't want to sound like a cynic, so I will say that yes sometimes you may reach a point when something in your head clicks and you feel some sort of connection to another person, but how can you be sureits real?

Human freedom to me seems that it cannot be reached. Can we truly be free? I don't think so. Somehow somewhere we are always restricted by rules,superiors,morals... freedom is a dream, an idea, a thought something that gives hope to those who cannot accept that we are tied down. Absolute individuals means being completely alone, being in ones own mind and being apart from the thoughts of others. Now human happiness is really quite similar to human freedom. Something that makes me happy might not make someone else happy, therefore complete human happiness cannot be achieved. Because all humans are so different and have completely different morals,values and ideas we do not, we cannot just agree on one thing; forever disturbing the non-existent chain of "human happiness"